The end is near for North Korea

[Uncensored2008]

No war!

Let Kim stew in his juices.

But you'd like to see Obama bow to him, right?

 

[Geaux4it]

In what context of the word "sniper"?

One who "shoots down" the ideas of others without presenting any of his own.

I have presented all the reasons why none of this other bullshit you amateurs come up will not work, based on the fact that most of you have no experience in this area.

No one has asked for my input because they know what it will be. We're fucked! Thank you Bubba and Maobama.

And your opinion sir is important just why?

-Geaux

Unlike the vast majority of those opinions on this forum, mine at least is an informed opinion!

Based on what? You have stated its better for the US to take a nuke on the chin than a pre-emptive strike on NK

-Geaux

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

In what context of the word "sniper"?

One who "shoots down" the ideas of others without presenting any of his own.

I have presented all the reasons why none of this other bullshit you amateurs come up will not work, based on the fact that most of you have no experience in this area.

No one has asked for my input because they know what it will be. We're fucked! Thank you Bubba and Maobama.

And your opinion sir is important just why?

-Geaux

Unlike the vast majority of those opinions on this forum, mine at least is an informed opinion!

Based on what? You have stated its better for the US to take a nuke on the chin than a pre-emptive strike on NK

-Geaux

Yes, because a preemptive strike will likely result in the aforementioned thermonuclear war.

I also do not believe the NKs are as capable as everyone wants to make them out to be in regards to the effectiveness of their missiles and nukes.

 

[Geaux4it]

One who "shoots down" the ideas of others without presenting any of his own.

I have presented all the reasons why none of this other bullshit you amateurs come up will not work, based on the fact that most of you have no experience in this area.

No one has asked for my input because they know what it will be. We're fucked! Thank you Bubba and Maobama.

And your opinion sir is important just why?

-Geaux

Unlike the vast majority of those opinions on this forum, mine at least is an informed opinion!

Based on what? You have stated its better for the US to take a nuke on the chin than a pre-emptive strike on NK

-Geaux

Yes, because a preemptive strike will likely result in the aforementioned thermonuclear war.

I also do not believe the NKs are as capable as everyone wants to make them out to be in regards to the effectiveness of their missiles and nukes.

I disagree. They have shown they have the ballistic knowledge to deliver to Pearl Harbor. Landing their recent shot 300 miles from Japan while flying 37 minutes is not by accident.

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

One who "shoots down" the ideas of others without presenting any of his own.

I have presented all the reasons why none of this other bullshit you amateurs come up will not work, based on the fact that most of you have no experience in this area.

No one has asked for my input because they know what it will be. We're fucked! Thank you Bubba and Maobama.

And your opinion sir is important just why?

-Geaux

Unlike the vast majority of those opinions on this forum, mine at least is an informed opinion!

Based on what? You have stated its better for the US to take a nuke on the chin than a pre-emptive strike on NK

-Geaux

Yes, because a preemptive strike will likely result in the aforementioned thermonuclear war.

I also do not believe the NKs are as capable as everyone wants to make them out to be in regards to the effectiveness of their missiles and nukes.

So, you had rather sacrifice your life, if your city is targeted, instead of having a fighting chance?

-Geaux

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I have presented all the reasons why none of this other bullshit you amateurs come up will not work, based on the fact that most of you have no experience in this area.

No one has asked for my input because they know what it will be. We're fucked! Thank you Bubba and Maobama.

And your opinion sir is important just why?

-Geaux

Unlike the vast majority of those opinions on this forum, mine at least is an informed opinion!

Based on what? You have stated its better for the US to take a nuke on the chin than a pre-emptive strike on NK

-Geaux

Yes, because a preemptive strike will likely result in the aforementioned thermonuclear war.

I also do not believe the NKs are as capable as everyone wants to make them out to be in regards to the effectiveness of their missiles and nukes.

So, you had rather sacrifice your life, if your city is targeted, instead of having a fighting chance?

