US considering Preemptive Strike against North Korea.

A Little Pony

Wish the damn yankees would hurry up and get rid of the NK regime. They are a joke. They are certainly capable of doing it.

Gatling

snotboogie wrote: »

There is no way out for the Kim's and the rest of the elites in North Korea, this is it. If they stop building missiles and relax their external threats, it won't be long before US, Southern and Japanese backed rebels are sticking bayonets up their arse in the street,

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaat

McMurphy

Wholly accurate representation of what's really going on right now.

Ever so slightly NSFW.


https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320xq90/r/924/nrSE8d.jpg

Gatling

Rick Shaw wrote: »

Wholly accurate representation of what's really going on right now.

Ever so slightly NSFW.


https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320xq90/r/924/nrSE8d.jpg

Ohhhhhh no ,no,no

Curly Judge

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Marx said that socialism could never exist in isolation. Stalin disagreed. Stalin was wrong, Marx was right. Socialism can prosper and thrive for a few decades when there is a bloc of co-operating socialist economies, but once this bloc is weakened, socialism will collapse. Socialism is inherently interdependent, it requires local as well as international solidarity.

Without this, socialism is a lame man walking towards a grave. This is why most serious socialists (not the archetypal 1st Arts loafer) have little time for the likes of Chavez, Morales, or even Stalin and Tito. These men have all foolishly pursued their own egotism at the expense of a slow and evolving permanent revolution, as espoused by the likes of Trotsky. In 1939, Trotsky wrote in 'Three Concepts of the Russian Revolution', that "[o]nly the victory of the proletariat in the West could protect Russia from bourgeois restoration and assure it the possibility of rounding-out the establishment of socialism".

So..... basically..... you subscribe to the, "If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle", school of political philosophy?

Kermit.de.frog

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnQfQFalTIk

Worth a watch.

aloyisious

snotboogie wrote: »

There is no way out for the Kim's and the rest of the elites in North Korea, this is it. If they stop building missiles and relax their external threats, it won't be long before US, Southern and Japanese backed rebels are sticking bayonets up their arse in the street, the Kim's saw the Arab spring. Listen to China and it won't be long before they find somebody else in North Korea who will do exactly as they say, why do you think they murdered Macau based and CCP protected Kim Jong Nam? Open up and they leave themselves vulnerable to all sorts of espionage, assassination attempts and foreign powers backing disgruntled opposition, the world won't forget the last 70 years and the Kim's will never be forgiven, best case scenario they end up before The Hague, worst case they end up tortured to death by some rebels. The stakes are high and the only way to protect the North Korean elites is Nuclear weapons.

There are rebels in NK???

Dyr

Curly Judge wrote: »

So..... basically..... you subscribe to the, "If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle", school of political philosophy?

I'm just impressed there's still people openly spouting that marxist guff, I mean even the likes of paul murphy only trot (pun intended) out their beaten docket ideology behind closed does.

Kermit.de.frog

In North Korea if you disagree you are put in a prison camp and worked to death - if not simply killed before it.

BillyBobBS

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

In North Korea if you disagree you are put in a prison camp and worked to death - if not simply killed before it.

A policy which a lot of the comrades here in Ireland support.

#leftielogic

Wanderer78

BillyBobBS wrote:

A policy which a lot of the comrades here in Ireland support.

I'm a lefty and I certainly don't agree with that

Cheerful Spring

Manic Moran wrote: »

The armistice was an agreement by the militaries to stop shooting at each other until further notice pending further discussions, it was not an agreement between governments to be nice to each other. That cessation of armed hostilities has been broken only by one side. The war the North started continues on, and thus continues to have repercussions on the North because an agreement for peace has not been reached. And, for the record, the North has said it would fail to follow that armsistice several times in the last 20 years. I would argue that the continued state of war probably takes away the moral argument that 'economic sanctions are an act of war' given they are already in one.

When hostilities cease you back off, instead America from the ending of the Korean war sanctioned them and has not stopped. When the other side tries to economically destroy your country, you have every right to defend yourself in face of this, least in my view.

Cheerful Spring

ilkhanid wrote: »

Poor Russia and China! I thought the USA was a declining, impotent power, and now we hear that it's able to bend China and Russia to it's will. Whatever next!



