hina warns NK faces 'GREAT LOSSES' if it tests another nuke

anatta said:
Good Point. I constantly hear the regime is only held up by weapons ( and China's desires)
but maybe lil Kim could be a world leader of starvation or wherever his talents lie
Click to expand...
There were a series of dictators.
One by one they got real quiet after a good bombing by us.
Some examples off the top of my head,

Saddam after the Kuwait invasion. After shock and awe he was done, and only because a religious zealot whose daddy felt threatened was a neo-con puppet did we return. There was no need to do so though. There were no WMD, Saddam had learned his lesson.

Next is Gaddaffy. Same thing. After we bombed the shit out of him, he became a real gentleman, not perfect but not any type of threat either. He never had nukes, contrary to the post you thanked.

Here, read this and see why Gaddafy should have been left alone by Dubya;

[h=1]Thanks to Libya, North Korea Might Never Negotiate on Nuclear Weapons[/h]

Most Korea experts long ago lost hope that the North was prepared to dismantle its nuclear program. In word and action, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) had demonstrated its commitment to being a nuclear state. While none of its neighbors desires that outcome, the North has ample reason to be well armed.
First, only an atomic bomb offers certain deterrence against the overwhelming military power of populous and prosperous South Korea backed by the U.S. superpower. Nuclear weapons also are a handy weapon of extortion. The ultimate bomb offers an important reward to a military that plays an important political role. Only an extraordinarily good offer could convince any country, especially the DPRK, to deal.
Second, even a good offer looks suspect in light of U.S. and European support for the ouster of Libya’s Khadafy. He, too, negotiated with the West, sacrificing his nuclear, chemical and long-range missile programs. He was encouraged to act by the U.S. invasion of Iraq, which had not yet soured. Moreover, his son Saif—currently held by one set of Libyan rebels and recently sentenced to death in absentia by one of Libya’s nominal governments—reportedly advocated making a deal to draw Western investment and trade.
President George W. Bush, wannabe-scourge of evil, nevertheless promised that Libya’s “good faith will be returned.” Khadafy was feted in European capitals. Tripoli was cited as a model for Iran, with North Korea to follow. Said the West: Give up your WMDs and a world of benefits will be yours, including security, trade and investment, diplomatic recognition and international respectability.
However, four years ago, the U.S. and European governments saw their chance. Under the guise of humanitarianism—Khadafy never massacred civilians, which the allies claimed they wanted to prevent—Washington and Brussels promoted low-cost (to them) regime change. Some analysts saw the West’s unabashed aggression as validating the earlier negotiations: “Imagine the possible nightmare if we had failed to remove the Libyan nuclear weapons program and their longer-range missile force,” asserted Robert Joseph, who participated in nonproliferation negotiations.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/thanks-libya-north-korea-might-never-negotiate-nuclear-13756

So much for simpleminded Darth LOL's commentary.
 
Rune said:
There were a series of dictators.
One by one they got real quiet after a good bombing by us.
Some examples off the top of my head,

Saddam after the Kuwait invasion. After shock and awe he was done, and only because a religious zealot whose daddy felt threatened was a neo-con puppet did we return. There was no need to do so though. There were no WMD, Saddam had learned his lesson.

Next is Gaddaffy. Same thing. After we bombed the shit out of him, he became a real gentleman, not perfect but not any type of threat either. He never had nukes, contrary to the post you thanked.

Here, read this and see why Gaddafy should have been left alone by Dubya;

[h=1]Thanks to Libya, North Korea Might Never Negotiate on Nuclear Weapons[/h]

Most Korea experts long ago lost hope that the North was prepared to dismantle its nuclear program. In word and action, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) had demonstrated its commitment to being a nuclear state. While none of its neighbors desires that outcome, the North has ample reason to be well armed.
First, only an atomic bomb offers certain deterrence against the overwhelming military power of populous and prosperous South Korea backed by the U.S. superpower. Nuclear weapons also are a handy weapon of extortion. The ultimate bomb offers an important reward to a military that plays an important political role. Only an extraordinarily good offer could convince any country, especially the DPRK, to deal.
Second, even a good offer looks suspect in light of U.S. and European support for the ouster of Libya’s Khadafy. He, too, negotiated with the West, sacrificing his nuclear, chemical and long-range missile programs. He was encouraged to act by the U.S. invasion of Iraq, which had not yet soured. Moreover, his son Saif—currently held by one set of Libyan rebels and recently sentenced to death in absentia by one of Libya’s nominal governments—reportedly advocated making a deal to draw Western investment and trade.
President George W. Bush, wannabe-scourge of evil, nevertheless promised that Libya’s “good faith will be returned.” Khadafy was feted in European capitals. Tripoli was cited as a model for Iran, with North Korea to follow. Said the West: Give up your WMDs and a world of benefits will be yours, including security, trade and investment, diplomatic recognition and international respectability.
However, four years ago, the U.S. and European governments saw their chance. Under the guise of humanitarianism—Khadafy never massacred civilians, which the allies claimed they wanted to prevent—Washington and Brussels promoted low-cost (to them) regime change. Some analysts saw the West’s unabashed aggression as validating the earlier negotiations: “Imagine the possible nightmare if we had failed to remove the Libyan nuclear weapons program and their longer-range missile force,” asserted Robert Joseph, who participated in nonproliferation negotiations.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/thanks-libya-north-korea-might-never-negotiate-nuclear-13756

So much for simpleminded Darth LOL's commentary.
Click to expand...

