-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Trump threatens to totally destroy North Korea.
- Thread starter 2MF
- Start date
Earthbound64
Banned
That doesn't prevent the person posting it here from using their own judgement about how to word things.
"Someone else wrote it this way and I just copied it" is lazy and basically makes one not much more than an RSS feed.
boredofcanada
Member
Read some articles on the internet about how impossible it will be take the regime out without killing thousands, of not millions of people.
Badly worded, but not much different than what past presidents have said regarding the issue.
If North Korea attacks the US or an Ally, we're going to go to war with them. Trump didn't say anything particularly new. He just said it in an embarrassingly fiery way that makes him sound not that much different than North Korea.
The current american stance is "Should they attack, we will respond." And we're just doing it in an increasingly angry way so that the people who are supply North Korea with the weapons will hopefully back down. But it's not really clear if that will work because it actually might work in their favor that america is fiery and testy.
If North Korea attacks the US or an Ally, we're going to go to war with them. Trump didn't say anything particularly new. He just said it in an embarrassingly fiery way that makes him sound not that much different than North Korea.
The current american stance is "Should they attack, we will respond." And we're just doing it in an increasingly angry way so that the people who are supply North Korea with the weapons will hopefully back down. But it's not really clear if that will work because it actually might work in their favor that america is fiery and testy.
Yeah, if NK struck first I'm sure thousands to millions would die. What would be your alternative plan in that situation?
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
If idiotic leadership of the most powerful country on the planet doesn't outrage you, that's your problem.
There's so much difference between now and 2014 on top of the obvious difference in the rhetoric between Obama and Trump, that if those differences aren't worthy of noting to you then this situation might be a bit over your head.
boredofcanada
Member
Letting them continue to exist without engagement, as hard of a pill it is to swallow, is the only option that won't end in war and massive casualties. Hopefully there is a coup of some sort one day (not that a new government on NK would be any better, im sure)
The Sum of Zero
Member
But it's a NK thread, there has to be anxiety-inducing overreactions and dog-piling anyone who isn't worrying about it.
And_Gignac
Member
I am familiar with genocide in the form of "totally destroying" a whole country.
My god the normalization of Trump has really become an infection with Americans rationalizing this shit.
Nobody is engaging them. The proposition is if THEY strike first.
Even that option is plenty bad like the rest. Who knows what they will do when they have nukes
boredofcanada
Member
Still a bad idea to engage them at all. This is a shit sandwich for a lot of countries. If this topic interests you guys, I highly recommend this podcast about it.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/07/the-worst-problem-on-earth/528717/
No, military politics is over your head, like most Berniebros. How is this that different? Obama made that statement after getting evidence that NK was creating miniature nukes. Trump is taking this stance after NK directly threatened the US by choosing Guam as a target. Yes, Trump could have worded it more eloquently. But if you take his full quote, please tell me how it's so different than what Obama said.
And_Gignac
Member
Advocating for the total destruction of a country isnt genocide? What, do you think people will survive and only the structures will stand if Trump "totally destroys" NK?
Who cares about the proposition. Your president is advocating genocide as a defensive response.
Pattycakes
Banned
One is a Democrat
One is a Republican
There's why it's so different
/s - they are the same thing
That is the cost of war. The alternayive is what? Letting a batshit insane totalitarian nation firing ballistic missiles above Japan, assassinating dissidents and exiled brothers with VX chemical nerve gas in busy airports, and letting them get the means to instantly kill millions of South Koreans amd Japanese and Americans in Guam and Hawaio and Alaska? No. Just like Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, you end it before it starts. The casualties would be heavy. But if the need comes to it, the lives of South Koreans, Japanese and Americans matter more than North Koreans.
This has been going on for two decades. In those two decades nothing has changed except North Korea getting stronger with more deadly weapons. Eventually it comes to a head.
sloppyjoe_gamer
Gold Member
"Trump threatens to ‘totally destroy' North Korea if they attack the US or any of their allies"
Fixed for accuracy.
FFS with the clickbait thread titles here....
Fixed for accuracy.
FFS with the clickbait thread titles here....
I have no idea what you are trying to say. I think you are now saying if they strike SK, Japan, or Guam, we should do nothing? I really don't know what your point is.