-Geaux

Starting a war with nuclear weapons is never a solution. There are no winners, only survivors, and damn few of them.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I have presented all the reasons why none of this other bullshit you amateurs come up will not work, based on the fact that most of you have no experience in this area.

No one has asked for my input because they know what it will be. We're fucked! Thank you Bubba and Maobama.

And your opinion sir is important just why?

-Geaux

Unlike the vast majority of those opinions on this forum, mine at least is an informed opinion!

Based on what? You have stated its better for the US to take a nuke on the chin than a pre-emptive strike on NK

-Geaux

Yes, because a preemptive strike will likely result in the aforementioned thermonuclear war.

I also do not believe the NKs are as capable as everyone wants to make them out to be in regards to the effectiveness of their missiles and nukes.

I disagree. They have shown they have the ballistic knowledge to deliver to Pearl Harbor. Landing their recent shot 300 miles from Japan while flying 37 minutes is not by accident.

-Geaux

Oh, please! Trying to hit Pearl Harbor with a nuke is like you trying to shoot a ping pong ball out of the air a hundred yards away with a slingshot, while blindfolded, and one hand tied behind your back! You do realize that is over 13,000 km, right? Their missile has a theoretical range of 10,000 km.

Shooting straight up with a missile involves zero accuracy! They have yet to demonstrate any accuracy except they have managed not to hit land or a boat on the ocean.

 

[usmbguest5318]

1. Forget using nukes against NoKo. The fallout would eventually kill tens of thousands in S. Korea.

2. Very powerful simultaneous strikes against NoKo positions north of Seoul, NoKo missile & nuke facilities, and NoKo troops just north of the DMZ should disable NoKo's offensive capabilities.

3. Follow up #2 with a limited invasion of NoKo, taking the high ground north of Seoul and pushing them back from the DMZ.

4. Watch the Chinese pitch a fit, but do nothing.

#1 Agreed!

#2 With what? Do you guys have a secret stash of the US military somewhere that no one in the world knows about?

#3 With what? You don't think the Chinese won't react the same way they did in the 1950s?

#4 Already covered in #3

#2 I have no doubt that the U.S. military has lot's of secret stashes and only a very limited number of people know about each. Besides, there's a huge difference between striking NoKo positions on the DMZ and the types of bombing required for the Persian gulf war and Iraq invasion - the NoKo positions are concentrated in a relatively small area, so carpet bombing with b-52s should work.

#3 The Chinese wouldn't do squat. We could have stopped them back in 1952 if the U.S. high command wanted. We certainly can stop them now...and they know it.

#3a Back in 1952 we could have carpet bombed all the Chinese coastal cities, we can still do that now.

OK. I'm sorry! Now you have joined the "too stupid for prime time" crowd.

Secret stashes of troops? You are funny!

Do you think the Chinese and North Koreans are just going to sit idly by and watch B-52s assemble and then carpet bomb north of the DMZ?

Please pass out some of what you are smoking to the other users. Some of you are desperately in need of medication, illegal or otherwise.

I was referring to secret technologies and other military capabilities, not troops, dim wit.

So apparently you think that the years of military exercises involving B-52s were just for fun. Yet it's those very same B-52 that gets the NoKos pissing in their pants. Guess again...It's only a few minutes from S. Korean airspace to the target area. Not enough time for the NoKos to react.

apparently you think that the years of military exercises involving B-52s were just for fun. Yet it's those very same B-52 that gets the NoKos pissing in their pants. Guess again...It's only a few minutes from S. Korean airspace to the target area. Not enough time for the NoKos to react.

