How likely is war with NK?

North Korea, what ultimately happens?

  • Total voters
    0
#1
lawgator1

lawgator1

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
74,479
Likes
43,986
#1
Trump and his supporters claimed that Trump's prior rhetoric and threats, combined with sanctions, had caused Rocket Man to back down. Evidently that is not the case. Now he has a missile that can hit anywhere on the continental US and estimates are that they will have a nuclear weapon that can be placed on to such a missile next year, and possibly early next year.

So no success as of yet. No diplomatic option, even a really bad one, seems viable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#2
#2
Unlikely. Like really really low on the scale of probability.

UT has better odds of hiring Saban as head coach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3
#3
I retired from the military last year thank god.

Most of my buddies are still in. Many of them were recently shipped off to germany/ poland near the czech republic (theres a large training base in germany there). The kicker is, all of our tanks and bradleys were shipped with them and now they are painting them all green from tan. We never ever painted our vehicles for a training exercise but hey, you never know. 1st infantry division is there in the waiting lol. Also our entire aviation brigade of apaches and blackhawks/ chinooks are in south korea currently.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4
#4
I don’t know what the answer is at this point. If either side makes a real move, most likely it evolves into WW3. I think it’s a stalemate for now. The best we can hope for is Kim gets offed by someone and they have a regime change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5
#5
lawgator1 said:
Trump and his supporters claimed that Trump's prior rhetoric and threats, combined with sanctions, had caused Rocket Man to back down. Evidently that is not the case. Now he has a missile that can hit anywhere on the continental US and estimates are that they will have a nuclear weapon that can be placed on to such a missile next year, and possibly early next year.

So no success as of yet. No diplomatic option, even a really bad one, seems viable.
Click to expand...

Who said that?

Also, do you believe all this advancement with NK missiles just started within the last year?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#6
#6
Also, we basically shut down all of our ADA (air defense artillary) units by around 2005 because they werent needed. Noone had an air threat vs us. Well, i live near a military installation and we have non stop patriot missles flying for training again. Havent even heard of them since the beginning of the Iraq war. Things are ramping up and we are preparing just in case to say the least.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#7
#7
govols74n said:
I retired from the military last year thank god.

Most of my buddies are still in. Many of them were recently shipped off to germany/ poland near the czech republic (theres a large training base in germany there). The kicker is, all of our tanks and bradleys were shipped with them and now they are painying them all green from tan. We never ever painted our vehicles for a training exercise but hey, you never know. 1st infantry division is there in the waiting lol. Also our entire aviation brigade of apaches and blackhawks/ chinooks are in south korea currently.
Click to expand...

The paint is part of the preparedness and I find it significant for the theater for which they are training. Not the ME. Thanks.

I wish Trump would not try to piss him off and make the US his target. I think we can get russia on board as well as many others. China can't control NK so they may be in as well. I have a feeling with the latest visit to the region by Trump the preemptive has been set in motion.
 
#9
#9
Mick said:
The paint is part of the preparedness and I find it significant for the theater for which they are training. Not the ME. Thanks.

I wish Trump would not try to piss him off and make the US his target. I think we can get russia on board as well as many others. China can't control NK so they may be in as well. I have a feeling with the latest visit to the region by Trump the preemptive has been set in motion.
Click to expand...
Russia won’t get on board. They’re the ones really pushing NK’s missile program. They want that thorn in the US’s side even more than China does.

Russia shares a hard labor camp with North Korea in Siberia.
 
#10
#10
davethevol said:
Russia won’t get on board. They’re the ones really pushing NK’s missile program. They want that thorn in the US’s side even more than China does.

Russia shares a hard labor camp with North Korea in Siberia.
Click to expand...

If NK was just a threat to the US I may agree that we would not have world support.
We are just working on the details with the world on what to do with the land afterwards.
 
#11
#11
I feel like it's a lot more likely with Trump in charge, but still not that likely.
 
#12
#12
I'm beginning to think the odds are better than 50-50. Trump's China visit seems to have fallen flat. China sent an envoy to NK immediately after the visit. The envoy either failed or really wasn't trying to reel Kim in. I still think at this time China is OK with Kim being a thorn in Trump's side. It distracts Trump from China's vastly growing influence in the Pacific and and world trade. Trump claimed a huge success in China but I believe he just got his ego stroked and he was played by a smarter man.
 