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
Why would I do that. It's self evident. You even explain it yourself that the rhetoric was different, since Trump could have worded it more 'eloquently'.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
I think you guys are confused. North Korea doesn't have the capability to cause a widespread nuclear holocaust that destroys the world or something. Honestly a lot of that is a simple misperception about the scope of nuclear war to begin with.
SyenceLabb
Member
Some people here think the NK regime is some oasis of wisdom and restraint with Kim Jong-un playing 4D chess. I agree the U.S. shouldn't do shit until NK makes the first move, but trust me, when North Korea's Nuclear weapons program matures enough, something really stupid will be done on NK's part that will force our hands. We just have to be ready when that happens. Flying rockets over Japan is only the beginning.
And i hate Trump. He's a white supremacist idiot, and I will dance in the streets of Manhattan if he ever got impeached, but I'm also pragmatic, and understand how diplomacy works.
Coriolanus
Banned
Oh, are all of those three nations in favour of preemptive military action? Especially SK, since itll take the most damage? News to me.
boredofcanada
Member
The lives of South Koreans and the Japanese definitely matter more, that's why we don't engage them. A flight from Pyongyang to Seoul is 45 mins. You can walk there. Who is going to deal with the millions of starving desperate refugees? America? Lol.
Regginator
Member
So basically just meaningless talks, thankfully. Because as scummy as North Korea is, I don't see them actively attacking US allies and definitely not the US itself. Just a dick swinging contest.
But like I said before, it's just semantics. You pointing out and getting upset about the difference in rhetoric is petty, when the message is the same.
This is probably one of the least controversial things Trump has said.
This is pretty much the standard US response to NK, that we've had before Trump was in office. You strike the US or US allies first, the response will be you're gone.
Trump is not the first and won't be the last to say something similar.
Random Painted HIghway
Member
even for North Korea, there is a difference between the government and people who happen to liven in the country. I think he was referring to ending North Korea as a nation, by wiping out its government, not by glassing the majority of the country, which I agree would amount to genocide. Perhaps that is wishful thinking on my part!
And_Gignac
Member
Did Obama say the US was going to totally destroy NK? No, he never did. He never advocated for mass murdering a population.
Language matters. Hyperbole aside, Trump made a clear statement advocating destruction of a whole country. You wont get outraged because you prefer to normalize this type of dangerous anguage and behavior by the maniac.
It is.
Ok, so tell me how you think Obama would respond militarily, if NK were to fire a nuke at Guam???
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
No, it's not. You're being reductive. Trump used the words 'totally destroy' at a time of high tensions.
ShirAhava
Plays with kids toys, in the adult gaming world
This is amazing
boredofcanada
Member
Unless someone gets killed, yes I do think doing nothing is the best course of action. What's the alternative? Millions of lives lost, nuclear fallout in SK, refugees all over the Asian peninsula, and possible war with China? For what? To get rid of Kim Jun Un? Not worth it. Trump doesn't see any of this. He's making the situation worse. Most likely because his approval rating is abysmal, which makes a war seem appealing.
He is an idiot.
Now, if NK does get people killed, then that's gonna be a pill the world is gonna have to decide if they want to swallow, and I bet a lot of countries will be against it. It's not just nuke them and that's it.
You're being insanely obtuse and biased by thinking there is any material difference in what Trump said and any past president said.
VincentMatts
Member
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
Because Trump has a reputation for using rhetoric that is similar to past presidents.
The very fact that you use the term rhetoric, proves my point. It's rhetoric...it's not meaningful.
Yah, that is one clickbait title and looks like it worked for some.
Next time don't leave out the rest of why it was said instead of making it seem like a blind threat in the title?
Shadow Puppetry
Member
"righteous many dont confront the wicked few, then evil will triumph, he said."
He's right, he did triumph and became POTUS.
He's right, he did triumph and became POTUS.
Ryzaki009
Member
Yep it's one of those scenarios where everyone looks like a shit.
He is threatening with a crime against humanity
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
Since when?
Nobody is saying Trump is smart but you have just created an impossible fantasy where NK strikes and people are not killed. That makes no sense and nuclear weapons are not the only thing the U.S. can use to defend itself or its allies. Maybe you think it is okay for a madman like Un to have his forces start attacking people without a response but I have a feeling most people in SK and Japan will not approve of being sitting ducks. Call it a hunch.
Similar threads
- Locked