Did you mean to make my point lol?

Recent dictators don't like to be pushed around. Gadaffi neutered himself [of a nuke program] after he saw what we did to Saddam.
 
Darth Omar said:
Did you mean to make my point lol?

Recent dictators don't like to be pushed around. Gadaffi neutered himself [of a nuke program] after he saw what we did to Saddam.
Click to expand...
Wow.
You are way less intelligent than even I gave you credit for.

I destroyed your point you retard.

You really don't remember the first time we bombed Gaddafi do you?
 
Rune said:
Wow.
You are way less intelligent than even I gave you credit for.

I destroyed your point you retard.

You really don't remember the first time we bombed Gaddafi do you?
Click to expand...

Reagan dropped a bomb on his tent and killed his daughter or something.

My point is that there's evidence recent dictators respond favorably to force.
 
Darth Omar said:
Reagan dropped a bomb on his tent and killed his daughter or something.

My point is that there's evidence recent dictators respond favorably to force.
Click to expand...
I am sorry to disapoint you, but human nature didn't abruptly change.
Gaddafy duck was never a problem again after Reagan bombed him, Just like Saddam.
 
Rune said:
I am sorry to disapoint you, but human nature didn't abruptly change.
Gaddafy duck was never a problem again after Reagan bombed him, Just like Saddam.
Click to expand...

If he wasn't a problem why did he roll back his nuke program in 2003?

He did it because he knew we were serious after we took Saddam out under Bush The Hated. An unsung consequence of the Iraq war is that it prevented a nuclear Libya.

Currently, Bowl Cut has reason to believe Trump is serious. Nobody has really gotten serious with NK so far and Trump isn't off base [given recent history at least] in thinking Bowl Cut can be stood-down via military threat.

That is my point.
 
Rune said:
There were a series of dictators.
One by one they got real quiet after a good bombing by us.
Some examples off the top of my head,

Saddam after the Kuwait invasion. After shock and awe he was done, and only because a religious zealot whose daddy felt threatened was a neo-con puppet did we return. There was no need to do so though. There were no WMD, Saddam had learned his lesson.

Next is Gaddaffy. Same thing. After we bombed the shit out of him, he became a real gentleman, not perfect but not any type of threat either. He never had nukes, contrary to the post you thanked.

Here, read this and see why Gaddafy should have been left alone by Dubya;

[h=1]Thanks to Libya, North Korea Might Never Negotiate on Nuclear Weapons[/h]

Most Korea experts long ago lost hope that the North was prepared to dismantle its nuclear program. In word and action, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) had demonstrated its commitment to being a nuclear state. While none of its neighbors desires that outcome, the North has ample reason to be well armed.
First, only an atomic bomb offers certain deterrence against the overwhelming military power of populous and prosperous South Korea backed by the U.S. superpower. Nuclear weapons also are a handy weapon of extortion. The ultimate bomb offers an important reward to a military that plays an important political role. Only an extraordinarily good offer could convince any country, especially the DPRK, to deal.
Second, even a good offer looks suspect in light of U.S. and European support for the ouster of Libya’s Khadafy. He, too, negotiated with the West, sacrificing his nuclear, chemical and long-range missile programs. He was encouraged to act by the U.S. invasion of Iraq, which had not yet soured. Moreover, his son Saif—currently held by one set of Libyan rebels and recently sentenced to death in absentia by one of Libya’s nominal governments—reportedly advocated making a deal to draw Western investment and trade.
President George W. Bush, wannabe-scourge of evil, nevertheless promised that Libya’s “good faith will be returned.” Khadafy was feted in European capitals. Tripoli was cited as a model for Iran, with North Korea to follow. Said the West: Give up your WMDs and a world of benefits will be yours, including security, trade and investment, diplomatic recognition and international respectability.
However, four years ago, the U.S. and European governments saw their chance. Under the guise of humanitarianism—Khadafy never massacred civilians, which the allies claimed they wanted to prevent—Washington and Brussels promoted low-cost (to them) regime change. Some analysts saw the West’s unabashed aggression as validating the earlier negotiations: “Imagine the possible nightmare if we had failed to remove the Libyan nuclear weapons program and their longer-range missile force,” asserted Robert Joseph, who participated in nonproliferation negotiations.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/thanks-libya-north-korea-might-never-negotiate-nuclear-13756

So much for simpleminded Darth LOL's commentary.
Click to expand...

