This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
North Korea's Nukes
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
TheMediator
I doubt North Korean leadership thinks it can conquer the US. At best, it wants to frighten the US by acting like it has much more deployment capabilities than it actually has. It likely can at best deploy them as gravity bombs, but it is doing long range missile tests at the same time as it is testing its nuclear weapons to make people believe it can combine the technologies, which is most likely cannot, and will not be able to for some time.
Post by
MyTie
I love how the words "likely" and "probably" is the defense you guys use against North Korean nuclear technology.
Post by
TheMediator
I might have a nuclear bomb in my backyard. You don't know if I do or don't, so you have to say whether I likely don't have it, or probably don't have it.
Post by
Patty
I might have a nuclear bomb in my backyard. You don't know if I do or don't, so you have to say whether I likely don't have it, or probably don't have it.
However saying "I likely don't have it" doesn't make grammatical sense, so would not be used.
Post by
MyTie
I might have a nuclear bomb in my backyard. You don't know if I do or don't, so you have to say whether I likely don't have it, or probably don't have it.
I know that you don't. There is no probably. TheMediator does not have a nuke in his back pocket. Period.
North Korea DOES have nukes. I know that. Period.
The word your looking for is 'proof'. I don't have proof you don't have a nuke and I don't have proof North Korea has nukes. Then again I don't have proof jumping off a cliff will kill me. However, I'm not an idiot.
Post by
TheMediator
Your brain is small, like I said in another thread. You have no idea whether or not I do or do not have a nuclear bomb in my backyard. Now, you might say, its very unlikely I do, but you haven't seen the backyard, and you don't know if the government did or did not bury a nuclear bomb in my backyard.
Post by
MyTie
Your brain is small, like I said in another thread. You have no idea whether or not I do or do not have a nuclear bomb in my backyard. Now, you might say, its very unlikely I do, but you haven't seen the backyard, and you don't know if the government did or did not bury a nuclear bomb in my backyard.
There is no nuclear bomb in your backyard.
Post by
172996
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
283608
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
So, we should stop them AFTER they have the technology to send a nuke over?
Post by
283608
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
So, we should stop them AFTER they have the technology to send a nuke over?
Do we even have the ability to stop them? We weren't able to destroy them the last time we were in an open conflict.
We don't have the funding to maintain the two wars we are currently involved in. Are you certain that starting another, much larger scale, war wouldn't destroy the US fiscally? We're not exactly in the best financial shape right now.
Good questions. If we wanted to win a war... really WIN a war... we wouldn't fight the PR battles. That is the expensive war. We would go in, bomb the holy hell outa the country we are fighting, then take it over. Take about 3 days, and in the end we would make money. Of course this isn't the politically correct move. We have to write them letters for at least 3 years, then go in with coffee and doughnuts. In the end we have to send a whole bunch of troops over, and then just sit there until they change thier minds. This, of course, could take decades. We call this 'modern warfare'. It sucks.
Post by
MyTie
MyTie wants to murder black kids because they might get guns.
dude... This is the closest I have ever come to pushing the 'Report' button.
So, we should stop them after they get their guns?
No no no.. .this is NOT the same thing. This is trolling you two are doing. You two are comparing using military force to stop an aggressive nation from obtaining nuclear weapons to murdering african american children. You two are resorting to mudslinging troll actions because you can't hold your water on the issues. Keep it up and I will report you. Something I have never done to anyone.
Post by
283608
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
No, I agree with MyTie on that point, if we actually used our full arsenal of weaponry, we would likely destroy North Korea in less than a day. However, I don't think there would be much left to the country if we blanketed it with nuclear weapons, and it'd be uninhabitable for a short time, but if we really wanted to win, we could do it.
Post by
MyTie
No, I agree with MyTie on that point, if we actually used our full arsenal of weaponry, we would likely destroy North Korea in less than a day. However, I don't think there would be much left to the country if we blanketed it with nuclear weapons, and it'd be uninhabitable for a short time, but if we really wanted to win, we could do it.
Monday - N. Korea threatens US with nukes.
Tuesday - US destroys N Korea
Wednesday - Iran declares it will never use nukes again (or even use the word 'nuke' in a sentence).
Thursday - Russia sends a 'BFF card' to US.
Friday - France, looking rather nervous, bakes us some strudels. Germany sends champagne to enjoy with them.
Quite a lot can happen in a week.
Post by
blademeld
Nuclear bombs are easy to make, making it effective is much harder.
Post by
283608
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
blademeld
I suppose if you are ok with killing 22 million people this is a possibility.
Why does MyTie have to be okay with it for it to be a possibility?
Or was that a figure of speech?
Post by
MyTie
Now they CAN kill you and your family on the west coast with relative ease.
Do you like fishsticks?
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.