Unless you happen to be implying the U.S. might opt to deploy the "BUFF" to launch an air-launched cruise missile (ALCM), you can't be serious. Any militarized conflict the U.S. might have with the DPRK will be "all about" the first strike, and a B-52 is not a first strike weapon. Practically the only ways a country and its military, even North Korea's, won't have enough time to react to their approach are (1) the just don't have something to throw at it, or (2) they are "deaf, dumb and blind." Even to from a B-52 launch an ALCM at DPRK targets the plane would most likely need to fly away from N. Korea to do so because if a B-52 is headed toward the DPRK, the DPRK will know so and shoot it down. (I wouldn't put it past KJU to shoot down even a patrolling-nearby BUFF.) Now however crafty such a flight plan may seem, that someone not privy to specific tactical plans can reliably intimate such a move is preposterous.

 

[Geaux4it]

And your opinion sir is important just why?

-Geaux

Unlike the vast majority of those opinions on this forum, mine at least is an informed opinion!

Based on what? You have stated its better for the US to take a nuke on the chin than a pre-emptive strike on NK

-Geaux

Yes, because a preemptive strike will likely result in the aforementioned thermonuclear war.

I also do not believe the NKs are as capable as everyone wants to make them out to be in regards to the effectiveness of their missiles and nukes.

I disagree. They have shown they have the ballistic knowledge to deliver to Pearl Harbor. Landing their recent shot 300 miles from Japan while flying 37 minutes is not by accident.

-Geaux

Oh, please! Trying to hit Pearl Harbor with a nuke is like you trying to shoot a ping pong ball out of the air a hundred yards away with a slingshot, while blindfolded, and one hand tied behind your back! You do realize that is over 13,000 km, right? Their missile has a theoretical range of 10,000 km.

Shooting straight up with a missile involves zero accuracy! They have yet to demonstrate any accuracy except they have managed not to hit land or a boat on the ocean.

You're assuming (remember what they say about that) the launch would come from NK mainland. What if they launched from a ship or slid one out the back of a cargo plane?

-Geaux

 

[Timmy]

In what context of the word "sniper"?

One who "shoots down" the ideas of others without presenting any of his own.

I have presented all the reasons why none of this other bullshit you amateurs come up will not work, based on the fact that most of you have no experience in this area.

No one has asked for my input because they know what it will be. We're fucked! Thank you Bubba and Maobama.

Obama kept NK under control . The second Trump took office they started shooting rockets in all directions and beating Americans to death .

Trump is over his head and everyone knows it .

 

[Geaux4it]

In what context of the word "sniper"?

One who "shoots down" the ideas of others without presenting any of his own.

I have presented all the reasons why none of this other bullshit you amateurs come up will not work, based on the fact that most of you have no experience in this area.

No one has asked for my input because they know what it will be. We're fucked! Thank you Bubba and Maobama.

Obama kept NK under control . The second Trump took office they started shooting rockets in all directions and beating Americans to death .

Trump is over his head and everyone knows it .

Obama is a complete joke and unarguably the worst POTUS in the last 50 years

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

In what context of the word "sniper"?

One who "shoots down" the ideas of others without presenting any of his own.

I have presented all the reasons why none of this other bullshit you amateurs come up will not work, based on the fact that most of you have no experience in this area.

No one has asked for my input because they know what it will be. We're fucked! Thank you Bubba and Maobama.

Obama kept NK under control . The second Trump took office they started shooting rockets in all directions and beating Americans to death .

Trump is over his head and everyone knows it .

So timmy, let me see if I can comprehend your ignorance, you think NK went straight to shooting missiles with no lab testing. No static engine firings?

-Geaux

 

[Timmy]

In what context of the word "sniper"?

One who "shoots down" the ideas of others without presenting any of his own.

I have presented all the reasons why none of this other bullshit you amateurs come up will not work, based on the fact that most of you have no experience in this area.

No one has asked for my input because they know what it will be. We're fucked! Thank you Bubba and Maobama.

Obama kept NK under control . The second Trump took office they started shooting rockets in all directions and beating Americans to death .

Trump is over his head and everyone knows it .

Obama is a complete joke and unarguably the worst POTUS in the last 50 years

-Geaux

Can you back up your dumb opinion with any objective data ? Nope.

