Current Events > North Korea can produce a nuke every 6-7 weeks

(+) Yeah! (+)

wah_wah_wah posted...

QuantumScript posted...

Like I said, every civilized nation understands the difference between collateral damage when you're taking out a high-profile target...and deliberate terrorism/crimes. If you don't want to understand that difference, that's on you.

Collateral damage is a euphemism. It's not collateral damage, it's a war crime and it flouts international law. It would be easier for us to be able to enforce a set of standards on the world if people like you didn't justify going into the countries of others and killing their kids as acceptable collateral damage.

Imagine if Iran flew to your neighborhood with a drone to target someone it thought MIGHT harm them someday and blew up your kids. Would you shrug and go "oopsie daisy collateral damage!"

Accidentally killing a child because they were caught in the blast radius when we take out an ISIS leader is not a war crime. It's an accident. What is called collateral damage.

nexigrams posted...

Honestly, just nuke them. The stakes are way too high. Just fucking do it. China will be pissed as all fuck, but at least we won't all be dead.

I'd rather it doesn't get that far. I think America and China could topple the current regime within a couple of hours if they really wanted to.

QuantumScript posted...

North Korea does not care about self preservation.

I contend that they do. If they are as unhinged as you believe them to be, what explains their unwillingness to attack SK over the past six decades?
---

Trump supporters transition from nationalistic isolationists to hawkish neocons has been a source of entertainment to me over the last few weeks
---

Antifar posted...

QuantumScript posted...

North Korea does not care about self preservation.

I contend that they do. If they are as unhinged as you believe them to be, what explains their unwillingness to attack SK over the past six decades?

No one cares what you contend anymore.

QuantumScript posted...

nexigrams posted...

Honestly, just nuke them. The stakes are way too high. Just fucking do it. China will be pissed as all fuck, but at least we won't all be dead.

I'd rather it doesn't get that far. I think America and China could topple the current regime within a couple of hours if they really wanted to.

Of course we'd rather it didn't get that far, but wasn't that the whole point of the article? We're already there. That was a sentiment for 15 years ago.
---

Doom_Art posted...

Trump supporters transition from nationalistic isolationists to hawkish neocons has been a source of entertainment to me over the last few weeks

I'm glad that this pressing situation involving North Korea has been a source of entertainment for you, rather than an awful situation that needs to be resolved in some way that doesn't involve North Korea obtaining long-range nuclear weapons.

QuantumScript posted...

No, it does not suggest that at all. And I don't think any of the surrounding nations want to risk finding out once North Korea has long range capabilities.

But that's the thing, once you start basing wars on what MIGHT happen and not legitimate self-defense then you quickly become a sort of Hitler. I mean you're just participating in naked aggression based on attacks that never happened.

QuantumScript posted...

I didn't say that they can beat America. They can't beat anyone. But with 1 long-range nuclear weapon being produced every 6 weeks once they have the capability...they can destabilize the entire planet. North Korea does not care about self preservation. The way they treat their own people and the way they antagonize other countries is evidence of that.

Dude again, they are not a suicidal country. They are interested in maintaining their elite over their people, but they aren't going to willingly attack America and kill themselves. There is no rational basis to assume that they would do that

QuantumScript posted...

No one cares what you contend anymore.

That's nice, can your answer his question?

No what's going on here is you feel unsafe and insecure about big bad North Korea so you want to bomb the problem away. Grow up.
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

But that's the thing, once you start basing wars on what MIGHT happen and not legitimate self-defense then you quickly become a sort of Hitler. I mean you're just participating in naked aggression based on attacks that never happened.

When some nations ramp up their activity and their rhetoric, that doesn't mean you wait for it to be too late. That means you do what it takes to eliminate the threat before it becomes unmanageable.

wah_wah_wah posted...

Dude again, they are not a suicidal country. They are interested in maintaining their elite over their people, but they aren't going to willingly attack America and kill themselves. There is no rational basis to assume that they would do that

Then why have they attempted to aggravate the biggest players for years on end? Why are they promising and threatening nuclear warfare? Their propaganda machine is nightmarish, and it's extremely dangerous and foolish to wait and see what happens. I mean, they'll have long range nuclear weapons. What are you going to do about their saber rattling when they can destroy major cities around the world?

Let's pretend you sucessfully remove Kim Jong Un's regime "within a matter of hours", who comes into power? Who decided who comes into power?

