US considering Preemptive Strike against North Korea.

Timberrrrrrrr

cnocbui wrote: »

So how exactly did NK get both nuclear weapons and ICBM technologies in a matter of a couple of years? Don't suppose they had any help. You are so naive. This is China's game.

Probably the same way India and Pakistan got it, they paid money for it. You're advocating starting a war with China! Do you really want to see china/USA go to war?

archer22

cnocbui wrote: »

So how exactly did NK get both nuclear weapons and ICBM technologies in a matter of a couple of years? Don't suppose they had any help. You are so naive. This is China's game.

And whose game was it to give Israel nukes....even if it were to emerge that China did give the technology to NK, it would still be nothing the west hasn't already done.

Gatling

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You're advocating starting a war with China! Do you really want to see china/USA go to war?

With the current retoric coming out of china the last 2 years and current military build up and laying claim to the whole south China sea a conflict is coming and it's not going to be a little skirmish ,
Russia can't even compete with these two

4068ac1elhodqr

Gatling wrote: »

With the current retoric coming out of china the last 2 years and current military build up and laying claim to the whole south China sea a conflict is coming and it's not going to be a little skirmish

Perhaps so, the question is now, or never (can they be readily challenged again).

According to their latest 3.5hr congress presentation they're hoping for some sort of FSD by 2030. So from 2031 onward if China wants to claim ownership of the Moon, Mars or anywhere else, it'll be very hard to stop them.

Meanwhile NK is currently suffering from 'tired mountain syndrome', lets hope they don't try to wipe out a few hundred sq km of tuna stocks in the Pacific.

archer22

People need to get used to China's rise to World superpower, it's a reality.

Although it's going to be a tough pill for some to swallow and accept the World's first non white superpower ..however they have no choice in the matter.

BTW to those who think China has no claim to the South China Sea...perhaps they could clarify who owns what there because it's a maze of overlapping claims...between a host of nations.

And it's a lie that China claims all of it.

Nettle Soup

cnocbui wrote: »

So how exactly did NK get both nuclear weapons and ICBM technologies in a matter of a couple of years? Don't suppose they had any help. You are so naive. This is China's game.

Absolute nonsense. It's not "China's game". That's stupid reasoning.
China gain nothing from NK acting the maggot.
The Chinese are much too clever, strategic and efficient. They are now the #1 world superpower in economic terms and they will not stop powering ahead of a dysfunctional debt ridden USA.

Gatling

archer22 wrote: »

BTW to those who think China has no claim to the South China Sea...perhaps they could clarify who owns what there because it's a maze of overlapping claims...between a host of nations.

But only china have cliamed the whole south China sea right up to the coast of every other country who's sovereign water's are included ,
Explain why when Vietnam tried to start drilling off shore was their operation threatened they would face the Chinese navy if they went ahead and started oil and gas exploration in their own waters ,

Maybe our government can build platforms in the Atlantic ocean and claim it all up to the east coast of the US and threatening to shoot down aircraft and sink shipping sailing through because that's what's going to happen in the south China sea

Gringo180

cnocbui wrote: »

I agree. I think the US should announce as policy that any launch of missiles at the US from North Korea would result in retaliatory strikes against not just NK, but every major military target in China also, just to let them know they aren't fooled as to the real relationship between NK and China.

Lol. What are you smoking?

archer22

Ireland and Britain once had a spat over who owned Rockall and all around it....just curious but was that ever resolved.

Gatling

archer22 wrote: »

Ireland and Britain once had a spat over who owned Rockall and all around it....just curious but was that ever resolved.

Yes it's British and recognised Internationally as such

Gringo180

Gatling wrote: »

But only china have cliamed the whole south China sea right up to the coast of every other country who's sovereign water's are included ,
Explain why when Vietnam tried to start drilling off shore was their operation threatened they would face the Chinese navy if they went ahead and started oil and gas exploration in their own waters ,

Maybe our government can build platforms in the Atlantic ocean and claim it all up to the east coast of the US and threatening to shoot down aircraft and sink shipping sailing through because that's what's going to happen in the south China sea

If China have no claim to the Spratley islands than the UK have no claim to the Falklands. The Chinese were the first to claim the islands going back over 2000 years.

Gatling

Gringo180 wrote: »

If China have no claim to the Spratley islands than the UK have no claim to the Falklands.

