General US Politics

[Time the Crestfallen]

1 minute ago, Lushen said:

America was not a major player before WW2.  Few years later, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  As I said above, this is exactly what the US has been doing in the last few presidencies.  The result?  North Korea can now hit the United States and continues to advance it's nuclear program.  Great job America.  

Those two cases are completely incomparable, since WW2 US was, unlike N.K., not dependent on outside aid in order to function as a country. Tell me what N.K.'s end-game is by attacking the US?

[Lushen]

2 minutes ago, Magus of Flowers said:

Those two cases are completely incomparable, since WW2 US was, unlike N.K., not dependent on outside aid in order to function as a country. Tell me what N.K.'s end-game is by attacking the US?

Their nuclear and missile program is still advancing just fine.  North Korea does not need to surpass America's technology, nor surpass it's number of nukes.  They just need enough to nuke all major US cities.  How long will that take?  Nobody knows, we didn't think they would have long range missiles by this point and now they can hit anywhere in the world.  

As for the end game, the fulfillment of a religious-like prophecy that North Korea will destroy the United States.  From the article I linked, sometimes there's a point where dictators begin to believe their own propaganda.  North Korea's #1 goal in life is to get big enough to destroy Western Civilization.  I'm not saying they'll attack tomorrow, but once they get enough long range nukes?  Maybe.

[Time the Crestfallen]

1 minute ago, Lushen said:

Their nuclear and missile program is still advancing just fine.  North Korea does not need to surpass America's technology, nor surpass it's number of nukes.  They just need enough to nuke all major US cities.  How long will that take?  Nobody knows, we didn't think they would have long range missiles by this point and now they can hit anywhere in the world.

I'm not talking about military, I'm talking infrastructure, I'm talking food, I'm talking science, technology, and education outside of weapons, I'm talking things that actually make a country able to stand on it's own two legs. The only reason the regime hasn't collapsed is because we made the mistake of not committing to the economic stranglehold and chucking them enough relief supplies to keep going another few years every time they got too noisy. The only reason the regime is still standing is because they leverage their military to receive aid from neighbouring countries. Without that aid, the country collapses.

4 minutes ago, Lushen said:

As for the end game, the fulfillment of a religious-like prophecy that North Korea will destroy the United States.  From the article I linked, sometimes there's a point where dictators begin to believe their own propaganda.  North Korea's #1 goal in life is to get big enough to destroy Western Civilization.  I'm not saying they'll attack tomorrow, but once they get enough long range nukes?  Maybe.

Right, so N.K.'s end-game is just destroying the US for the sake of doing it. Are you sure you don't have them confused with Captain Planet villains? Your perspective on N.K. has the same suicidally self-destructive behaviour as Verminous Skumm or Looten Plunder.

[Lushen]

2 minutes ago, Magus of Flowers said:

I'm not talking about military, I'm talking infrastructure, I'm talking food, I'm talking science, technology, and education outside of weapons, I'm talking things that actually make a country able to stand on it's own two legs. The only reason the regime hasn't collapsed is because we made the mistake of not committing to the economic stranglehold and chucking them enough relief supplies to keep going another few years every time they got too noisy. The only reason the regime is still standing is because they leverage their military to receive aid from neighbouring countries. Without that aid, the country collapses.

Right, so N.K.'s end-game is just destroying the US for the sake of doing it. Are you sure you don't have them confused with Captain Planet villains? Your perspective on N.K. has the same suicidally self-destructive behaviour as Verminous Skumm or Looten Plunder.

I think this is the thing you don't understand.  Trump is doing this right now.  He is cutting off all trade and encouraging other countries to do the same.  The reason I asked "what if it doesn't work?" is because this idea requires other countries to do the same.  If other countries don't follow the US down this road, North Korea will have plenty of infrastructure to continue to develop it's nuclear and missile program.  The Untied States alone does not have the power to commit "to the economic stranglehold and chucking them enough relief supplies to keep going another few years every time they got too noisy".  This isn't the cold war, we can't do that alone.  Our success with that strategy depends on other countries, not just the US.  And if they fail to comply, what nonmilitary solution is there?

