Introduction
I don't normally like to post more than once per day but I will be away during the day tomorrow and may not get the chance to post this then.
I just heard the news that North Korea has conducted a new ballistic missile test and I wanted to make sure to discuss this whilst the news was still fresh.
You can read a BBC news report on the subject here.
According to that report this is the 14th test they have carried out in 2017.
The missile landed in the sea in something Japan describes as its "economic zone". I think this basically means these are waters that are used by Japan but not technically their territory.
I would like to briefly discuss why I think we need to deal with North Korea, sooner rather than later.
My Thoughts
I am not a warmonger, I believe that war should only ever be a last resort. However:
When War Is Inevitable, Waiting Can Make Your Position Worse
Sometimes war is inevitable and I think World War II is an example of that. In those cases delaying action can actually make a situation more difficult to contain.
Although it is hard to say for sure, appeasement of Nazi Germany (e.g. Chamberlain) and general inaction may have lead to many more deaths than would otherwise have occurred.
In North Korea we have a madman who is not only repressing his own people, but may actually be starving them in order to pay for his nuclear missile program.
The longer we wait before taking any kind of action, the weaker his people will be and the greater threat he will present to the rest of the world.
Right now he cannot deliver a nuclear missile to Europe or the US, but if I was in South Korea, Japan or any of the other surrounding nations I would be very frightened.
So What Needs To Happen?
The only way I can see this being resolved is by taking military action whilst it is still possible to do so without a nuclear incident.
Nobody wants that but I fear we may end up having to take it anyway later down the line as a result of North Korea using nuclear weapons.
I just think we are better off doing it now when their nuclear program is in its early stages and they can't necessarily unleash that kind of carnage.
It will obviously need agreement between the major world powers including Russia and most importantly China.
Indeed I think we have reached the point where even their closest ally has realised that Kim Jong Un is a "ticking time bomb" - and a nuclear one at that.
Don't get me wrong. War is not a good thing. People will die, it will be messy, but this is the reason we have armies. Those people sign up voluntarily to risk their lives and protect others.
It should not be taken lightly but I really believe that neglecting this situation or taking soft measures will ultimately result in even greater loss of life.
But the Iraq War Was A Disaster!
This is a different situation from Iraq prior to the war there.
In that situation, Iraq had basically lost pretty much all ability to wage war (the WMDs only existed in the imaginations of Bush and Blair and were a means to justifying an invasion which they had already decided on).
Further although there is little doubt that Saddam was a psychopath - he was not suicidal or crazy on the level of the North Korean leader.
You don't want someone who is crazy (and quite likely paranoid too) having the ability to use nuclear weapons.
In addition to the humanitarian and ecological disaster a nuclear strike by North Korea would create in Asia we must also consider the economic impact.
South East Asia is the hub of production for the vast majority of technology on which our world is dependent. It is hard to imagine the turmoil that would cause to the world as a whole.
The thing is that although most of the world seems to agree that action needs to be taken - the only thing that is likely to work is a military solution.
Sanctions and similar measures only work if your opponent actually cares about his people and is capable of rational thought.
Conclusion
Well those are my thoughts and I don't want this to get too long.
What do you think? Should we continue with sanctions and softer measures? Should we wait?
I would particularly like to hear the opinions of those who are in South Korea and other nations who are directly in the firing line. -Do you think the western powers are not taking this situation seriously enough?
Let me know in the comments.
(Since this is a discussion post I may be rewarding some Steem (as Steem Power) to my favourite comments - it depends on the quality of discussion though).
Thank you for reading
Best case result is China gets scared that Trump is just crazy enough to initiate military action.
So they pre-emptively handle regime change themselves in North Korea, behind the scenes, prior to the shooting war beginning.
Trump may have been crazy like a fox in launching missile attack against Syria, while at dinner in Florida with the Chinese premiere.
I'm sure that opened the Chinese eyes - this guy is a loose cannon !!
Worst case result for China is a shooting war on the peninsula, and millions of NK refugees streaming north into China.
I'm predicting China will handle a regime change in NK in the next two weeks, quietly, behind the scenes.
Dennis Rodman may have song his last karaoke with his BFF Kim.
STEEM On !!
I hadn't thought of that but I think it may be another possibility. The chinese might just get fed up and decide to get rid of him themselves.
That would be the best answer for all. But the Chinese play the long game better than anyone else. Not easily flappable with short-term issues. Not sure if NK rises to level of concern that the will feel they need to act on.
wow two weeks? Well we shall see soon then.