It wasn't Qaddafi trusting the west - Bush the 2nd treated him with respect.
Qadaffi 's behaviors were modified by the strike -ye,but also his desires for the good of his people
He was a member in good standing of the world community.
For various reasons Sarcozy wanted him out- mostly his Pan -African ism-
but that wouldn't have gotten him out, nor would the fact he had a nuclear program.

What killed him was HRClinton. Her insistence on regime change under the guise of R2P.
Recall Gates said she was the deciding voice (51st%) on the NSC, and that ultimately was the reason Obama gave the go ahead.
Without the USA -NATO would not have gone in. It was HRClinton's neocon agenda at work..

Qadaffi wasn't a threat to the west -in fact he was part of anti-terrorism.
Lil Kim is a threat - a real declare threat who is marshalling up nuclear weaponization to fit on ballistic missiles.
What saves him is his army,and his deployment around Seoul.

If we and China can find a way to decapitate him as "leader". Maybe we could deal with a junta governement.
That is the current goal,and why China is crucial
 
anatta said:
It wasn't Qaddafi trusting the west - Bush the 2nd treated him with respect.
Qadaffi 's behaviors were modified by the strike -ye,but also his desires for the good of his people
He was a member in good standing of the world community.
For various reasons Sarcozy wanted him out- mostly his Pan -African ism-
but that wouldn't have gotten him out, nor would the fact he had a nuclear program.

What killed him was HRClinton. Her insistence on regime change under the guise of R2P.
Recall Gates said she was the deciding voice (51st%) on the NSC, and that ultimately was the reason Obama gave the go ahead.
Without the USA -NATO would not have gone in. It was HRClinton's neocon agenda at work..

Qadaffi wasn't a threat to the west -in fact he was part of anti-terrorism.
Lil Kim is a threat - a real declare threat who is marshalling up nuclear weaponization to fit on ballistic missiles.
What saves him is his army,and his deployment around Seoul.

If we and China can find a way to decapitate him as "leader". Maybe we could deal with a junta governement.
That is the current goal,and why China is crucial
Click to expand...
My point is that Gaddafy was neutered by the first bombing, never a problem again.

Hillary earned her place in history, dismal as it may be.
 
Darth Omar said:
If he wasn't a problem why did he roll back his nuke program in 2003?

He did it because he knew we were serious after we took Saddam out under Bush The Hated. An unsung consequence of the Iraq war is that it prevented a nuclear Libya.

Currently, Bowl Cut has reason to believe Trump is serious. Nobody has really gotten serious with NK so far and Trump isn't off base [given recent history at least] in thinking Bowl Cut can be stood-down via military threat.

That is my point.
Click to expand...
Because the west lied to him and promised him great things and because of those lies, no crackpot despot will ever believe our bullshit again.
 
Rune said:
My point is that Gaddafy was neutered by the first bombing, never a problem again.
Hillary earned her place in history, dismal as it may be.
Click to expand...
well I can accept that. It definately changed his behavior, along with his desires for bettering his people.

I disagree that nukes would have saved him from HRClinton's bloodthirst-
although Obama might not have been dragged into her desires if he had nuke weapons..
it does change the equation.
 
anatta said:
well I can accept that. It definately changed his behavior, along with his desires for bettering his people.

I disagree that nukes would have saved him from HRClinton's bloodthirst-
although Obama might not have been dragged into her desires if he had nuke weapons..
it does change the equation.
Click to expand...
You know,
I wasn't trying to claim that they would have saved him as I don't believe he actually would have developed them but your last sentence is a good point in that had he actually developed them, he likely would be alive today.

Again, with Gaddafy as an example, Kim is unlikely to disarm, so again, the neo-cons fucked up.
 
Darth Omar said:
Nobody has really gotten serious with NK so far and Trump isn't off base [given recent history at least] in thinking Bowl Cut can be stood-down via military threat.

That is my point.
Click to expand...

That has yet to be proven.... There are several million ppl that will die/maimed/homeless etc if he pulls something stupid......... Not that he has ever pulled anything stupid :whome:

x-currency manipulator/mother fuckers aka red China is exerting pressure & starting to call the kid on his bull shit... Hopefully that will be enough to dissuade him from forcing rumpf's over compensating-trying to prove what a tough guy he is..
trump%20army%20men.jpg
 
Bill said:
That has yet to be proven.... There are several million ppl that will die/maimed/homeless etc if he pulls something stupid......... Not that he has ever pulled anything stupid :whome:

x-currency manipulator/mother fuckers aka red China is exerting pressure & starting to call the kid on his bull shit... Hopefully that will be enough to dissuade him from forcing rumpf's over compensating-trying to prove what a tough guy he is..
trump%20army%20men.jpg
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with some of that, but do we kick the can down the road until Bowl Cut refines his ability to weaponize an ICBM or 12?

Then what do we do?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top