Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
NYrepublican

North Korea war

When do you think the U.S will get in a war with North Korea?  

20 members have voted

  1. 1. When do you think the U.S will get in a war with North Korea?

    • Within 1 week
      0
    • Within 1 month
    • Within 3 months
    • Within 6 months
    • Within a year
    • Within 5 years
    • Within 10 years
      0
    • Within 15 years
    • Within 20 years
      0
    • Other timeframe (specify below)
      0
    • No war will happen


Recommended Posts

When do you think the U.S will get in a war with North Korea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NYrepublican said:

When do you think the U.S will get in a war with North Korea?

I'm sorry but I forgot my crystal ball, tarot cards, astrology chart, volcanic fumes, and aspicious chickens for entrails to read at my last address... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

I'm sorry but I forgot my crystal ball, tarot cards, astrology chart, volcanic fumes, and aspicious chickens for entrails to read at my last address... :P

It's your prediction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a specific prediction. I have a range. 

I think if it happens, it will happen while Trump is president and not after. I think it happens while his favorability rating is even lower than it is now. I think it happens as he finds it increasingly more difficult to do things domestically. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2017‎-‎09‎-‎03 at 8:35 PM, NYrepublican said:

When do you think the U.S will get in a war with North Korea?

 

On ‎2017‎-‎09‎-‎03 at 8:56 PM, vcczar said:

I don't have a specific prediction. I have a range. 

I think if it happens, it will happen while Trump is president and not after. I think it happens while his favorability rating is even lower than it is now. I think it happens as he finds it increasingly more difficult to do things domestically. 

Well, I think this has simmered down (again - these flare-ups and threats of war, then simmering down, has happened perennially since the Korean War ended in 1953). Trump has agreed to meet Kim (the first such meeting of a North Korean and U.S. leader in North Korea's 70 years of existence as a nation), and Kim has agreed to "de-nuclearization."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, its impossible to know. Right now, it feels like NK is looking to move toward diplomacy and away from trying to nuke hawaii. However, if talks go poorly, I could see Trump making this "his war" sometime before the midterms, to rally conservative, "patriot", warhawk mentality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, elljawa said:

I mean, its impossible to know. Right now, it feels like NK is looking to move toward diplomacy and away from trying to nuke hawaii. However, if talks go poorly, I could see Trump making this "his war" sometime before the midterms, to rally conservative, "patriot", warhawk mentality. 

Yes, that's often a tactic commonly used by leaders, both American and in many other countries, to distract the people away from thinking about and criticizing a piss-poor, failing government...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Patine said:

 

Well, I think this has simmered down (again - these flare-ups and threats of war, then simmering down, has happened perennially since the Korean War ended in 1953). Trump has agreed to meet Kim (the first such meeting of a North Korean and U.S. leader in North Korea's 70 years of existence as a nation), and Kim has agreed to "de-nuclearization."

calling it now kim jong un is going to offer trump something to drink or eat and it will be posion we be at war with north korea for 20 minutes untill mattis is done nuking them in to the stone age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Presidentinsertname said:

calling it now kim jong un is going to offer trump something to drink or eat and it will be posion we be at war with north korea for 20 minutes untill mattis is done nuking them in to the stone age.

The loosening of your grasp on how the world works and your sinking into bad clichés, stereotypes, and tired old tropes becomes more and more pronounced each day you post on these forums. Go back to your comic books and cartoons and stop trying to sound like you have any idea of what you're talking about on a forum where real world politics is discussed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wont happen.If Trump wants to do it General Mattis and congressional leaders will talk him to his sense!(in case he even has one)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rodja said:

It wont happen.If Trump wants to do it General Mattis and congressional leaders will talk him to his sense!(in case he even has one)

I don't see a lack of sense of them actually meeting. It's long overdue, in fact. It's the poisoning and nuclear war scenario I view as on the absurd side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Presidentinsertname said:

calling it now kim jong un is going to offer trump something to drink or eat and it will be posion we be at war with north korea for 20 minutes untill mattis is done nuking them in to the stone age.

What are you trying to do, make us all sick with worry? Your attitude and behaviour have been terrible!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Wiw said:

What are you trying to do, make us all sick with worry? Your attitude and behaviour have been terrible!

And his grasp on reality, actual knowledge of affairs, and grammar have been worse...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I don't see a lack of sense of them actually meeting. It's long overdue, in fact. It's the poisoning and nuclear war scenario I view as on the absurd side.

I was actually answering the question about possibility of war.The two meeting would be 3rd best diplomatic action  in last 10 yers(best being Iran Nuclear Deal and second Cuban Restart)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Rodja said:

It wont happen.If Trump wants to do it General Mattis and congressional leaders will talk him to his sense!(in case he even has one)

oh please Mad dog have be waiting his entire life for the order to got to war with north Korea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Patine said:

I don't see a lack of sense of them actually meeting. It's long overdue, in fact. It's the poisoning and nuclear war scenario I view as on the absurd side.

