Why North Korea will not be attacked

[Joey AlfioParticipant]

Δεν υπάρχει τίποτε αδύνατο γι’ αυτόν που θα προσπαθήσει. - Μέγας Αλέξανδρος

[It’sallbsParticipant]

Or is it because America are too busy partitioning Syria and stirring things up in Iran so they can put a puppet leader in place there.

http://www.leavemeansleave.eu

[joetechParticipant]

Why won’t North Korea be attacked? Because there’s no oil in North Korea.

"Don't follow in my footsteps...I stepped in something."

[Joey AlfioParticipant]

You both are correct but it’s also meant to show that the more pressure and hostilities we have on NK the more nukes/missiles they will build in retaliation. It reminds me of all those countries we attacked and how we would have never done so if they had their own nukes and missile programs. Libya wouldn’t be the s~~~ hole it is today if that was the case.

Δεν υπάρχει τίποτε αδύνατο γι’ αυτόν που θα προσπαθήσει. - Μέγας Αλέξανδρος

[It’sallbsParticipant]

Libya was the most successfull economy in North Africa.

http://www.leavemeansleave.eu

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22578]

The reason the U.S. is not going to attack North Korea is not because North Korea has nuclear weapons. The reason has always been in China. That has been the case since China entered the Korean-U.S. War seventy years ago.

The U.S. does not want a war with China for the simple fact that the U.S. might lose such a war.

China is not like fighting camel herders in the desert with bare bones technology, whom use hit and run attacks.

China can more than match the U.S. blow for blow. China has more soldiers, more firepower, and is around the same level of technology as the U.S. thanks to the Clintons and shipping most of the technology factories to China.

Besides being a military disadvantage with China, the U.S. has a massive diplomatic disadvantage. While Bush 43 and Obama spent 16 years using the U.S. military to p~~~ off much of the world.

President Trump has been trying to play clean up for the last year. But, every time President Trump tries to pull the U.S. out of a mess, the Deep State uses their puppets in the media to scream “Russian Collusion”.

Meanwhile, China has been using that 16 years to slowly build up their strength and wealth, while China has also been spreading some of that wealth in investments around the world. Much of these investments are for their Silk Road Project.

China’s Silk Road Project will likely f~~~ over the U.S. economy in a decade. But, a war with China would f~~~ over the U.S. within a week.

China has made a lot of powerful friends.

China’s influence is in the government halls of everyone from Europe, Russia, Africa, much of Asia, and all the way to Latin American including Mexico.

What influence in Mexico the U.S. does not control, China likely controls. And considering President Trump wants to end the Mexican’s elites gravy train from the U.S., China likely have more influence with the Mexico government than the U.S. has.

To give you an idea of how much influence China has over the world. If tomorrow, if the President of China called the Mexican government and order the Mexican government to use the Mexican military to scare and drive fifty million Mexicans to flee to the U.S., the Mexican government would likely do this with only little resistance towards the government of China.

China does not have to fire a shot towards the U.S. to destroy the U.S. An invasion of fifty million Mexicans over the course of a month would collapse the U.S.

If China and the U.S. went to war, chances are most of the world is going to side with China.

[It’sallbsParticipant]

I don’t think even Britain would side with America if they attacked China.

There is so much Chinese investment in this country.

http://www.leavemeansleave.eu

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22578]

It’sallbs wrote:

I don’t think even Britain would side with America if they attacked China.

There is so much Chinese investment in this country.

Exactly. Those in the U.S. Deep State trying to start more s~~~ in the world do not realize the weakened position they are in.

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

War with China?

Number of nukes controlled by China: 260
Number of nukes controlled by USA: 6,800

Pretty simple math really.

OH and lets not forget China’s bitter rival India: 120 nukes
and our ally Israel with 200+ nukes. And the UK 215 nukes

Again pretty simple math

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22578]

PistolPete wrote:

Number of nukes controlled by China: 260
Number of nukes controlled by USA: 6,800

Pete, you are only looking at raw numbers.

In addition, “nuclear weapons” can be from a suitcase nuke to a ballistic missiles with each missile having multiple warheads.

If even only 10 of those nuclear weapons China has are ballistic missiles with multiple warheads, that is enough to destroy the U.S. several times over.

Also, China likely has their own missile defense systems.

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

I see your point but we also have ABMS and the proof of their effectiveness is the level of fear they generated back in the 80s & 90s enough to enter into an ABM treaty–YES we’ve broken it.

But many of our weapons are MRVs as well and WE possess a surplus of first strike weapons.