Look at the article.  When you gear up children in school for war with the United States, you're planning for war.  Unlike other nations, they aren't building a military for defense, they're building it for war.  I don't think I have them confused at all.  History is filled with civilizations that would rather destroy one another than live in peace.  How many wars are fought for logical reasons?

[Time the Crestfallen]

Just now, Lushen said:

I think this is the thing you don't understand.  Trump is doing this right now.  He is cutting off all trade and encouraging other countries to do the same.

I never said he was doing that wrong, I just said that he needs to stop being a keyboard-warrior and implying that he'll make a preemptive strike, because that would be a terrible idea.

2 minutes ago, Lushen said:

The reason I asked "what if it doesn't work?" is because this idea requires other countries to do the same. 

The answer to 'what if it doesn't work' is keep doing it and don't let up. The answer is absolutely not do a preemptive strike, because that drags China into this. Do you want us to go to war with China on top of everything else that would occur?

9 minutes ago, Lushen said:

Our success with that strategy depends on other countries, not just the US.  And if they fail to comply, what nonmilitary solution is there?

As I've said, even if this does come to blows it should absolutely not be because the US. struck the first blow.

3 minutes ago, Lushen said:

Look at the article.  When you gear up children in school for war with the United States, you're planning for war.  Unlike other nations, they aren't building a military for defense, they're building it for war.  I don't think I have them confused at all.

By that logic, it would be 'inevitable' that the US and the Soviets would've gone to war, yet look what happened. Sure, there were proxy wars fought but it never came to outright blows. Do you know why? Because the people in-charge of both sides didn't buy their own propaganda and knew that a war between the two of them would only result in mutual annihilation. Only with N.K. the annihilation is going to be one-sided and not in their favour. You shouldn't judge the actions of the higher-ups based on the propaganda they feed to the citizens.

5 minutes ago, Lushen said:

How many wars are fought for logical reasons?

@blah the Prussian

The vast, vast, vast majority of wars throughout human history have been fought with logical reasons behind them. You're grossly over-simplifying this.

[Lushen]

11 minutes ago, Magus of Flowers said:

By that logic, it would be 'inevitable' that the US and the Soviets would've gone to war, yet look what happened. Sure, there were proxy wars fought but it never came to outright blows. Do you know why? Because the people in-charge of both sides didn't buy their own propaganda and knew that a war between the two of them would only result in mutual annihilation. Only with N.K. the annihilation is going to be one-sided and not in their favour. You shouldn't judge the actions of the higher-ups based on the propaganda they feed to the citizens.

Actually the war ended with the Untied States annihilating the Soviet Union and forcing them into democracy.  As I said, this may not work with North Korea and if it doesn't work VERY soon, we may be forced to do something else.  

Thing is, the US would be perfectly in the right if they launches a missile at infrastructure used to create and test Missiles.  The Koreans are already defying UN sanctions, doing so would be exactly like the Syrian Missile.  The issue is, unlike Syria, would North Korea respond?  I think the best thing would be to let China, a member of the UN, allow the US to strike infastructure that does not apply with UN sanctions imposed on North Korea.  I don't think this would be very hard to negotiate.  

Edited October 8, 2017 by Lushen

[The Geek]

45 minutes ago, Lushen said:

America was not a major player before WW2.  Few years later, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  As I said above, this is exactly what the US has been doing in the last few presidencies.  The result?  North Korea can now hit the United States and continues to advance it's nuclear program.  Great job America.  

Yeah but do you remember what prompted the US to become this great military power?  A direct attack from Japan.  If Japan had never attacked Pearl Harbor we likely would have never gotten directly involved in WWII (or at least not with the same fervor that we ended up going into it)

[Time the Crestfallen]

1 minute ago, Lushen said:

Actually the war ended with the Untied States annihilating the Soviet Union and forcing them into democracy.  As I said, this may not work with North Korea and if it doesn't work VERY soon, we may be forced to do something else.  