No, I'd put out the government that kept harassing the English and threatening them, wasting our money on a huge army and doing those-at least you admit it-bad things. But that's not an option that the people of North Korea have. They do as they're told.
The solution is simple. 1.Stop building missiles. 2. Listen to the Chinese. 3. Rejoin the world and dump this Juche nonsense. But that's not an option because there is no solution acceptable to everybody else that doesn't have a bad outcome for the Kims regime. Their existence depends on keeping their people terrified, ignorant slaves completely cut off from the outside world, believing that they are a superior people and that the rest of the world is hostile, poverty-stricken and inferior. No light can be allowed into this Plato's cave.
People are still under the impression that this is a normal regime. It's not. It's not even like other dictatorships. The hereditary nature of the Kim regime means that a relapse into normal behaviour is precluded from the start. People make clueless comparisons to places like Vietnam, claiming that north Korea could become like that, but they're drawing the wrong lessons. Even psychotic regimes like Stalin's Russia or Mao's China changed because there was a cohort of people at the highest level that saw change as desirable when the despot died. Those regimes were so terrifying, so unpredictable that nobody, even-especially those-in the elite felt safe. A dialling down of terror and a loosening of the reins not only brought relief to the high Party members but made the general public more grateful and tractable. Regimes like Vietnam and Laos were a mixture of nationalists and ideologues-but not totally blind ones. There was no hereditary elite. When the world changed the regime took note and altered it's course. The Kims, the ideology and the state are one. Juche was originated by and is inseperable from the Kims. Any attempt to adapt to changing times would have detrimential consequences for the Kim regime which wants total, unchallenged power. This is what it hopes for from normalization: a guarantee of it's continued existence, regular dollops of aid and otherwise for everything to go on as before.

Your worldview is backwards, but this what you get when you watch Fox news.

Cheerful Spring

A Little Pony wrote: »

Wish the damn yankees would hurry up and get rid of the NK regime. They are a joke. They are certainly capable of doing it.

It took them 2 months to take out Saddam, when they had allies at their side. And Saddam army basically ran away. Kim has an army of 1.2 million and another 10 million men if he needed it. If Kim send in 5 million armed soldiers, it going to be hard for the South Koreans and US forces to keep them back. It take least a month for the Americans to get enough soldiers and armaments across the ocean to reinforce South Korea. There is no way to know if Kim will just go nuclear at the beginning or end?

ilkhanid

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Your worldview is backwards, but this what you get when you watch Fox news.

I have no access to Fox News. The only times I know what's on it is when somebody else is quoting from it, or mocking it.

Cheerful Spring

ilkhanid wrote: »

I have no access to Fox News. The only times I know what's on it is when somebody else is quoting from it, or mocking it.

Triggered! You watch it all the time tell the truth.

ilkhanid

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Triggered! You watch it all the time tell the truth.

As I said. Most of my knowledge of 'Faux' News is from Trevor Noah's jibes at it's expense.

Cheerful Spring

ilkhanid wrote: »

As I said. Most of my knowledge of 'Faux' News is from Trevor Noah's jibes at it's expense.

Fair enough. Maybe you just believe everything you hear on American TV stations then?

Cheerful Spring

Gatling wrote: »

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaat

You forgotten about Libya already?

etselbbuns

I cannot find my iodine tablets!

Cheerful Spring

It escalating rapidly every day. The North Korean Ambassador called a special meeting at the UN and has said Trump has declared war on North korea and North Korea has a right to shoot down American bombers. They could be talking about shooting down the American planes flying near the DMZ this weekend?

https://twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/status/912341324510220288/video/1

Gatling

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

When hostilities cease you back off, instead

North Korea kept the state of war for 6 + decades ,

And if nk targets a single US aircraft the War will be swift

Cheerful Spring

Gatling wrote: »

North Korea kept the state of war for 6 + decades ,

And if nk targets a single US aircraft the War will be swift

North Korea signed an armistice with America and ended the war. Only one country sanctioned after the war ended! America continued the fight by other means and was only going to be a matter of time North Korea would strike out. North Korea was not a legitimate nuclear power till 2006, so there was no excuse to continue sanctioning them, the korean war ended, if maintaining peace was the aim?

North Korea have new anti aircraft batteries, they are just as good as S300 the Russians have. They can knock out any aircraft the Americans got. There just an unknown have they enough to cover the entire sky of North Korea. This of course will not matter if goes nuclear ICBM flies way too fast and too high for conventional weapons to shoot down.

This is worrisome. Trump is likely to test this bait and continue to do so, the risk of a mistake or miscalculation has now increased again.

LordSutch

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It escalating rapidly every day. The North Korean Ambassador called a special meeting at the UN and has said Trump has declared war on North korea and North Korea has a right to shoot down American bombers. They could be talking about shooting down the American planes flying near the DMZ this weekend?

https://twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/status/912341324510220288/video/1

My thoughts exactly!

Very worrying, and it really could kick off at any moment, either by design or by accident. The risk of nuclear war seems even more real than in the 1980s ...

On the other hand ... why would Kim Jung un want to be the rocket man on a suicide mission to oblivion? Surely he wants to remain alive to rule NK for many decades to come, or does he really want to bow out with a loud bang, while taking half the peninsula with him!

arayess

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

This is worrisome. Trump is likely to test this bait and continue to do so, the risk of a mistake or miscalculation has now increased again.

while I agree - the decision will be made by mattis and maybe mcmasters.
Trump may be good at blowhard rhetoric but he won't go to war without mattis's approval.