That would be a, "NO!"
I'm with you. However nuclear conflict cannot be avoided at this point, even if it seems it can. It has become just a matter of when.
I hope not. I don't think the world is ready for that or ever will be.
What is the alternative though?
Hey!
I have found this to be one of the more valuable posts I have read in the last couple weeks. I came back to have a look at the discussions that took place and found them still very relevant.
I am quite surprised that even here on Steemit that this topic is not getting a lot more attention, not just for the very real and relevant possibility of war and even nuclear war but the much deeper layers of the political web that all countries of power are playing in.
I really hope humanity gets a clue and I feel like posts like this help to that end. I wanted to feature it as a FINE example of how worthwhile and valuable discussions can be had from a post such as this.
I have found few posts lately that have this great of discussion on such important matters.
Thanks for your contributions.
Best Regards~*~
Thanks mate you are very kind:)
This was an awesome post man. I really appreciate how you created a space for such dialogue!
You contribute a lot of content of REAL value!
Hope to catch ur next great article!
nobody deserves a regime like that, If only there would be a way to get rid of the regime without having to fight the propaganda blinded people..
If you want to see their view of the US, I highly recommend this, if for no other reason than to view our side through their eyes. It's definitely interesting.
MAKE LOVE NOT WAR!
blessings.
http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Red_Wedding
You need to watch the GoT episode called the Red Wedding.
I'll give you three guesses which character you are playing. Your first two guesses don't count.
Sometimes the real world interrupts your utopia.
I know it sucks, but that's the real world for ya. Rarely fair, and seldom compassionate.
STEEM On!!
Lol that you talk about the real world and cite GOT. Sadly I will probably never watch it because I don't like fantasy fiction or TV.
lol, same here. I like Science Fiction, but I am pretty picky about what I read in the genre as well. And no tv for me. I do do a little youtube though high five
Well let me know if you have any sci-fi recommendations has been a while since I read any good novels.
heh, I've been mired in ancient Sci-fi. Heinlein, P.K. Dick, Asimov.
'Exit to Reality' is a pretty good book, and the author settled (i think) out of court with the Wachowski brothers for them ripping off her book. I don't know if they did or not, but they are really damn similar.
Cool thanks.
Not sure that helps when you have a madman with nukes but whatever.
No offense @thecryptofield, but we have madmen with nukes on both sides.
Lol :)
I agree but what if we are forced into it? I think the best we can hope for is internal regime change but it could backfire.
With all the stuff going on in the world now (ISIS, Korea, Trump. etc etc) there should be clear sanctions on the use of nuclear weapons. Using those weapons is no good for humanity but also for the earth we live on.
Very true. I think most sane people would not want to use them.
The biggest issue here @thecryptofiend is how other nations will react. South Korea doesn't want war because they are in the crosshairs for one of the largest artillery barrages to ever be unleashed if war starts. Some estimates state over 2 million South Koreans would be killed in the first few minutes of a full war. It seems a better alternative to a firing war would be the slow strangle of withholding resources from North Korea. To do that, we need all the countries of the world to participate--this includes Russia and China. China is the true wild card here. Do they want North Korea as is or would they prefer a less belligerent ally? Whatever eventually does happen, I fear we are slowly marching towards an all out war that could quickly turn into one of the greatest catastrophes in world history if the situation isn't handled correctly.
I think those estimates are likely exaggerated but who knows for sure. The thing is that a surprise attack might be able to prevent that from occurring. I think the potential for loss of life would be even greater once NK get usable nukes.
I think China is losing patience with them.
I agree we do slowly seem to be going towards war anyway.
It's hard to know which estimates can be trusted. I agree that a nuke would be much worse for everyone.
It seems the best case scenario might be for Kim Jong-un to quietly disappear.
Yes that would be best for all - assuming he wasn't replaced by someone worse!
The principal! He will give me TP! I would hate for my bungholio to get polio....Where I come from, we have no bunghole.
"No" my friend. War will not solve any problem and innocent people will suffer for no reason.
Innocent people suffer either way but I understand what you are saying. My fear is we may be pushed into a war later anyway.
I believe that people who have the power take decisions by supporting specific interests that are not necessarily identical to the interests of the people of the countries that emerge. If they decide to do war they will do it without any hesitation. The rest of us, the only thing we have to worry about, is how we will prevent such decisions. This is my point of view :)
Thanks for sharing your perspective on it.