The USSR didn't get annihilated by the US, it dissolved on it's own due to internal reforms.

2 minutes ago, Lushen said:

Thing is, the US would be perfectly in the right if they launches a missile at infrastructure used to create and test Missiles.  The Koreans are already defying UN sanctions, doing so would be exactly like the Syrian Missile.  

Yes, but China has outright stated that if the US. attacks first, they will side with N.K. and attack the US. Until you address this, I'm not discussing this with you anymore because I'm sick of you dodging it.

[Lushen]

10 minutes ago, The Geek said:

Yeah but do you remember what prompted the US to become this great military power?  A direct attack from Japan.  If Japan had never attacked Pearl Harbor we likely would have never gotten directly involved in WWII (or at least not with the same fervor that we ended up going into it)

Except Japan is likely North Korea in this hypothetical, not the US.  The Untied States wants to be left alone both today and before Pearl Harbor.  We may be funding South Korea today just like we were funding England during WW2, but we don't want war.  North Korea and Japan wants/wanted war.

edit:  China's statements regarding North Korea are very unclear.  It is not black and white that if the US attacks North Korea, China will attack us.  And there's definitely the option of the US consulting China before attacking North Korea by acknowledging that NK is refusing to abide by UN sanctions.

I'm not suggesting that the US just randomly attacks North Korea.  But given that NK is defying the UN's wishes, it's entirely possible the US could convince both China and Russia to allow the US to strike targets that are not UN-approved, much like the Syrian missile.

Edited October 8, 2017 by Lushen

[The Geek]

Kim Jong-Un isn't an idiot.  He riles up his people against the US and rattles his saber at us because it keeps him in power.  The moment he tries to actually attack the US or one of its allies he'll have the entire world coming after his head, and he knows that.  But if we attack him first, we'll force his hand and he'll pretty much have no choice but to attack us or one of our allies in the area in retaliation.

[Lushen]

4 minutes ago, The Geek said:

Kim Jong-Un isn't an idiot.  He riles up his people against the US and rattles his saber at us because it keeps him in power.  The moment he tries to actually attack the US or one of its allies he'll have the entire world coming after his head, and he knows that.  But if we attack him first, we'll force his hand and he'll pretty much have no choice but to attack us or one of our allies in the area in retaliation.

He is an idiot, actually.  He's giving the middle finger to the UN which is a very dangerous move.

He also likes to spread propaganda that he is a super human that does not poop.  Literally.  Does this sound like someone who is "not an idiot"?  Seriously, being a world leader does not automatically absolve you from being a complete idiot.

Edited October 8, 2017 by Lushen

[Time the Crestfallen]

15 minutes ago, Lushen said:

edit:  China's statements regarding North Korea are very unclear.  It is not black and white that if the US attacks North Korea, China will attack us.  And there's definitely the option of the US consulting China before attacking North Korea by acknowledging that NK is refusing to abide by UN sanctions.

I'm not suggesting that the US just randomly attacks North Korea.  But given that NK is defying the UN's wishes, it's entirely possible the US could convince both China and Russia to allow the US to strike targets that are not UN-approved, much like the Syrian missile.

It's really not. If the US attacks first, they will defend N.K., but if N.K. attacks a US. ally they'll just let them suffer the consequences. That's why any attack by the US. should be retaliatory.

2 minutes ago, Lushen said:

He is an idiot, actually.  He's giving the middle finger to the UN which is a very dangerous move.

Yes, because that's his usual strategy. Make a big song and dance about attacking until they give him food and supplies so he shuts up for a year or two, and the second-best scenario is to provoke other countries into attacking them so that China will have their back.