This again and yes the UK have claim to the Falklands a couple of a hundred years but hey

archer22

Gringo180 wrote: »

If China have no claim to the Spratley islands than the UK have no claim to the Falklands. The Chinese were the first to claim the islands going back over 2000 years.

Indeed and if proximity was the determining factor in who owned what...then the Channel Islands would belong to France.

Gringo180

archer22 wrote: »

Indeed and if proximity was the determining factor in who owned what...then the Channel Islands would belong to France.

And Russia would own Alaska.

Gatling

archer22 wrote: »

Indeed and if proximity was the determining factor in who owned what...then the Channel Islands would belong to France.

But unfortunately it doesn't work like that sure it doesnt

Gringo180

Gatling wrote: »

This again and yes the UK have claim to the Falklands a couple of a hundred years but hey

I never said they had no claim to the Falklands. Your suggesting the proximity of the south China seas away from mainland China is the reason they shouldnt have any claim over it. Thats nonsense.

MadYaker

Trump has just issued an executive order giving the sec of defense the ability to call all retired military personell back to active duty....

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/10/20/presidential-executive-order-amending-executive-order-13223

Edit: apparently this is intended for use by the air force since they are extremely short on pilots at the moment in relation to the situation in Syria https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/10/20/air-force-recall-many-1-000-retired-pilots-address-serious-shortage/785344001/

Gatling

Gringo180 wrote: »

Your suggesting the proximity of the south China seas away from mainland China is the reason they shouldnt have any claim over it. Thats nonsense.

Never said that at all ,

At least I can chuckle but it's not the first time is it

SeanW

archer22 wrote: »

People need to get used to China's rise to World superpower, it's a reality.

That's true, albeit unfortunate for lots of free peoples in the world.

Although it's going to be a tough pill for some to swallow and accept the World's first non white superpower ..however they have no choice in the matter.

When you have no argument, call people racist. There should be a version of Godwin's Law with this.

People fear Red China's rise because Red China is a Communist hellhole - like their friends in North Korea - not because of the race of the Chinese people.

Please withdraw your insinuation that this is about race.

BTW to those who think China has no claim to the South China Sea...perhaps they could clarify who owns what there because it's a maze of overlapping claims...between a host of nations.

Yes, there are overlapping claims - but Red China is included in virtually all of them.

And it's a lie that China claims all of it.

Have you seen their "Nine dashes line?" It encompasses virtually all of the South China sea, stretching almost 1000 miles from their mainland and leaves Vietnam (possibly also Brunei) with almost no maritime territory and leaves the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia with "China" only a few miles off their South China Sea coasts.

Gringo180 wrote: »

If China have no claim to the Spratley islands than the UK have no claim to the Falklands. The Chinese were the first to claim the islands going back over 2000 years.

Red China has no claim. The Falkland Islands have been inhabited by British people for a long time, they were the first to settle it a long time ago. That's why they have a claim. Note they only claim the islands and AFAIK and waters connecting them to the ocean.

The Chinese never settled the South China Sea until recent years when they began building artificial islands in them - after they had already been claimed by countries nearer to them.

This has all been established in international tribunals.

Red China's claim to the South China is only backed by the Chinese military, i.e. thuggery and intimidation. It has no other basis.

Gringo180 wrote: »

And Russia would own Alaska.

Russia explicitly sold Alaska to the United States in the 19th century. Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia and Indonesia made no such agreement.

4068ac1elhodqr

Japan’s Abe is set for landslide win (estimate:311/465), as Japan votes under North Korea threats.

A "super-majority" would allow Abe to ‘propose changes’ to the current pacifist constitution, that forces it to ‘renounce war’ and currently limits its military to a self-defense role.

nacho libre

cnocbui wrote: »

That so?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/the-hidden-hand-behind-the-islamic-state-militants-saddam-husseins/2015/04/04/aa97676c-cc32-11e4-8730-4f473416e759_story.html

It was obvious from their rapid take over of Mosul this was the case. Mosul was a city full of disgruntled former Saddam loyalists being ruled by malaki's sectarian government, it was a powderkeg waiting to explode. As were other sunnis areas

However, with death of al -tikriti and the brutality of the foreign jihadis elements, a lot of Saddam's former officer turned against ISIS. It was a marriage of convenient.


