North Korea threatens to sink a U.S. aircraft carrier. Could they?

[MorningGlory]

4 hours ago, Running Gator said:

We are the biggest, baddest country on the block with the biggest, baddest military, nobody can make us do anything, thus we are responsible for our own actions.   There is nobody to blame for our actions but ourselves. 

And what is WRONG with our actions?  Other than the backing up and standing down over the Obama administration that is. 

[MorningGlory]

4 hours ago, other one said:

Are you looking in the mirror saying that  ?

[Running Gator]

1 hour ago, Zemke said:

You see right in your statement, who wants the conflict to happen? it's the cry of "war monger". Exactly the very thing I addressed in my first post that you spent no time trying to understand.

 

I have to admit you are right, once I got to the Hitler reference I pretty much quit reading. 

[Running Gator]

1 hour ago, MorningGlory said:

And what is WRONG with our actions?  Other than the backing up and standing down over the Obama administration that is. 

Which actions?  You mean invading a country that was no threat to the US at the cost of more than 4000 American service members and more than a trillion dollars, an invasion that gave us nothing but ISIS.

As for NK, at this point nothing, but this thing is a long way from over.

[Steve_S]

7 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

Politically speaking, Trump is in a no-win situation.  The same people who are complaining that he might take military action to halt N Korea's development of a nuclear arsenal and oppose taking military action to that end, will be the very same people, who, if Trump does nothing and N Korea deploys a nuke at say Japan or the US mainland, will complain that Trump did nothing to stop the crazy fat kid and will argue that he should have taken military action to prevent it from happening.

So Trump is cursed if he does, and cursed if he doesn't.   It's just politics.   Regardless of which direction he goes, it will be viewed as a failure for him as a president. 

This is one of those situations where the politics don't matter. The president has to act in a way that he believes serves the best interests of the US public, whether that be doing nothing, seeking a diplomatic solution, showing force regularly, or attacking. I agree the political situation is untenable, but that comes with the territory. This is one of those things that presidents are elected for.

[Guest shiloh357]

2 hours ago, Running Gator said:

Which actions?  You mean invading a country that was no threat to the US at the cost of more than 4000 American service members and more than a trillion dollars, an invasion that gave us nothing but ISIS.

As for NK, at this point nothing, but this thing is a long way from over.

Our invasion of Iraq was a mistake and a needless war.   But this is entirely different.  A delusional dictator that is too dumb to know that he is no match for the United States is developing a nuclear weapon for the purpose of using it against us.   He doesn't realize the consequences that result from attempting to hit us with nuke.   He really has no point of reference for what we are capable of and is not living in reality.   And that makes him more of a threat that you are willing to admit that he is.  

The idea is to take out their nuclear capabilities, not invade the country.   There are no plans to invade North Korea that I am aware of.  The plans are to take out the nuke facilities and the  ability NK to mount a retaliatory response.   If we don't take out their nuke development and decimate their military now, we will end up, fighting a nuclear N Korea in the future. 

[MorningGlory]

2 hours ago, Running Gator said:

Which actions?  You mean invading a country that was no threat to the US at the cost of more than 4000 American service members and more than a trillion dollars, an invasion that gave us nothing but ISIS.

As for NK, at this point nothing, but this thing is a long way from over.

Well you can have your opinion since you're a free man.  I was actually against the Iraq war but no one asked my opinion.  I wanted our government to invade Iran instead.  If I, a regular citizen, thought of that, why didn't the government?  There would be WAY less problems today if Saddam had been hobbled and left in power and the mullahs in Iran overturned.

[Running Gator]

1 hour ago, MorningGlory said:

Well you can have your opinion since you're a free man.  I was actually against the Iraq war but no one asked my opinion.  I wanted our government to invade Iran instead.  If I, a regular citizen, thought of that, why didn't the government?  There would be WAY less problems today if Saddam had been hobbled and left in power and the mullahs in Iran overturned.

There are 3 mains reasons we did not go into Iran.

1.  There is no friendly country next to Iran that we could have used to build up a massive invasion force.  We would have had to rely on an amphibious assault and airborne troops.  The chances of success are much smaller that way.    Also, Iraq's troops were inferior to Iran's and the population of Iran would not have greeted us as liberators like a small part of those in Iraq did.   Iraq was the low hanging fruit.

2.  The geography of the two countries are very different.  Iraq is basically all desert, Iran has very large mountains that make moving a large force much harder.  Getting to Baghdad was easy, it sit at basically sea level.   Tehran sits about 4000 feet above sea level with limited ways of getting there.  They knew what they were doing when they built it there.  The fight to Tehran would have been 100 times harder than the one to Baghdad. 

3.  Iran has been an ally of Russia for a long time, an invasion of Iran would be the same as invading Russia.  They would not have let it stand.  

What I do not get is why people in this country think we have the right ot just go around invading anyone we want.  Is it as simple as the "might makes rights" philosophy?  Is the US just the 4th graders that hit the growth spurt first and is now 25 pounds bigger than everyone so he can push all the other kids around and  steal their lunch money?

I wonder if you were standing in line to join the military when you want to send them into Iran?

[Running Gator]

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

Our invasion of Iraq was a mistake and a needless war.   But this is entirely different.  A delusional dictator that is too dumb to know that he is no match for the United States is developing a nuclear weapon for the purpose of using it against us.   He doesn't realize the consequences that result from attempting to hit us with nuke.   He really has no point of reference for what we are capable of and is not living in reality.   And that makes him more of a threat that you are willing to admit that he is.  

You do not know a thing about Kim Jong Un, you do not know what he knows or believes or what he understands about the compatibility of the US.   

Quote

The idea is to take out their nuclear capabilities, not invade the country.   There are no plans to invade North Korea that I am aware of.  The plans are to take out the nuke facilities and the  ability NK to mount a retaliatory response.   If we don't take out their nuke development and decimate their military now, we will end up, fighting a nuclear N Korea in the future. 

You cannot remove the the ability NK to mount a retaliatory response without either ground troops or using our own nukes.  

[other one]

2 hours ago, MorningGlory said:

Well you can have your opinion since you're a free man.  I was actually against the Iraq war but no one asked my opinion.  I wanted our government to invade Iran instead.  If I, a regular citizen, thought of that, why didn't the government?  There would be WAY less problems today if Saddam had been hobbled and left in power and the mullahs in Iran overturned.

because we didn't go into Iraq to rid the place of Saddam.....    we went there to take stuff away...   but that would be a CT and I know you don't like to deal with those.