Like everyone else says if you fail then it becomes full scale war and Seoul is looking down a barrel.
---

Doom_Art posted...

QuantumScript posted...

No one cares what you contend anymore.

That's nice, can your answer his question?

No what's going on here is you feel unsafe and insecure about big bad North Korea so you want to bomb the problem away. Grow up.

Anyone who hasn't lived under a rock knows that there have been incidents between the north and the south even in the last decade. Not all out war, but they're still at war with one another and there's definitely no peace. To live in some kind of delusional fantasy world where North Korea is simply looking out for its own...is at best laughably naive and at worst evil and dangerous.

nexigrams posted...

Honestly, just nuke them. The stakes are way too high. Just fucking do it. China will be pissed as all fuck, but at least we won't all be dead.

South Korea, Japan and Russia will be caught in the fallout and pissed too.
---

Antifar posted...

How many nukes do we have?

6,000 or so last I checked. Enough to destroy the world, certainly enough to keep an aggressive piddly nation like NK in check.
---

twitterfriends posted...

Let's pretend you sucessfully remove Kim Jong Un's regime "within a matter of hours", who comes into power? Who decided who comes into power?

Like everyone else says if you fail then it becomes full scale war and Seoul is looking down a barrel.

We'd obviously have to put up a new governing body and introduce the people there to an entirely new way of life. They don't know anything besides indoctrination and dictatorship there, but if all the documentaries and articles about NK are to be believed they'd welcome the change.

voldothegr8 posted...

Antifar posted...

How many nukes do we have?

6,000 or so last I checked. Enough to destroy the world, certainly enough to keep an aggressive nation like NK in check.

I guess we should just let North Korea develop long-range nukes and see what happens! Let's play Russian Roulette while we're at it.

A nation with a track record for blatant disregard for its own people and its own future having the capacity to destroy entire cities. What could go wrong.

QuantumScript posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

QuantumScript posted...

Like I said, every civilized nation understands the difference between collateral damage when you're taking out a high-profile target...and deliberate terrorism/crimes. If you don't want to understand that difference, that's on you.

Collateral damage is a euphemism. It's not collateral damage, it's a war crime and it flouts international law. It would be easier for us to be able to enforce a set of standards on the world if people like you didn't justify going into the countries of others and killing their kids as acceptable collateral damage.

Imagine if Iran flew to your neighborhood with a drone to target someone it thought MIGHT harm them someday and blew up your kids. Would you shrug and go "oopsie daisy collateral damage!"

Accidentally killing a child because they were caught in the blast radius when we take out an ISIS leader is not a war crime. It's an accident. What is called collateral damage.

When we do it, then it's an accident. When they do it it is murder. OK. That's kind of why the world is starting to see America as a full of shit oligarchy rather than a reasoned republic.

QuantumScript posted...

twitterfriends posted...

Let's pretend you sucessfully remove Kim Jong Un's regime "within a matter of hours", who comes into power? Who decided who comes into power?

Like everyone else says if you fail then it becomes full scale war and Seoul is looking down a barrel.

We'd obviously have to put up a new governing body and introduce the people there to an entirely new way of life. They don't know anything besides indoctrination and dictatorship there, but if all the documentaries and articles about NK are to be believed they'd welcome the change.

Pffft. Yeah, that's worked so fucking well in the ME. The US can't nation build for jack shit.
---

In every RotK I've played they are ruled by a Gongsun who dies in two turns.

QuantumScript posted...

To live in some kind of delusional fantasy world where North Korea is simply looking out for its own...is at best laughably naive and at worst evil and dangerous.

You're the one being a drama queen about the whole matter and insisting we need to solve this problem lest the USA drown in a sea of nuclear hellfire.
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

QuantumScript posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

QuantumScript posted...

Like I said, every civilized nation understands the difference between collateral damage when you're taking out a high-profile target...and deliberate terrorism/crimes. If you don't want to understand that difference, that's on you.

Collateral damage is a euphemism. It's not collateral damage, it's a war crime and it flouts international law. It would be easier for us to be able to enforce a set of standards on the world if people like you didn't justify going into the countries of others and killing their kids as acceptable collateral damage.

Imagine if Iran flew to your neighborhood with a drone to target someone it thought MIGHT harm them someday and blew up your kids. Would you shrug and go "oopsie daisy collateral damage!"

Accidentally killing a child because they were caught in the blast radius when we take out an ISIS leader is not a war crime. It's an accident. What is called collateral damage.