[Lushen]

6 minutes ago, The Geek said:

Kim Jong-Un isn't an idiot.  He riles up his people against the US and rattles his saber at us because it keeps him in power.  The moment he tries to actually attack the US or one of its allies he'll have the entire world coming after his head, and he knows that.  But if we attack him first, we'll force his hand and he'll pretty much have no choice but to attack us or one of our allies in the area in retaliation.

As I said, the US directly attacking NK is not the only option.  Have a look at this article, which goes into a few possibilities.  What's so frustrating, is if China would just drop support for North Korea this whole issue would go away.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/how-to-handle-north-korea-either-china-helps-or-its-war/article/2636649

[Time the Crestfallen]

13 minutes ago, Lushen said:

As I said, the US directly attacking NK is not the only option.  Have a look at this article, which goes into a few possibilities.  What's so frustrating, is if China would just drop support for North Korea this whole issue would go away.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/how-to-handle-north-korea-either-china-helps-or-its-war/article/2636649

Which would mean millions of poor, hungry, and unskilled labourers flooding across the border as well as losing their buffer state against S.K. and, by extension, the US. China will only drop N.K. when there is no longer benefit in maintaining the regime.

Edited October 8, 2017 by Magus of Flowers

[Lushen]

18 minutes ago, Magus of Flowers said:

Which would mean millions of poor, hungry, and unskilled labourers flooding across the border as well as losing their buffer state against S.K. and, by extension, the US. China will only drop N.K. when there is no longer benefit in maintaining the regime.

This is the same thing you said earlier, which implies the US can somehow cause NK's economy to crumble on their own.  They can't, which is why all eyes are on China who can actually swat NK like a fly if they wanted to.

[Sias]

9 hours ago, Lushen said:

^Exactly why people are mad at the democratic party. 

Real honest question now: Is it this impossible to grasp as a concept that you might not know the full extent of racism in the US because you don't have to experience said racism yourself?

Quote

The article is great for evidence of what the situation in N Korea is like.  The opinion of the author is rather stupid.  His answer to question one is infinity and his answer to question 2 is ignore it.  Basically precisely why North Korea now has weapons that can reach the United States.

Don't you think that someone who has actually been to NK many times and done quite a bit of research for this might be able to assess the situation better than you?

Also, he doesn't even propose to put the NK issue off or ignore it like you claim (there are six suggested options to slowly corrode them), he just puts forth a recommendation against blowing everyone up and starting WW3.

[Shoblongoo]

The subtext everyone is missing with Trump's latest North Korea pokes is the Rex Tillerson news that came out this past week--the Secretary of State refusing to deny that he called the president a "fucking moron."

...and its now being widely reported that these are views shared by Defense Secretary Mattis and White House Chief of Staff John Kelly--that the 3 of them see themselves in a 3-way-alliance to mitigate the damages of Trump's presidency, and view their role in his White House as constraining to the best of their ability the international chaos he is causing with his occupancy of the office.

Trump publicly says he has confidence in them and that their relationship is great--hes afraid to have another round of high level defections from his White House--but his ego is wounded. Hes being characteristically impulsive, petty, and irresponsible about it.

Tillerson was meeting with the Chinese ambassador and assuring the Chinese that we we had not committed to war + were still looking for a peaceful, diplomatic path forward with North Korea when Trump made his comments. Trump knew this. 

...that was a giant middle-finger to Rex Tillerson...

So no one around the world actually takes anything Trump says seriously. But the news going out on the  diplomatic cables now is  Tillerson is not on the same page as The President; do NOT negotiate with him, do NOT rely on the representations he makes when you meet with him, and do NOT place any stock in what he tells you. He has no authority or credibility to tell you what the Trump Administration's policy is; Tillerson will tell you one thing and the White House will say the exact opposite.

Which makes it impossible for him to do his job as Secretary of State, and which is terrible if our goal as a country is to have  a clear-and-effective foreign policy.

But its GREAT if our goal is to let the Secretary of State know hes on the President's shit-list.
 