One criticism of Trump by his supporters - anti foreign invasion /anti industrial military complex crowd and throw in the Ron Paul type people also - is that Trump has given the military a lot of autonomy that they didn't have before.
And lets them make there own decisions.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades!

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Marx said that socialism could never exist in isolation. Stalin disagreed. Stalin was wrong, Marx was right. Socialism can prosper and thrive for a few decades when there is a bloc of co-operating socialist economies, but once this bloc is weakened, socialism will collapse. Socialism is inherently interdependent, it requires local as well as international solidarity.

Without this, socialism is a lame man walking towards a grave. This is why most serious socialists (not the archetypal 1st Arts loafer) have little time for the likes of Chavez, Morales, or even Stalin and Tito. These men have all foolishly pursued their own egotism at the expense of a slow and evolving permanent revolution, as espoused by the likes of Trotsky. In 1939, Trotsky wrote in 'Three Concepts of the Russian Revolution', that "[o]nly the victory of the proletariat in the West could protect Russia from bourgeois restoration and assure it the possibility of rounding-out the establishment of socialism".

Curly Judge wrote: »

So..... basically..... you subscribe to the, "If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle", school of political philosophy?

Eh??

No. I have no idea how you reached that conclusion. My point is summed up by saying that socialism as a mixture of theories by Marx, Engels, and later Trotsky or Pyatakov, has never been implemented. It may even be impossible to implement, regardless of how preferable it may be.

I would use climate change as an analogy. Even those who believe we need radical environmental reforms, are willing to accept that this may be impossible, to the detriment of mankind.

I have no idea how you misread this statement as an 'if my aunt had balls...' position.

A Little Pony

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Marx said that socialism could never exist in isolation. Stalin disagreed. Stalin was wrong, Marx was right. Socialism can prosper and thrive for a few decades when there is a bloc of co-operating socialist economies, but once this bloc is weakened, socialism will collapse. Socialism is inherently interdependent, it requires local as well as international solidarity.

Without this, socialism is a lame man walking towards a grave. This is why most serious socialists (not the archetypal 1st Arts loafer) have little time for the likes of Chavez, Morales, or even Stalin and Tito. These men have all foolishly pursued their own egotism at the expense of a slow and evolving permanent revolution, as espoused by the likes of Trotsky. In 1939, Trotsky wrote in 'Three Concepts of the Russian Revolution', that "[o]nly the victory of the proletariat in the West could protect Russia from bourgeois restoration and assure it the possibility of rounding-out the establishment of socialism".

Curly Judge wrote: »

So..... basically..... you subscribe to the, "If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle", school of political philosophy?

Eh??

No. I have no idea how you reached that conclusion. My point is summed up by saying that socialism as a mixture of theories by Marx, Engels, and later Trotsky or Pyatakov, has never been implemented. It may even be impossible to implement, regardless of how preferable it may be.

I would use climate change as an analogy. Even those who believe we need radical environmental reforms, are willing to accept that this may be impossible, to the detriment of mankind.

I have no idea how you misread this statement as an 'if my aunt had balls...' position.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AM7u1-BQ8ww

Cheerful Spring

LordSutch wrote: »

My thoughts exactly!

Very worrying, and it really could kick off at any moment, either by design or by accident. The risk of nuclear war seems even more real than in the 1980s ...

On the other hand ... why would Kim Jung un want to be the rocket man on a suicide mission to oblivion? Surely he wants to remain alive to rule NK for many decades to come, or does he really want to bow out with a loud bang, while taking half the peninsula with him!

Well Trump tweeted this over the weekend "Kim Jong-un “won’t be around much longer”

This is a threat to his regime. He going to be thinking a pre-emptive strike is coming soon.

Every week bombers are flying near the North. We are getting real close to war now, it could be weeks away if this continues with Trump and Kim arguing with each other.

Cheerful Spring

arayess wrote: »

while I agree - the decision will be made by mattis and maybe mcmasters.
Trump may be good at blowhard rhetoric but he won't go to war without mattis's approval.

One criticism of Trump by his supporters - anti foreign invasion /anti industrial military complex crowd and throw in the Ron Paul type people also - is that Trump has given the military a lot of autonomy that they didn't have before.
And lets them make there own decisions.

You just know Trump is going to send bombers and jets to test Kim after this. We entering a period of miscalculation. North Korea may strike out and target US warplanes flying near the border, they are now threatening it. Kim will look weak if Trump continuously orders planes to fly near his border and he does nothing!

A Little Pony

A Little Pony wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AM7u1-BQ8ww

I'm not listening to 42 minutes of robot-voice generator in order to decipher whatever point you are attempting to make.

Neither do I make a habit of endorsing much of Stalin's theories, in fact I have ridiculed the crux of his philosophy on this thread.