When we do it, then it's an accident. When they do it it is murder. OK. That's kind of why the world is starting to see America as a full of shit oligarchy rather than a reasoned republic.

The reason it's an accident when we do it is because when someone dies as a result of being caught in a blast targeting a high profile ISIS leader, it's not intentional and not the same as flying a plane into a building or gassing children. This is a very simple concept to grasp.

Danger_Close posted...

QuantumScript posted...

twitterfriends posted...

Let's pretend you sucessfully remove Kim Jong Un's regime "within a matter of hours", who comes into power? Who decided who comes into power?

Like everyone else says if you fail then it becomes full scale war and Seoul is looking down a barrel.

We'd obviously have to put up a new governing body and introduce the people there to an entirely new way of life. They don't know anything besides indoctrination and dictatorship there, but if all the documentaries and articles about NK are to be believed they'd welcome the change.

Pffft. Yeah, that's worked so fucking well in the ME. The US can't nation build for jack shit.

Get the United Nations and the EU involved. There are plenty of individuals who can contribute. Get South Korea involved. What makes this different than other similar situations is that the people of North Korea don't want that regime. They just don't have a choice. Go read about North Korea, it's a hell hole.

QuantumScript posted...

When some nations ramp up their activity and their rhetoric, that doesn't mean you wait for it to be too late. That means you do what it takes to eliminate the threat before it becomes unmanageable.

No. That's not at all what that means. You're only allowed to attack on the basis of self-defense and not because someone looked at you funny. Nations do not operate on the laws of paranoid schizophrenia.

QuantumScript posted...

Then why have they attempted to aggravate the biggest players for years on end?

"Attempted." Again you keep using the language of tried, not actually succeeded in doing. The reason why is they don't actually intend on launching a pre-emptive strike on America. That is your projection of what you want to do to North Korea. Have fun with the millions of "collateral damages"

Doom_Art posted...

You're the one being a drama queen about the whole matter and insisting we need to solve this problem lest the USA drown in a sea of nuclear hellfire.

That's dishonest. There's no risk of the USA drowning in a sea of nuclear hellfire. But there is a risk of North Korea actually nuking Seoul, Tokyo, American cities, etc.

QuantumScript posted...

voldothegr8 posted...

Antifar posted...

How many nukes do we have?

6,000 or so last I checked. Enough to destroy the world, certainly enough to keep an aggressive nation like NK in check.

I guess we should just let North Korea develop long-range nukes and see what happens! Let's play Russian Roulette while we're at it.

A nation with a track record for blatant disregard for its own people and its own future having the capacity to destroy entire cities. What could go wrong.

I'm not saying the world shouldn't intervene, but if they dared to actually attack a nation they'll be wiped from the face of the planet. And Kim knows it.
---

QuantumScript posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

QuantumScript posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

QuantumScript posted...

Like I said, every civilized nation understands the difference between collateral damage when you're taking out a high-profile target...and deliberate terrorism/crimes. If you don't want to understand that difference, that's on you.

Collateral damage is a euphemism. It's not collateral damage, it's a war crime and it flouts international law. It would be easier for us to be able to enforce a set of standards on the world if people like you didn't justify going into the countries of others and killing their kids as acceptable collateral damage.

Imagine if Iran flew to your neighborhood with a drone to target someone it thought MIGHT harm them someday and blew up your kids. Would you shrug and go "oopsie daisy collateral damage!"

Accidentally killing a child because they were caught in the blast radius when we take out an ISIS leader is not a war crime. It's an accident. What is called collateral damage.

When we do it, then it's an accident. When they do it it is murder. OK. That's kind of why the world is starting to see America as a full of shit oligarchy rather than a reasoned republic.

The reason it's an accident when we do it is because when someone dies as a result of being caught in a blast targeting a high profile ISIS leader, it's not intentional and not the same as flying a plane into a building or gassing children. This is a very simple concept to grasp.

It's because we said we didn't. Got it. Let's ignore that that is war criminal 101, what every war criminal does, never admit that it was intentional.

QuantumScript posted...

We'd obviously have to put up a new governing body and introduce the people there to an entirely new way of life. They don't know anything besides indoctrination and dictatorship there, but if all the documentaries and articles about NK are to be believed they'd welcome the change.

A stable, open, and free regime in a former totalitarian dictatorship?

Something like that could take decades, generations. Pretty much us devoting trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands/millions of troops.

