Thread: North Korea attacks South Korea

Originally Posted by fishjoel

Well...if starting military operations is going to be the yardstick for being a pussy or not then Bush definitely isn't a pussy. So your post lacks any legitimacy on those grounds.

Now, the question is should military actions be the yardstick for whether a president is a pussy or not?

I would say that nessecary military actions should be the yardstick, and not wars started on a lie. Bush had tenfold more reason to invade North Korea on account of WMDs than Iraq, but didnt because he is a pussy.

Originally Posted by Wallaroo

Obama doesnt look like a pussy to me, but Bush sure as hell did and he did NOTHING about NK either.

Clinton entered into agreements with NK that, even thou transparent to most thinking people, the left praised at the time, and then put their heads back into the sand.

Then when Bush became president, thou he should have done more, his hands were rather tied because of the agreements made by Clinton. Besides, the left would have screamed bloody murder if Bush acted anything but hospitable to NK. The left would have called for impeachment and military tribunals, just as they did for the actions taken in Iraq.

It's ironic that only now, after NK gets nukes, does the left see that appeasing NK was a bad idea. Typical.

The respective pussy levels of Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama are not the topic here, so get off it.

Originally Posted by Speakeasy

I personally can't really fault either Bush or Obama (or Clinton, etc.) for their handling of North Korea, simply because I don't have any better ideas. The last thing we want is for war to break out in NK, which would make both Iraq and Afghanistan combined look like a walk in the park. I think people who are calling for military action against NK don't fully appreciate how costly such a war would be in terms of human lives and its impact on the world economy. On the other hand, sternly written letters and sanctions come off as quite weak and so far have been ineffective at getting NK to calm the hell down. I'm not entirely sure what the effective middle ground between the two would be, and it seems that I'm not alone.

One middle ground type of action would be (of course it could br really dangerous as to the outcome) to tactically strike something in NK. We basically go like this.....

"OK NK...you sunk an SK ship...*BOOM* you lost a missle platform."

"OK NK...you shelled an SK island....*BOOM* you lost a factory."

I think the Pavlov learning curve would take effect at that point. When did we get to the point that it has to be all or nothing? A good 'ol fashioned cruise missle can work wonders.

Yeah, that is kinda what I was thinking too. We wouldn't have to invade NK in order to cripple it.

That was my thought as well. Isn't that what cruise missles are for?

The problem would be the NK nuts cases would then start shelling Sueol, and then we have a full fledged war. tghe Nk do not seem like the types that would take losing a factory, and just say opps..

Originally Posted by fishjoel

One middle ground type of action would be (of course it could br really dangerous as to the outcome) to tactically strike something in NK. We basically go like this.....

"OK NK...you sunk an SK ship...*BOOM* you lost a missle platform."

"OK NK...you shelled an SK island....*BOOM* you lost a factory."

I think the Pavlov learning curve would take effect at that point. When did we get to the point that it has to be all or nothing? A good 'ol fashioned cruise missle can work wonders.

NK does rattle their swords every few years just to get attention. But I agree they went too far this time and a couple cruise strikes would get their attention.
But as you said it could lead to bigger things that we may not want.

Originally Posted by CSA

The problem would be the NK nuts cases would then start shelling Sueol, and then we have a full fledged war. tghe Nk do not seem like the types that would take losing a factory, and just say opps..

Yep, they do have helluvalot of artillery, and Seoul is within range of that artillery.

The only way to do it would be a fast shock and awe style campaign. It would have to be massive.

Originally Posted by wooyarn

NK does rattle their swords every few years just to get attention. But I agree they went too far this time and a couple cruise strikes would get their attention.
But as you said it could lead to bigger things that we may not want.

Right.

I think it would serve as a good sounding, IMO. If we did strike back and the North Koreans took it (like the South Koreans have for decades), it would show that they are a bit more rational than we thought. Still, a big risk.

Originally Posted by hairballxavier

Yep, they do have helluvalot of artillery, and Seoul is within range of that artillery.

Yes, Seoul would get hit. However, I don't think would be as bad bloody as many predict. The South Koreans wouldn't just take it. They have a lot of arty as well, and most of the North Korean artillery sights have been identified.

Originally Posted by wooyarn

NK does rattle their swords every few years just to get attention. But I agree they went too far this time and a couple cruise strikes would get their attention.
But as you said it could lead to bigger things that we may not want.

Yep...that's the danger. I really don't think that NK would do anything about it but bitch but you never know. They could completely lose it. Regardless, something has to be done to end this constant provocation by NK. I think cruise missles would be the best step. I mean...if we really wanted to send a message we could take out a government building. If the leaders of NK are scared that they might get asploded next then they might stop being stupid.

Originally Posted by fishjoel

One middle ground type of action would be (of course it could br really dangerous as to the outcome) to tactically strike something in NK. We basically go like this.....

"OK NK...you sunk an SK ship...*BOOM* you lost a missle platform."

"OK NK...you shelled an SK island....*BOOM* you lost a factory."

I think the Pavlov learning curve would take effect at that point. When did we get to the point that it has to be all or nothing? A good 'ol fashioned cruise missle can work wonders.

I highly doubt it would go over well. Remember, NK just shelled SK for merely holding military exercises. NK is quite prone to extreme over reactions. If we actually struck NK, we'd have to do so only if we were prepared to engage them in all out war, which we aren't.