Was someone else listening to the Rubin Report? His guest the other day wrote an article about this, sorry don't have the link here at work. Essentially the conversation he had with Dave as well as with military members was war will not happen. Instead screws will be tightened, sanctions, and decapitation of the regime will be sought.
Keep in mind China and Russia do a lot of trade with NK and it is their pit bull. As crazy as they think the Donald is, they are not going to give up one of their pawns in this game.
Unless Lil' Kim shoots down an airliner or the likes, I don't think he's going anywhere for a long time.
Interesting. I do think that China is getting tired of North Korea and others have suggested that they may get rid of KJU themselves if he keeps this up.
If they did they would be playing into America's hands. As it stands Lil' Kim is their shit talker, flame thrower. Who else on the world stage plays that role for China? Remember, pawns in the game of chess. NK couldn't be where they are and doing what they are doing without the support of at least China.
Then again I could be totally wrong and Trump or China could whack him tomorrow. I would actually prefer that as I live in Tokyo part time and my family is there full time. If things went down Seoul would get the artillery, Tokyo would get biological or nuke and the West Coast would get a nuke. I live in two of three of those places so, ya, take the fucker out.
Well as we saw from WW2 and how Britain had failed to do anything to prevent Hitler's rise I don't think it would be a good idea to sit back and do nothing. We let Hitler rearm and gain territory and sitting back and letting North Korea expand their nuclear capabilities is not a great thing.
We don't know for sure if they do have a warhead capable of striking the US but North Korea will always continue to flex their military muscle leading to constant retaliation by America drastically increasing tensions.
In the end if the order is given, North Korea will be the first one to strike but in the end it may lead to their demise but that is if China and Russia do not get in the way.
At least North Korea will probably not be able to make anything as advanced as the Russian missiles which can constantly change flight path to prevent it being taken down by an antiballistic missile so if NK were to launch anything a SAM should be able to deal with it.
That is kind of what I was thinking.
Yes that may be possible.
the problem with the situation in North Korea is the fact that there just aren't any viable military options. I didn't say that aren't any options―only that any pre-emptive use of military force will create intolerable consequences.
A regime change as you suggested is the preferable choice. Keep in mind though, that this is a leader whom the people view as deity and eternal― the only caveat being that he assassinated his own half-brother, Kim Jong Nam, and consequently, may have weakened his own claim to family immortality in the minds of his people.
There are many ways to carry out a regime change . Kim Jong-un has already provided one example by using assassins to carry out the murder of a family member. It's unlikely the Chinese would initiate or sanction the killing of Kim Jong-un though― the most that could be hoped for is quiet non-interference― and that too is unlikely.
A military coup is possible, but given the extreme indoctrination of the people and leadership, this again is highly unlikely. The most feasible scenario is a sleeper cell inside North Korea manned by Korean nationals who are prepared to mount a suicide attack against Kim Jong-un such as was used against Anwar Sadat, in Egypt in 1981.
In my opinion, there is no other viable option
Well others have suggested that some sort of Chinese action to do the same may be possible. One would presume that they have some sort of presence there.
perhaps, it's murky to say the least. I reserve the right to be wrong :)
I think being wrong in these matters is almost guaranteed! There probably is no absolutely correct answer or good solution - just a set of different wrongs. I'm just glad I don't have to make military decisions like this for any nation.
I don't think war is inevitable in this case. So no war. IF however they did attack South Korea or a neighbor, I think Team America World Police could step in, along with it's allies.
If the answer is nuclear war, I say no. I believe the world is strong enough to subdue North Korea without the use of nuclear weapons. I couldn't stomach risking massive collateral damage to the earth and everyone surrounding North Korea just because they happened to be born in that area.
I hope you are right.
Yes I certainly think any kind of nuclear response is unthinkable. The only possibility of nuclear weapon use will be on the North Korean side assuming they have a device that is useable.
We should re-examine our willingness to assume that Kim Jong Un is psychologically unstable.
Mainstream media and punditry will drill this idea into one's head and it becomes for us "fact" that we sprinkle our comments with, faithfully ever after.
No doubt we do see "survival mode" behavior as we would with most anyone who has been backed into a corner.
But madness?
We should also be willing to consider that efforts to control and dictate to North Korea, and now to threaten militarily, are the prime reasons for their interest in nuclear weapons to begin with.
The "West" seems unable to tolerate dissent, and inability to eventually control through political means all too often escalates into a military solution.
Obviously I am personally against this behavior of power mad politicians who unleash the military in order to "make the world safe for democracy" . .
Indeed
I don't think so. It is possible we are being deceived but the continuous provocations by NK cannot be considered rational (at least not by me).