#13
#13
lawgator1 said:
I'm afraid that I am not optimistic. Trump is too invested in this.
Click to expand...

This situation is the responsibility of every President since Clinton gave them the keys to the nuclear toybox. Every one of them kicked the NK can down the road (as politicians are prone to do with everything) until we have apparently run out of road. Unfortunately for Trump, it happened on his watch.

I have no fear of a successful attack on the U.S. by NK. Even with the depleted status of our military, we should be able to thwart any threat from them.

South Korea is a much different story. I believe NK could destroy half of Seoul before being stopped. I really hope that I am mistaken in that belief.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#14
#14
KentheOrange said:
This situation is the responsibility of every President since Clinton gave them the keys to the nuclear toybox. Every one of them kicked the NK can down the road (as politicians are prone to do with everything) until we have apparently run out of road. Unfortunately for Trump, it happened on his watch.

I have no fear of a successful attack on the U.S. by NK. Even with the depleted status of our military, we should be able to thwart any threat from them.

South Korea is a much different story. I believe NK could destroy half of Seoul before being stopped. I really hope that I am mistaken in that belief.
Click to expand...

no, no, this is a new problem because Trump
 
#15
#15
KentheOrange said:
This situation is the responsibility of every President since Clinton gave them the keys to the nuclear toybox. Every one of them kicked the NK can down the road (as politicians are prone to do with everything) until we have apparently run out of road. Unfortunately for Trump, it happened on his watch.

I have no fear of a successful attack on the U.S. by NK. Even with the depleted status of our military, we should be able to thwart any threat from them.

South Korea is a much different story. I believe NK could destroy half of Seoul before being stopped. I really hope that I am mistaken in that belief.
Click to expand...

I agree that S. Korea is the issue.

Hard to blame past presidents when it has been under Trump - and largely in response to his bellicose tone - that they've upped the ante repeatedly on their end.

If war occurs, and its a year into his administration, he can blame everyone he wants to. Won't work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#16
#16
Technically we are still at war with NK. The fact the world's latest Hitler wannabe is threatening us with total destruction should not have us just turning our heads like we have for 30 years over NK. It's deadly serious and waiting until he's 100X more powerful and crazy isn't a smart move. Hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#18
#18
lawgator1 said:
I agree that S. Korea is the issue.

Hard to blame past presidents when it has been under Trump - and largely in response to his bellicose tone - that they've upped the ante repeatedly on their end.

If war occurs, and its a year into his administration, he can blame everyone he wants to. Won't work.
Click to expand...
oh for ****'s sake. Really?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#19
#19
alaVOL said:
Technically we are still at war with NK. The fact the world's latest Hitler wannabe is threatening us with total destruction should not have us just turning our heads like we have for 30 years over NK. It's deadly serious and waiting until he's 100X more powerful and crazy isn't a smart move. Hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
Click to expand...
We need to preemptively kill that little POS. No fanfare, and no advertisement. Again, just like the hate preaching mullahs in the middle east... just make him dead.


... or be amazed when he kills a few million people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#20
#20
SpaceCoastVol said:
oh for ****'s sake. Really?
Click to expand...


No.

But poster I quoted tried to lay it off first on Clinton.

You can blame them all, some mpre than others. Whatever. My point is that finger pointing gets us no closer to a solution.

I'd rather Trump worry about that solution than tweeting ways to blame others, wouldn't you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#21
#21
lawgator1 said:
No.

But poster I quoted tried to lay it off first on Clinton.

You can blame them all, some mpre than others. Whatever. My point is that finger pointing gets us no closer to a solution.

I'd rather Trump worry about that solution than tweeting ways to blame others, wouldn't you?
Click to expand...
The only solution at this point is to kill him. However you have to do it, but make him dead.
 
#22
#22
A war with NK is inevitable given the risk of nukes by KJU. This is compounded by a President who really, really needs a war, and couldn't give a rat's ass how many people die, as long as he stays in power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#23
#23
lawgator1 said:
No.

But poster I quoted tried to lay it off first on Clinton.

You can blame them all, some mpre than others. Whatever. My point is that finger pointing gets us no closer to a solution.

I'd rather Trump worry about that solution than tweeting ways to blame others, wouldn't you?
Click to expand...

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Ha.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#25
#25
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top