To be fair. The military industrial complex isn't really in the gun business per say.
Society NK + SK Coming Soon?
- Thread starter KWingJitsu
- Start date
by guns I refer to bombs and all the stuff produced for a military....From Tanks to jets to firearms and even down to the tents and toilet paper
That's fair, I was just looking for clarification.
I often hear people equating companies that make small arms with the MIC which isn't really accurate. Right now American small arms manufacturers are in tough spots. Haliburton on the other hand...
What broad view of history have you the conclusion that the Kim regime will give 100 percent transparency of their nuclear program to the United States? Because Trump says so is not an answer.
Countless times we've seen "We're building nukes." As many times it's followed by "Please, don't. We'll sanction you, but if you stop we'll be nice and throw some money your way." rinse, repeat.
This time it was "We're building nukes." followed by "knock that shit off or we'll fuck you up." This time it was immediately followed by NK grovelling to the international community about wanting peace.
They're groveling to see what they can get to stop testing for awhile. That's not a effing concession. That's called making money on your nukes. When will you get that?
Nice!!!
Notice how this time it's NK doing the grovelling instead of the international community? That would be a concession.
No I don't notice that. Just look at the amount of people itt who are "concerned" about the nuclear capabilities of North Korea. Kim is calm, he is coming from a position of power. He doesn't have to do anything and he's trying to make small gestures such as the closure of a broken test facility seem like a grand gesture of a modern and fair leader. He's trying to say "hey world, I'm not crazy, just you wait, I can be trusted with nukes."
I reiterate. You don't see it because you don't want to.
If he hasn't done anything different then wtf are you basing your optimism on? Trump?
Because he has done something different.
This time around it's him looking for compromise after being threatened. In the past it's been the other way around.
Exactly where are you getting this from? Infact Trump has been kissing his ass and reversing his fire and fury bullshit.
The timeline of events.
I don't think you know what happened. Kim wants an economic relationship with South Korea. We can't give him one unless the US is willing to allow that. You might think this has something to do with Trump but his loud mouth who is making everything worse so all the local countries japan, china, korea are coddling him into playing along and for some reason he seems to be doing it. One guess is that compliments work but another is that none of these countries want war and neither do the American people. The reason Kim is open to the talks with Trump after that rash of insults is not because of threats, it's because he can't get the economic opportunities with South Korea without Trump on board.
That's not a new development.
The only unique circumstances of this whole situation are 1) A U.S. president openly threatening NK. 2) NK being the one looking to be friends. Am I saying, things will turn out different? We have no way of knowing that. But to pretend this is the same thing we've seen in the past is to ignore what's actually unfolding.
None of what you said is true. Clinton was almost strike North Korea and had Bush not been busy in the middle east he was wanting to strike as well.
The north isn't wanting to be friends, they're shopping for economic opportunities. If you don't give them anything worthwhile they will be right back at lobbing missiles over your friends.
When did either of them directly threaten NK with a nuclear strike?
I can't understand if you're serious or not. Tweeting that your nuclear button is bigger isn't exactly threatening a nuclear strike. Clinton was actually ready to go in, unlike Trump who is just ready to tweet about it.
No it's not. It's tame in comparison to both Clinton and Bush.
You would think optimism can't hurt but it can. You're risking giving this regime millions of dollars once again only to see everything turn belly up and they fire up their production and test facilities faster than their empty promises to shutter them and you have now just funded their nuclear program again.
When did Clinton or Bush publicly threaten to wipe NK off the face of the Earth?
I think Obama is the only one who threatened them. He said if they did 'so and so' there would be consequences.
Bush said they were evil.
That's all I could find. Lol
Kind of like when he told Syria that chemical weapons were a "red line" and did nothing when they were used. Trump on the other hand bombed Syria for using chemical weapons.
Clinton 1993
"Now, as to your second question, I can only reiterate what I said when I was in Korea. I know of no one who seriously believes that the United States and the Republic of Korea would be defeated in a war of aggression by North Korea if they were to attack. And I made it as clear as I could that if they were to do that, they would pay a price so great that the nation would probably not survive as it is known today."