Not to mention any sort of conflict is going to horribly affect SK either through the bombing that NK unleashes on it, or the economic meltdown that would occur


This plan of yours fucking sucks a big one, bro
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

No. That's not at all what that means. You're only allowed to attack on the basis of self-defense and not because someone looked at you funny. Nations do not operate on the laws of paranoid schizophrenia.

That's not how the world works. When a nation is ramping up its propaganda and racing towards militarization and developing long-range nuclear weapons, you don't wait for them to launch a nuke before you cripple their nuclear production.

wah_wah_wah posted...

"Attempted." Again you keep using the language of tried, not actually succeeded in doing. The reason why is they don't actually intend on launching a pre-emptive strike on America. That is your projection of what you want to do to North Korea. Have fun with the millions of "collateral damages"

How do you know that North Korea doesn't want to do it? They outright threatened multiple nations and have exerted themselves more and more the closer they get to their goal. Their behavior indicates that they'll continue to ramp up their current trend once they can back up their threats against long-range targets.

I don't think China and Russia would like the idea of their neighbor blasting everything in the area...
---

QuantumScript posted...

Get the United Nations and the EU involved. There are plenty of individuals who can contribute. Get South Korea involved

The only nations who will get involved with this are US and SK, the latter might not even really exist afterwards. Nah, you're on your own.
---

QuantumScript posted...

But there is a risk of North Korea actually nuking Seoul, Tokyo, American cities, etc.

Why would they do that?

I fucking hate NK, but why would they wake up in morning one day and decide "I want to start a nuclear war with Japan and the USA!"
---

Doom_Art posted...

QuantumScript posted...

We'd obviously have to put up a new governing body and introduce the people there to an entirely new way of life. They don't know anything besides indoctrination and dictatorship there, but if all the documentaries and articles about NK are to be believed they'd welcome the change.

A stable, open, and free regime in a former totalitarian dictatorship?

Something like that could take decades, generations. Pretty much us devoting trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands/millions of troops.

Not to mention any sort of conflict is going to horribly affect SK either through the bombing that NK unleashes on it, or the economic meltdown that would occur


This plan of yours fucking sucks a big one, bro

So you're counting the cost of a war, but don't want to count the cost of North Korea actually nuking crucial cities? That'd be far more expensive than eliminating their nuclear abilities now.

Doom_Art posted...

QuantumScript posted...

But there is a risk of North Korea actually nuking Seoul, Tokyo, American cities, etc.

Why would they do that?

I fucking hate NK, but why would they wake up in morning one day and decide "I want to start a nuclear war with Japan and the USA!"

Because they have a chip on their shoulder? Because they're led by a madman who wants to dominate as a means of compensation for perceived offenses? Because their behavior thus far has been irrational in every way? Your attempted justification is so weak. You're literally saying "let them have long range nukes, why would they use them?"

In response to North Korea.

I don't think China and Russia would let them get away with firing a nuke...
---

QuantumScript posted...

That's not how the world works. When a nation is ramping up its propaganda and racing towards militarization and developing long-range nuclear weapons, you don't wait for them to launch a nuke before you cripple their nuclear production.

But again if you're going to be a warmonger on the basis of who MIGHT attack then there's literally no end to it. Germany MIGHT attack us. Hell, Russia MIGHT attack us. That's actually not how sound foreign policy works.

QuantumScript posted...

How do you know that North Korea doesn't want to do it?

Really the burden of proof is on you. You're the one trying to paint a narrative that North Korea is suicidal. You have to prove that.

Bat178 posted...

I don't think China and Russia would let them get away with firing a nuke...

So you want an unstable and irrational dictatorship to obtain nuclear weapons and see what it does with them? Rather than eliminate their capability to do so?

China could exert pressure on them until they cave and end their nuclear program. It doesn't even have to be war.

Yeah just ignore Gongsun Gong.

Do nothing:
- Things likely continue as before
- small chance of a catastrophic attack

Intervene
- Chaos in the region for years at a minimum, putting millions of South Koreans at immediate risk of retaliation

What this argument comes down to is just how small you think the chances of NK nuking a major city is. I don't think they're large enough to justify intervention by force.
---

QuantumScript posted...

So you're counting the cost of a war

Yes I am. lol

QuantumScript posted...

Because they have a chip on their shoulder? Because they're led by a madman who wants to dominate as a means of compensation for perceived offenses? Because their behavior thus far has been irrational in every way? Your attempted justification is so weak. You're literally saying "let them have long range nukes, why would they use them?"