I think it is a trap, but not one involving poison in the tea or anything like that. I think that they'll exploit Trump's volatility

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rodja said:

I was actually answering the question about possibility of war.The two meeting would be 3rd best diplomatic action  in last 10 yers(best being Iran Nuclear Deal and second Cuban Restart)

Considering those two were two of the worst in the last 10 years I'll take this as the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 The thing i love about Republicans is that they cannot aknowledge when the other side does something good :D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

Considering those two were two of the worst in the last 10 years I'll take this as the best.

Actually, I think the Iran Nuclear Deal and Cuban Restart are very good ideas. In fact, I believe Presidents like Nixon and Reagan would have, under the current context (not the context that existed during their own Presidencies, which were different, and, in the case of Cuba, involved the complication of the U.S.S.R.'s influence in the Western Hemisphere, and the Iranian Revolution was a fresh event in Reagan's day and hadn't yet happened in Nixon's) could have been convinced to agree to those deals or some variation thereof, given many other changes in similar policies those two Presidents made in their day ("only Nixon could go to China"). The modern Republican Party has become too hidebound, ideologically unbending (no matter the cost to all of that inflexibility), promoting of, and believing themselves, of bad stereotypes of foreigners (American real knowledge of foreign countries, peoples, and governments compared to bad stereotypes is appalling in the modern day and age - it's getting to the point of backward Third World nations where Islamist and other extremist groups easily recruit by playing upon such lack of education and promotion of bad stereotypes and myth - and also, such a lack of education coupled with bad stereotypes is a hallmark pillar of power in North Korea - and Oceania in George Orwell's novel "1984"), and a seeming party belief that all change and innovation is bad, which is hurting the party's diplomatic and image to those not already it's supporters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't believe a renewed war will break out on the Korean peninsula - hostilities, perhaps, but not outright war.

I would bet any hostilities would be largely limited to naval and air skirmishes. Any war worth fighting in Korea would require the cooperation of the Republic of Korea, and they simply will not accept war with China - to the extent that I even think South Korea would try to avoid outright dominating the North in any such military conflict. I know that RoK and the US just renewed the war-time command agreement, but I also really just don't see how the US could seriously force South Korea to engage if the government really were against it.

If South Korea and/or the US took a position of air supremacy over North Korea (which RoK alone could do in a matter of days), that only puts China in the position of making a choice between intervening or folding - and folding out-and-out to American dominance in Korea is also not an option for China. I think war would very quickly have the Republic of Korea and the People's Republic of China meeting in private to resolve the balance if the United States won't. The US might not like something like that, but the South Korean people just might make any Korean President who reached such a deal a literal national hero. It's not like South Korea is ever going communist at this point - neither China nor North Korea are communist now anyway.

Real military conflict involving North Korea in any context would quite simply be disastrous for everyone involved, except perhaps China itself.

((minor edits have been added))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lyly said:

I still don't believe a renewed war will break out on the Korean peninsula - hostilities, perhaps, but not outright war.

I would bet any hostilities would be largely limited to naval and air skirmishes. Any war worth fighting in Korea would require the cooperation of the Republic of Korea, and they simply will not accept war with China - to the extent that I even think South Korea would try to avoid outright dominating the North in any such military conflict. I know that RoK and the US just renewed the war-time command agreement, but I also really just don't see how the US could seriously force South Korea to engage if the government really were against it.

If South Korea and/or the US took a position of air supremacy over North Korea (which RoK alone could do in a matter of days), that only puts China in the position of making a choice between intervening or folding - and folding out-and-out to American dominance in Korea is also not an option for China. I think war would very quickly have the Republic of Korea and the People's Republic of China meeting in private to resolve the balance. The US might not like something like that, but the South Korean people just might make any Korean President who reached such a deal a literal national hero.

Real military conflict involving North Korea in any context would quite simply be disastrous for American foreign policy.

There's also Japan to consider. Abe has been pushing for a series of amendments to the 1947 Japanese Constitution - that is, effective, to change the articles and clauses that forbid the Japanese military from undertaking anything but purely defensive, internal emergency, and UN peacekeeping activities - so he has the option to make a "pre-emptive strike against North Korea if the threat warrants it." His pushing for this has even spanned not one, but two whole new parties that organized, ran, and won seats in the 2017 election on a largely "pacifist" platform in response to Abe's plans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patine said:

There's also Japan to consider. Abe has been pushing for a series of amendments to the 1947 Japanese Constitution - that is, effective, to change the articles and clauses that forbid the Japanese military from undertaking anything but purely defensive, internal emergency, and UN peacekeeping activities - so he has the option to make a "pre-emptive strike against North Korea if the threat warrants it." His pushing for this has even spanned not one, but two whole new parties that organized, ran, and won seats in the 2017 election on a largely "pacifist" platform in response to Abe's plans.

Good point. I don't think Japan would actually risk war, but the threat of North Korea is a damn good excuse to get those amendments wiped away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm willing to bet he's turning the other cheek, as it were. Had a change of heart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×