As for NK . you telling me they are better behaved under Trump !? Lol! You are delusional.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Unlike the vast majority of those opinions on this forum, mine at least is an informed opinion!

Based on what? You have stated its better for the US to take a nuke on the chin than a pre-emptive strike on NK

-Geaux

Yes, because a preemptive strike will likely result in the aforementioned thermonuclear war.

I also do not believe the NKs are as capable as everyone wants to make them out to be in regards to the effectiveness of their missiles and nukes.

I disagree. They have shown they have the ballistic knowledge to deliver to Pearl Harbor. Landing their recent shot 300 miles from Japan while flying 37 minutes is not by accident.

-Geaux

Oh, please! Trying to hit Pearl Harbor with a nuke is like you trying to shoot a ping pong ball out of the air a hundred yards away with a slingshot, while blindfolded, and one hand tied behind your back! You do realize that is over 13,000 km, right? Their missile has a theoretical range of 10,000 km.

Shooting straight up with a missile involves zero accuracy! They have yet to demonstrate any accuracy except they have managed not to hit land or a boat on the ocean.

You're assuming (remember what they say about that) the launch would come from NK mainland. What if they launched from a ship or slid one out the back of a cargo plane?

-Geaux

Launching from a ship involves a whole new degree of difficulty. Dropping a missile out of a cargo plane is about 10,000 times as hard.

You do realize that the missile has to know where it starts from in order to calculate where it is going, right?

Who are they going to borrow a cargo plane with the legs needed to get there from NK and how will it get there without us knowing about it since we control all of the air traffic control?

 

[depotoo]

You must have missed this-

So while Wright suggests 33-34 minutes to San Francisco, Schiller predicts a faster trip to the West Coast — saying a missile could hit Seattle (8,000 kilometers, or 5,000 miles away) and Los Angeles (9,000 kilometers, or 5,600 miles) away in under 30 minutes from launch.

• North Korea: New long-range missile can carry heavy nuke

But that’s assuming a North Korean launch from within its own territory.

To get around the distance problem, and to bolster its stealth, North Korea is already developing submarine-launched ballistic missiles. Experts believe it will take years for the North to have a sub-based missile it could actually use in an attack, but it successfully tested its first one — named Polaris, the same name as the first U.S. missile of that kind — last year.
Potential N. Korean missile would hit SF in 30 min

Based on what? You have stated its better for the US to take a nuke on the chin than a pre-emptive strike on NK

-Geaux

Yes, because a preemptive strike will likely result in the aforementioned thermonuclear war.

I also do not believe the NKs are as capable as everyone wants to make them out to be in regards to the effectiveness of their missiles and nukes.

I disagree. They have shown they have the ballistic knowledge to deliver to Pearl Harbor. Landing their recent shot 300 miles from Japan while flying 37 minutes is not by accident.

-Geaux

Oh, please! Trying to hit Pearl Harbor with a nuke is like you trying to shoot a ping pong ball out of the air a hundred yards away with a slingshot, while blindfolded, and one hand tied behind your back! You do realize that is over 13,000 km, right? Their missile has a theoretical range of 10,000 km.

Shooting straight up with a missile involves zero accuracy! They have yet to demonstrate any accuracy except they have managed not to hit land or a boat on the ocean.

You're assuming (remember what they say about that) the launch would come from NK mainland. What if they launched from a ship or slid one out the back of a cargo plane?

-Geaux

Launching from a ship involves a whole new degree of difficulty. Dropping a missile out of a cargo plane is about 10,000 times as hard.

You do realize that the missile has to know where it starts from in order to calculate where it is going, right?

Who are they going to borrow a cargo plane with the legs needed to get there from NK and how will it get there without us knowing about it since we control all of the air traffic control?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You must have missed this-

So while Wright suggests 33-34 minutes to San Francisco, Schiller predicts a faster trip to the West Coast — saying a missile could hit Seattle (8,000 kilometers, or 5,000 miles away) and Los Angeles (9,000 kilometers, or 5,600 miles) away in under 30 minutes from launch.