Finally you make my point–is China willing to be destroyed for NK? No not any more than we would have sacrificed NY for Berlin during the cold war. The dynamic works BOTH ways.

I say blow NK off the map. Don’t invade, Don’t occupy—merely level and go home.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22578]

PistolPete wrote:

Finally you make my point–is China willing to be destroyed for NK?

You need to understand China’s view on this.

China will not tolerate tens of thousands of U.S. troops on their border. And China will likely go to war rather than have the U.S. station nuclear weapons on their border.

Such an act by the U.S. would be seen by China in a similar way the U.S. look at nukes placed in Cuba by the USSR during the Cuba missile crisis, which almost started World War III.

PistolPete wrote:

I say blow NK off the map. Don’t invade, Don’t occupy—merely level and go home.

Doing that would have far worse consequences. In the long term, leveling a nation that “might attack” would be very foolish.

That is not regime change, which the rest of the world will usually turn a blind eye. That is total annihilation. The rest of the world will react badly to such actions because they will believe they might be next, and thus they will use the same justification to attack the U.S. first.

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

I don’t want them to turn a blind eye. I want them to see it. NK has been threatening us for far too long. Its time to make an example of them. The alternative you suggest will also be viewed by the world–it will be interpreted as weakness–and that is something we dare not show because it encourages precisely the attack you fear. Peace is insured through strength not weakness.

We’ve seen it over and over again—the aggressor perceives weakness, lack of resolve and attacks.

[Silver FoxParticipant 2766]

I fervently hope America does not go to war with North Korea. It’s not worth it and will only cause more suffering to their already-suffering population.

Regarding nukes, it doesn’t take that many to cripple a nation. Sure, we have thousands and China has a few hundred, but it would only take about a dozen hits for the US to collapse. Imagine a dozen of the biggest US cities being hit… or even just one or two. Everything would change. It’s a horrific scenario that defies imagination.

I also have no faith whatsoever in the American ABM technology. If you’ve ever read the actual test protocols and results of those tests, they look pretty shabby. Very low success rates even in ideal conditions against single targets without ECM or evasive maneuvers. The Pentagon massages the numbers in their press releases to make them sound more impressive, until they get called out on their unrealistic test scenarios.

If we got a barrage of ICBMs launched at us, we would be screwed.

What’s more, both China and Russia have large numbers of mobile launchers that cannot be pinpointed 100% of the time. America couldn’t realistically eliminate them in a shooting war. They represent a serious and credible deterrent because we can’t kill them preemptively, unlike fixed silos which remain in place and can be targeted.

It’s scary hearing hawkish US politicians talk openly about using nukes. The hubris and ignorance is staggering.

"Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife." --Apostle Paul

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22578]

PistolPete wrote:

We’ve seen it over and over again—the aggressor perceives weakness, lack of resolve and attacks.

That is a over-simplification of the matter.

The truth is that the U.S. military is stretched.

Pulling back to a better position is not always a sign of weakness.

For example. And this is a hypothetical question(s) for you.

What do you think would happen if tomorrow, the President of the United States ordered all of the U.S. military, U.S. personnel, and U.S. citizens to immediately evacuate South Korea.

At the same time, the President of the United States has four U.S. submarines with nuclear missiles surface off the coasts of South Korea, two submarines on the western coast of South Korea in the Yellow Sea and two submarines on the eastern coast of South Korea in the Sea of Japan, for everyone to see.

Would these actions be seen as an act of weakness? Or, would these actions be seen as an act of strength?

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

Comon Fox you’ve let the libs brainwash you into fearing nukes. There is nothing to be afraid of. They are perhaps one of the most elegant weapons ever created. I love watching those things go off. As for Faust I like his idea but only if it is followed up by launches—otherwise its just posturing theater. Theater always bored me and it would bore everyone else too.

Yes out military is overstretched–thats why we eliminate the threat and then come home.

[Silver FoxParticipant 2766]

PistolPete wrote:

Comon Fox you’ve let the libs brainwash you into fearing nukes. There is nothing to be afraid of. They are perhaps one of the most elegant weapons ever created. I love watching those things go off.

Lol, well, I’ll give you that! 😀 They are fun to watch go boom.

"Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife." --Apostle Paul

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

HERE this will make you all feel better about nukes and their power to…cleanse with fire what needs cleansed.

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

I like the Zar bomb video but I could have lived without the Gustav Holst sound track! HA HA

[Silver FoxParticipant 2766]

Fictional video, but still captures the terror of the civilians caught up in the first day of nuclear war.

"Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife." --Apostle Paul

[Author]

Posts