If my justification is weak, then yours must by as strong as a baby kitten.

You're saying that upon receiving long range capabilities, the NK government will reverse its previous 70 years of policy and start lobbing nukes at will because they feel slighted?

You fucking serious?
---

QuantumScript posted...

Bat178 posted...

I don't think China and Russia would let them get away with firing a nuke...

So you want an unstable and irrational dictatorship to obtain nuclear weapons and see what it does with them? Rather than eliminate their capability to do so?

China could exert pressure on them until they cave and end their nuclear program. It doesn't even have to be war.

But everything you've posted is about getting rid of the regime. That's ultimately a war proposal if you're at least semi-cogent of reality.

Bitches.

wah_wah_wah posted...

But again if you're going to be a warmonger on the basis of who MIGHT attack then there's literally no end to it. Germany MIGHT attack us. Hell, Russia MIGHT attack us. That's actually not how sound foreign policy works.

That's not the same at all. There's no indication that Germany or Russia or anyone else "might" attack us. Whereas North Korea has outright declared war on other nations. Do you want to wait until they have long-range nuclear weapons to see if they mean it? You're really dishonest.

wah_wah_wah posted...

Really the burden of proof is on you. You're the one trying to paint a narrative that North Korea is suicidal. You have to prove that.

Why did you quote only a part of my sentence rather than the entire block? You're responding to that piece, saying that the burden of proof is on me. Even though the sentences immediately after the one you quoted are providing proof. You're dishonest.

I'm going to leave you with this post. Don't expect another response from me, because you've wasted my time and don't deserve another one. It seems like you're either an Antifar alt or as dishonest as him. You both do that thing where you quote a single sentence out of someone's response and then argue against it in isolation, completely and willfully ignoring what people actually said.

Your username is extremely appropriate.

QuantumScript posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

But again if you're going to be a warmonger on the basis of who MIGHT attack then there's literally no end to it. Germany MIGHT attack us. Hell, Russia MIGHT attack us. That's actually not how sound foreign policy works.

That's not the same at all. There's no indication that Germany or Russia or anyone else "might" attack us. Whereas North Korea has outright declared war on other nations. Do you want to wait until they have long-range nuclear weapons to see if they mean it? You're really dishonest.

wah_wah_wah posted...

Really the burden of proof is on you. You're the one trying to paint a narrative that North Korea is suicidal. You have to prove that.

Why did you quote only a part of my sentence rather than the entire block? You're responding to that piece, saying that the burden of proof is on me. Even though the sentences immediately after the one you quoted are providing proof. You're dishonest.

I'm going to leave you with this post. Don't expect another response from me, because you've wasted my time and don't deserve another one. It seems like you're either an Antifar alt or as dishonest as him. You both do that thing where you quote a single sentence out of someone's response and then argue against it in isolation, completely and willfully ignoring what people actually said.

Your username is extremely appropriate.

"Outright declared war on other nations" they have only fired missiles into water so far because they know the second they actually try to attack another country, their asses would be toast.
---

Antifar posted...

Do nothing:
- Things likely continue as before
- small chance of a catastrophic attack

Intervene
- Chaos in the region for years at a minimum, putting millions of South Koreans at immediate risk of retaliation

What this argument comes down to is just how small you think the chances of NK nuking a major city is. I don't think they're large enough to justify intervention by force.

What you think doesn't matter. Russia, China, and America are all taking it seriously enough to show that it's more than just a small chance of a catastrophic attack. If it was actually a small chance, no one would care what they're doing. But their track record is awful, and they're certainly not a humanitarian nation by any means.

For your sake, I hope they never launch a nuclear weapon. Because if they do, the world will have high expectations from people like you.

Bat178 posted...

QuantumScript posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

But again if you're going to be a warmonger on the basis of who MIGHT attack then there's literally no end to it. Germany MIGHT attack us. Hell, Russia MIGHT attack us. That's actually not how sound foreign policy works.

That's not the same at all. There's no indication that Germany or Russia or anyone else "might" attack us. Whereas North Korea has outright declared war on other nations. Do you want to wait until they have long-range nuclear weapons to see if they mean it? You're really dishonest.

wah_wah_wah posted...

Really the burden of proof is on you. You're the one trying to paint a narrative that North Korea is suicidal. You have to prove that.

Why did you quote only a part of my sentence rather than the entire block? You're responding to that piece, saying that the burden of proof is on me. Even though the sentences immediately after the one you quoted are providing proof. You're dishonest.