• North Korea: New long-range missile can carry heavy nuke

But that’s assuming a North Korean launch from within its own territory.

To get around the distance problem, and to bolster its stealth, North Korea is already developing submarine-launched ballistic missiles. Experts believe it will take years for the North to have a sub-based missile it could actually use in an attack, but it successfully tested its first one — named Polaris, the same name as the first U.S. missile of that kind — last year.
Potential N. Korean missile would hit SF in 30 min

Yes, because a preemptive strike will likely result in the aforementioned thermonuclear war.

I also do not believe the NKs are as capable as everyone wants to make them out to be in regards to the effectiveness of their missiles and nukes.

I disagree. They have shown they have the ballistic knowledge to deliver to Pearl Harbor. Landing their recent shot 300 miles from Japan while flying 37 minutes is not by accident.

-Geaux

Oh, please! Trying to hit Pearl Harbor with a nuke is like you trying to shoot a ping pong ball out of the air a hundred yards away with a slingshot, while blindfolded, and one hand tied behind your back! You do realize that is over 13,000 km, right? Their missile has a theoretical range of 10,000 km.

Shooting straight up with a missile involves zero accuracy! They have yet to demonstrate any accuracy except they have managed not to hit land or a boat on the ocean.

You're assuming (remember what they say about that) the launch would come from NK mainland. What if they launched from a ship or slid one out the back of a cargo plane?

-Geaux

Launching from a ship involves a whole new degree of difficulty. Dropping a missile out of a cargo plane is about 10,000 times as hard.

You do realize that the missile has to know where it starts from in order to calculate where it is going, right?

Who are they going to borrow a cargo plane with the legs needed to get there from NK and how will it get there without us knowing about it since we control all of the air traffic control?

How would we have missed that since that was not the topic of discussion? Your post and the one you quoted have little to do with one another. We were discussing Pearl Harbor.

 

[THAI EXPAT]

Does the West have the will to defend Civilization? That is the question Trump asks in his speech. He is a statesman, that doesn't look the part! But it is action that proves the content of the man. Will he act on North Korea, or will he be an Obama and just look the other way?

Mattis Says U.S., North Korea Not Near War After ICBM Test

• 
• 

this handout photo released by the South Korean Defense Ministry, a South Korean navy ship fires a missile during a drill aimed to counter North Korea's intercontinental ballistic missile test on July 6, 2017 in East Sea, South Korea. The U.S. Army and South Korean military responded to North Korea's missile launch with a combined ballistic missile exercise on Wednesday, into South Korean waters along the country's eastern coastline.

WHY is the Mad Dog acting like a PUPPY? Is it because he knows the horror of WAR?

 

[THAI EXPAT]

(Bloomberg) -- North Korea’s launch of a missile capable of reaching the U.S. doesn’t necessarily bring the two nations closer to war, Defense Secretary James Mattis said, even as President Donald Trump announced that he’s weighing some "pretty severe things" in response.

“I don’t believe this capability in itself brings us closer to war,” Mattis told reporters Thursday at the Pentagon. He said he wasn’t surprised by the July 4 launch and added that U.S. “self-restraint” prevented open conflict between the countries. “Diplomacy has not failed.”

North Korea’s first confirmed test of an intercontinental ballistic missile is becoming a key test of Trump’s vow to stop Pyongyang’s weapons programs and is expected to be a central part of his talks at the Group of 20 summit in Hamburg this week. In Poland on Thursday, Trump said, "It’s a shame they’re behaving this way, and they’re behaving in a very dangerous manner, and something will have to be done about it.”

But, the president added, "Doesn’t mean we’re going to do them. I don’t draw red lines."

Yet an early administration effort to rally international condemnation against North Korea appeared stymied at the UN, one day after U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley, along with South Korea and Japan, called for an emergency Security Council session on the launch. While Haley threatened U.S. trade ties with any nation still doing business with North Korea, Chinese and Russian objections to a resolution condemning the missile test continued into Thursday afternoon.