If lessons have not been learnt by the ruling shia sect, isis mark 2 will emerge in years to come.

SeanW

Evie Big Troop wrote: »

Japan’s Abe is set for landslide win (estimate:311/465), as Japan votes under North Korea threats.

A "super-majority" would allow Abe to ‘propose changes’ to the current pacifist constitution, that forces it to ‘renounce war’ and currently limits its military to a self-defense role.

Nothing wrong with that. They have that fat piece of Communist **** in North Korea threatening to sink their entire country into the sea with H-Bombs and Red China trying to steal the Senkaku Islands from them.

"We just want to be left alone" is not a credible foreign or military policy when you are threatened by Communist scum. The Tibetan people (now the victims of ongoing cultural genocide) have learned this the hard way as did the peoples of the Baltic States, Ukraine, Poland and so on.

When your people are threatened by aggressive Commies (such threat being at best, oppression, at worst genocide), your military and foreign policies need to change from "we just want to be left alone" to "leave us alone - OR ELSE!!!"

4068ac1elhodqr

Foresee Japan taking a few 'lease agreements on big sticks' when they change their stance, not a bad thing (under current conditions).
Along with various new deep radar spots, wonder if the Chinese have any regrets yet, on not muzzling their barking mad lap dog?

flaneur

If Trump would stop his megaphone diplomacy, there might be more chance of getting China to intervene more effectively.

China will not want to be seen to be being told what to do. You have to understand they need to be able to be seen to take the diplomatic and sensible lead and I think that’s probably a bridge too far for the current US Administration, as it would mean China being seen as a real regional power.

On the one hand you’ve Trump trying to reach out to China for help and on the other hand you’ve him threatening trade wars and making really aggressive statements. There’s no cohesiveness to the statements and I think they probably just want nothing to do with Trump’s crazy at the moment.

SeanW

Donald Trump has been President for less than one year - what have the Chinese been doing up until January 20th 2017?

fxotoole

flaneur wrote: »

On the one hand you’ve Trump trying to reach out to China for help and on the other hand you’ve him threatening trade wars and making really aggressive statements. There’s no cohesiveness to the statements and I think they probably just want nothing to do with Trump’s crazy at the moment.

Trump has no overarching Foreign Policy strategy. He flips and flops depending on what way the wind is blowing. A true populist in the best sense of the word.

His administration should take his damn phone away from him and shut down his Twitter account. Ranting and raving on Twitter whenever some random thought comes into his mind, with no overall strategy is only going to do harm in the long term. He needs to have a unified communications strategy.

Gatling

fxotoole wrote: »

Trump has no overarching Foreign Policy strategy. He flips and flops depending on what way the wind is blowing. A true populist in the best sense of the word.

His administration should take his damn phone away from him and shut down his Twitter account. Ranting and raving on Twitter whenever some random thought comes into his mind, with no overall strategy is only going to do harm in the long term. He needs to have a unified communications strategy.

Now newest policy is nuclear Bombers on 24/7 standby something that hasn't happened since the cold war

BoatMad

Gatling wrote: »

Now newest policy is nuclear Bombers on 24/7 standby something that hasn't happened since the cold war

The world hasn't ended so far. Despite many here thinking it will

Gatling

BoatMad wrote: »

The world hasn't ended so far. Despite many here thinking it will

It won't end , but there is every chance of a shooting match happening

BoatMad

SeanW wrote: »

Nothing wrong with that. They have that fat piece of Communist **** in North Korea threatening to sink their entire country into the sea with H-Bombs and Red China trying to steal the Senkaku Islands from them.

"We just want to be left alone" is not a credible foreign or military policy when you are threatened by Communist scum. The Tibetan people (now the victims of ongoing cultural genocide) have learned this the hard way as did the peoples of the Baltic States, Ukraine, Poland and so on.

When your people are threatened by aggressive Commies (such threat being at best, oppression, at worst genocide), your military and foreign policies need to change from "we just want to be left alone" to "leave us alone - OR ELSE!!!"

Aggressive commies , wow , are we back in the era of McCarthyism and " unamerican activities "

All I see in China is the rise of a huge middle class and the desire of a superpower To " stretch " it's sphere of influence , god knows the US has been at it since the 1900s.