I'm going to leave you with this post. Don't expect another response from me, because you've wasted my time and don't deserve another one. It seems like you're either an Antifar alt or as dishonest as him. You both do that thing where you quote a single sentence out of someone's response and then argue against it in isolation, completely and willfully ignoring what people actually said.

Your username is extremely appropriate.

"Outright declared war on other nations" they have only fired missiles into water so far because they know the second they tried to attack another country, there asses would be toast.

They don't currently have the capability to launch ballistic missiles. That doesn't change their threats and their declarations, and they're getting closer to being able to launch ballistic missiles.

QuantumScript posted...

That's not the same at all. There's no indication that Germany or Russia or anyone else "might" attack us. Whereas North Korea has outright declared war on other nations.

lol are you trying to say Germany and Russia have never declared war on other nations.

Alright scared kiddie pool foreign policy debate is officially over. Have fun being scared and not influencing the discussion at all.

QuantumScript posted...

Antifar posted...

Do nothing:
- Things likely continue as before
- small chance of a catastrophic attack

Intervene
- Chaos in the region for years at a minimum, putting millions of South Koreans at immediate risk of retaliation

What this argument comes down to is just how small you think the chances of NK nuking a major city is. I don't think they're large enough to justify intervention by force.

What you think doesn't matter. Russia, China, and America are all taking it seriously enough to show that it's more than just a small chance of a catastrophic attack. If it was actually a small chance, no one would care what they're doing. But their track record is awful, and they're certainly not a humanitarian nation by any means.

For your sake, I hope they never launch a nuclear weapon. Because if they do, the world will have high expectations from people like you.

im just gonna say this.

North Korea is not Chinas slaves, and they arent best friends.
But China will never allow a pro US united Korea.
---

QuantumScript posted...

I'm going to leave you with this post. Don't expect another response from me, because you've wasted my time and don't deserve another one. It seems like you're either an Antifar alt or as dishonest as him. You both do that thing where you quote a single sentence out of someone's response and then argue against it in isolation, completely and willfully ignoring what people actually said.

So you're ignoring him because you don't like what he's saying or how he's arguing with you? Jeez talk about safe spaces, huh?

QuantumScript posted...

What you think doesn't matter.

Oh but what you think does? Let me ask you, TC. What makes what you think so much more valid and better than whatever anyone else is saying?
---

QuantumScript posted...

Bat178 posted...

QuantumScript posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

But again if you're going to be a warmonger on the basis of who MIGHT attack then there's literally no end to it. Germany MIGHT attack us. Hell, Russia MIGHT attack us. That's actually not how sound foreign policy works.

That's not the same at all. There's no indication that Germany or Russia or anyone else "might" attack us. Whereas North Korea has outright declared war on other nations. Do you want to wait until they have long-range nuclear weapons to see if they mean it? You're really dishonest.

wah_wah_wah posted...

Really the burden of proof is on you. You're the one trying to paint a narrative that North Korea is suicidal. You have to prove that.

Why did you quote only a part of my sentence rather than the entire block? You're responding to that piece, saying that the burden of proof is on me. Even though the sentences immediately after the one you quoted are providing proof. You're dishonest.

I'm going to leave you with this post. Don't expect another response from me, because you've wasted my time and don't deserve another one. It seems like you're either an Antifar alt or as dishonest as him. You both do that thing where you quote a single sentence out of someone's response and then argue against it in isolation, completely and willfully ignoring what people actually said.

Your username is extremely appropriate.

"Outright declared war on other nations" they have only fired missiles into water so far because they know the second they tried to attack another country, there asses would be toast.

They don't currently have the capability to launch ballistic missiles. That doesn't change their threats and their declarations, and they're getting closer to being able to launch ballistic missiles.

North Korea are like the school jock who thinks they are so tough and cool and can beat up all the nerds, but the second one of them fights back, he gets his ass handed to him. They are all bark, no bite.
---

Doom_Art posted...

So you're ignoring him because you don't like what he's saying or how he's arguing with you? Jeez talk about safe spaces, huh?

Read his posts. They're dishonest. He flat out argues against things I don't say. And he quotes just snippets of what I said and argues against them in isolation, to the point where he shifts the burden of proof on me.

Doom_Art posted...

Oh but what you think does? Let me ask you, TC. What makes what you think so much more valid and better than whatever anyone else is saying?

Read the topic.