Edited October 8, 2017 by Shoblongoo

[ping]

@Shoblongoo: Thanks for the explaination three pages ago! ;) I appreciate it.

On 6.10.2017 at 5:18 PM, Shoblongoo said:

"It is well understood that the right of free speech is not absolute at all times and under all circumstances. There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting" words those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality.”   Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942)

"The jury may measure the essentially factual issues of prurient appeal and patent offensiveness by the standard that prevails in the forum community."  Miller v. California, 413 US 15 (1973)

"Today, we hold that child pornography is unprotected speech subject to content-based regulation."  New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982)

This I believe (as a non-lawyer, mind - all I know about law, I've learned my dear ol'  lawyer-dad) is roughly where the German judgement on that matter stands, as well: While free speech is protected, there is no right to insult or verbally hurt people, as well as no right to agitate against any groups of people (which is incidently why it's forbidden to claim that the holocaust did not happen). You'll find fights about what is (in)appropriate to say in public here as well, of course, although I reckon they're not quite as shrill as in the US on both sides.

--

I'll agree with the people in the thread who think that Kim's actions and politics are, while morally abhorrent, "sane". His only motivation is to keep his rulership stable, and he knows that an external thread, real or not, is an excellent way to keep the population quiet. Harsher oppression? It's because they have to catch all the well-poisoning US spies. Famine? It's the US spies fault because they destroyed the crops. More funds for the military? Guess why. An unpleasant political enemy needs to disappear? You would not believe who he has had contacts with.

You can add to that list that cooperating has not turned out to be a viable survival strategy, either - just take a look at Libya, where Gaddafi's status as Europa's Darling did not help him at all in the end.

[Shoblongoo]

"Adult Daycare Center" sounding pretty accurate (consider the following in evaluating Trump's Reality TV treatment of North Korea) http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/09/trump-aides-guard-rails-243608

[Crysta]

 

 

To be honest my read on the situation is that they're both showboating and basking in the attention, but North Korea is actually pretty confused by Trump and Trump is attempting to embrace his unpredictability (which is ironically pretty predictable) and convince Kim that he's playing 4D chess when it's really checkers.

Edited October 10, 2017 by Agent 707

[Time the Crestfallen]

47 minutes ago, Agent 707 said:

 

To be honest my read on the situation is that they're both showboating and basking in the attention, but North Korea is actually pretty confused by Trump and Trump is attempting to embrace his unpredictability (which is ironically pretty predictable) and convince Kim that he's playing 4D chess when it's really checkers.

Personally speaking, I thought he was going for madman theory (which has obviously failed miserably thus far).

[Time the Crestfallen]

This was entirely expected.

[Tryhard]

from his twitter this morning

i mean I'd like to hope that he most likely won't do anything just like he seems to not be doing anything to punish NFL players that kneel for the anthem in some way with the rest of his weak bluster, but he really doesn't seem to want the existence of certain media networks

[Water Mage]

9 minutes ago, Tryhard said:

from his twitter this morning

i mean I'd like to hope that he most likely won't do anything just like he seems to not be doing anything to punish NFL players that kneel for the anthem in some way with the rest of his weak bluster, but he really doesn't seem to want the existence of certain media networks

Wait, he's still going on about the NFL kneeling thing? With all due respect to Americans, but I think there are far more important things than a flag. Also, this is something I've been noticing about him recently, it seems like Trump is focusing too much on one subject, almost like he's trying to get the attention away from something else, but I don't know what it is. Is there something happening these days that he wants to take attention from?

Edited October 11, 2017 by Water Mage

[Tryhard]

1 minute ago, Water Mage said:

Also, this is something I've been noticing about him recently, it seems like Trump is focusing too much on one subject, almost like he's trying to get the attention away from something else, but I don't know what it is. Is there something happening these days that he wants to take attention from?

His presidency.

In all seriousness, Trump is getting very little done and looking pretty bad while doing it. He may have distraction tactics, but they ring ultimately hollow because he's going to be judged at the end of this all anyway.