*shrug* At this point, the way things are, I don't want ANYONE to have a full nuclear arsenal... I think we've proven sufficiently that we humans are too stupid to hold the power to wipe out 90+ percent of the human population at the touch of our fingers...
Well... we are not dead yet so there is that. Anyways I think a limited strike is the most likely option, and least worse of horrible options.
If charnel houses and our graves must send those that we bury back, our monuments shall be the maws of kites. ............... on the bright side at 90% casualties, there'd still be 70,000,000 of us left-----not even a genetic bottleneck but then comes the nuclear winter(s). starvation and disease pain and suffering and a sickness unto death. ............................... We used to say of those who focused on the nuclear war games: If your only tool is a hammer, pretty soon, all problems begin to look like nails. Sooner or later, you may see a hammerman banging furiously away at some mud on a windshield.
or “... the deeds were done and done again as my life is done ... . I will tell you about it because I am here and you are distant.” or Are you?
Woooo shit is getting abstract, sculptor you hitting the acid http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...an-nuclear-attack_us_59807ff7e4b08e143005946b "The GMD is America’s only missile defense system established to defend the nation from unsophisticated long-range ballistic missile attacks and incoming warheads. It was first operationally deployed in 2004, and has cost taxpayers over $40 billion.The system is designed to defend the entire U.S. and Canada from distant attackers, but is not capable of short-range defense missions. North Korean threats against shorter-range targets, such as U.S. allies like South Korea or Japan, would have to be addressed with other defense systems, such as Aegis, THAAD or Patriot, per CSIS." "The Missile Defense Agency doesn’t test in bad weather, so you’d have to hope the North Koreans attack when it’s sunny,” he said, noting that tests can cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and are therefore infrequent." "Washington seemed to soften its tone after the latest, most advanced ICBM test. Days after the launch, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson announced America is not an enemy to North Korea, and does not want to see a regime change or take military action. Instead, he suggested the U.S. would be open to a dialogue with Pyongyang. “I don’t think we actually plan to attack them ― the problem is, this administration likes to sort of pretend they might, to motivate the Chinese,” said Lewis, who thinks North Korea would only use its nuclear weapons if it felt threatened. “If we panic and we act like President Trump, and stamp our feet and threaten the North Koreans and talk about attacking them (and God forbid we do), then we’re in a lot of trouble ... North Korea can build missiles faster than we can build defenses,” he added. “It seems really hard to believe that we’ll be able to stay ahead.”
Nah, just shakespeare and brautigan ................... I think reunification is desirable and inevitable and will proceed at it's own pace. So far, it seems that our actions are/have been delaying that outcome.
There are major problem with thinking on this issue in such a narrow "ICBM" way. The main one being that there are other ways to deliver a nuke than by an ICBM. It is a war that no one can win...the only course is to find a diplomatic solution...
The point is that the crisis with NK will take extraordinary leadership and one willing to potentially sacrifice his own life so that millions if not billions, can avoid the horrors of a major global confrontation. Leadership that unfortunately appears not to be available...
oh... but there is... unfortunately the USA has got to get off it's high horse and start genuine negotiations.... NK has the position of strength whether we like it or not.. that's the reality. They have no fear of consequences, they are deluded as to their own nuke capacity but they still have the strongest position simply because they are quite prepared to die for their cause. Just imagine : If the USA dropped all preconditions and preconceptions and went into a meeting with all things on the table. removed the sanctions ( even if probationary), give NK some breathing space, allow their leader to bask in his own deluded grandure... see what happens... Open the door so that a political process can be developed that deals with emerging nuclear powers elsewhere in the world.. ( ie. Iran) Kim's apparent lunacy could be mainly due to the extremes under which he is governing... help remove those extremes and see what happens... What do we have to lose? Nothing except the threat of millions being slaughtered on both sides of the border and at some stage by some means in the USA it self. The USA can not control nations that are dev. nuke capacity... it can not police the non-proliferation of nukes... and even if it tried to it will fail eventually. Prohibition leads to dark development and we all know where that leads to... Seek to partner with nations and not alienate them. Remove the economic leverage of sanctions and give the NK people something to eat... Bomb them with food drops and medical supplies, not nukes. diplomacy.. politics... and pride all play a big part here...
Offer a pseudo copy of the Iran Nuke deal that Obama and Kerry organized. Offer Iran and NK membership to Club Nuke...as it is apparent that they have the Nuke assets that would afford them full membership.
One of the basic premises I am working to is this: If NK has nukes and was serious about striking SK or the USA etc. It would not advertise it using ICBM's. They do not need to use ICBM's if they really wanted to strike the USA. The missile test firing is simply a sign, a protest, a way of telling the world that NK has arrived. and they certainly have...
It's been repudiated, according to Iran - they say the US just violated its end of that bargain. Which is something NKorea will have to consider. Anything that can fit in a bale of marijuana obviously can be delivered to any large US city.
If say ISIL was proven to have nukes would they be in a position of strength or not? How would that effect the battle for Raqqa for example?
Anyone with the proof of nukes and willing to use them , has strength . Perhaps what is really going on is that both Russa and China hope that USA over reacts , and hence enters a war in which breaks the USA , finacially .