U.S. wording that nations should consider “further significant measures” against Pyongyang was one source of protest, as was Russia’s opposition to describing the missile as an ICBM, according to diplomats involved in the talks who asked not to be identified while negotiations continue.

As an alternative to tighter economic sanctions, China and Russia have proposed that North Korea declare a moratorium on nuclear and missile tests if the U.S. and South Korea halt large-scale military exercises. But that proposal was rejected and, in the aftermath of the launch, the U.S. and South Korean militaries held a previously unscheduled live-fire drill.

Two U.S. officials said North Korea’s latest launch involved an upgraded version of its exiting road-mobile KN-17 missile, which is described by analysts at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington as an intermediate-range ballistic missile that previously was tested successfully on May 14. Intermediate-range missiles are capable of flying 3,000 to 5,500 kilometers (1,860-3,400 miles).

The two officials, who asked not to be identified discussing their assessments, said the North Korean missile was equipped with a booster that’s estimated to increase its range to the ICBM-class of over 5,500 kilometers. That would put Alaska, though not Hawaii or the U.S. mainland, within range of attack.

“We’re still analyzing all the details on the test,” Mattis said. “It clearly had a booster, which was a new development on a previous missile,” he said.

The missile was detected by U.S. radar and missile defense systems as soon as it was launched, Mattis told reporters.

“We were on duty, the radars were up and operating,” Mattis said, calling the test a “grave concern.”

Trump, who spoke alongside Polish President Andrzej Duda earlier in the day, offered no details about what measures he is considering and didn’t answer a question directly about whether he’s contemplating the use of military force. Earlier in the news conference, he said he’s calling on all nations to "publicly demonstrate to North Korea that there are consequences for their very, very bad behavior."

The U.S. president has signaled increasing impatience with his initial efforts to convince China to do more to rein in its neighbor and trading partner.

So where is the RED LINE? Trump says he has no red lines. He keeps all options open. The fact that his cabinet members feel free to speak their mind, is a big PLUS for Trump!

 

[Vandalshandle]

If we could only have nuclear war with North Korea, everything would be alright!

 

[jwoodie]

Based on what? You have stated its better for the US to take a nuke on the chin than a pre-emptive strike on NK

-Geaux

Yes, because a preemptive strike will likely result in the aforementioned thermonuclear war.

I also do not believe the NKs are as capable as everyone wants to make them out to be in regards to the effectiveness of their missiles and nukes.

I disagree. They have shown they have the ballistic knowledge to deliver to Pearl Harbor. Landing their recent shot 300 miles from Japan while flying 37 minutes is not by accident.

-Geaux

Oh, please! Trying to hit Pearl Harbor with a nuke is like you trying to shoot a ping pong ball out of the air a hundred yards away with a slingshot, while blindfolded, and one hand tied behind your back! You do realize that is over 13,000 km, right? Their missile has a theoretical range of 10,000 km.

Shooting straight up with a missile involves zero accuracy! They have yet to demonstrate any accuracy except they have managed not to hit land or a boat on the ocean.

You're assuming (remember what they say about that) the launch would come from NK mainland. What if they launched from a ship or slid one out the back of a cargo plane?

-Geaux

Launching from a ship involves a whole new degree of difficulty. Dropping a missile out of a cargo plane is about 10,000 times as hard.

You do realize that the missile has to know where it starts from in order to calculate where it is going, right?

Who are they going to borrow a cargo plane with the legs needed to get there from NK and how will it get there without us knowing about it since we control all of the air traffic control?

Every advance in technology involves a "whole new degree of difficulty." Your argument seems to be that NK will be unable to proceed to the next step, as if its past progress in nuclear missile technology never occurred.

Also, your assertion that any military action will necessarily lead to global catastrophe is similarly unfounded. Why do you believe that the leaders of the U.S., China and Russia are all willing to commit suicide at the drop of a hat?