When viewed through Kim's perspective (to the extent which imagination allows) and taking into account the context of a recent internal power struggle to consolidate power, while fending off external pressures from the West, I would consider his moves and decisions to be absolutely rational when one considers the goal . .
i.e. to gain and hold on to power
In this regard one could say that Mr. Un and the West have something very much in common.
But by doing so he may actually be hastening his own demise. It is certainly an interesting way to examine it.
Agreed.
But how do we take down Kim and the regime without killing millions of innocent lives?
Even a largely air based attack would not kill millions of people - but I think a ground based invasion (unpalatable as it would be to the major world powers) would probably cause the least loss of life. I suspect there would be considerable support from the North Korean people who have lived in this limbo and under extreme fear and oppression for half a century.
Someone really needs to do something about it and what I will never understand is why UK, Japan etc all look to the US to make the first move all the time. Other countries need to start taking part to rid the world of such evils. This issue is only getting worse and worse as the continue to move towards nuclear ICBMs. The longer everyone waits the worse it is getting which is what happens in the case of many wars in the past such as WW1 and WW2 sitting back and taking no action has a much higher cost.
I think it is because there is still a degree of cold war mentality and it is also the situation that the US is the most powerful military nation in the world.
I think western powers are not taking this situation seriously enough, the dictatorship need to be destroyed until it's too late...
Thanks for sharing your perspective.
"The longer we wait before taking any kind of action, the weaker his people will be and the greater threat he will present to the rest of the world." - That somehow doesnt make sense to me. Am I missing something?
"You don't want someone who is crazy (and quite likely paranoid too) having the ability to use nuclear weapons." - He may be paranoid(idk), but you are saying to strike first because you are afraid of what they may do...
"Don't get me wrong. War is not a good thing. People will die, it will be messy, but this is the reason we have armies. Those people sign up voluntarily to risk their lives and protect others." - If USA attacks the ones to suffer will be the Koreans mostly, and the soldiers. War is never just messy(That's the understatement of the year). The reason we have armies... Right if you have a gun you have to use it right? Btw the pic with the nuclear explosion where you say "Do we wait for this to happen again?", are you referring to Hiroshima and Nagasaki? If you are then I dont know what to say.
From what I read your reasons are basically fear. Actions driven by fear, rarely get the best results.
Sometimes fear is warranted. These are the exact kind of arguments that were made during the run up to World War II.
Maybe Kim Jong-un is also afraid that the west is interfering in his own little world and that's why he's making nuclear weapons.
OK I understand what you are saying. It is possible.
Kim Jong Un is a Switzerland trained agent of the Freemasons and of the Military Industrial Complex which needs boogeymen to keep the wars going and military expenditure high. I'll write an article on this during the weekend.
If there's a war I hope there won't be many civilian casualties. People there have suffered enough by living in a grotesque communist dictatorship, I hope they can be given a chance to live the rest of their days freely.
I agree. The people are the ones who will suffer.
This is exactly why north korea try so hard to get nuclear weapon.
Possibly yes.
No war please ~
It would get really messy and scary if nuclear weapons would be involved. And who knows how powerful the nuclear bombs are right now. It definitely would be much more devastating than the past nuclear explosions.
The whole point of action now would be to prevent a nuclear incident.
The world doesn't need another war. Trust me. War is devastating. Maybe we can do better with lesser "hotheaded" world leaders and make the citizens more aware on how their governments are using propagandas to create a state of unrest to forever create fear among them and rule them like sheep.
I'm going to assume you would have said the same thing had you been around during second World War as well? Sometimes war is inevitable.
I'm not sure about that but what I can tell you now is that we have amazingly progressed on weapons of mass destructions now which are definitely hundreds of times more fatal than those used in WWII. The question is, are we ready to jeopardize billions of lives that exist right now and destroy our future generations before they even exist?
I think people are not bad anywhere in the world. Its the government inciting us all the time, using patriotism to attach strings to us and make us their puppets. I still feel if people started fighting their own governments instead of fighting the rest of the world, the world would be more peaceful.
Well that is a perspective I hear a lot. I'm not sure it is necessarily true but it is not something we can be sure of.
"Sometimes war is inevitable." - Maybe that's what Hitler thought when he started invading countries.
Now you are just being overly dramatic. I could do the same and suggest you are making excuses for Hitler.
I'm not trying to be dramatic. I'm just saying that making decisions based on fear isn't going to help anyone. You can't go around eliminating every threat you find. Why is it that USA always ends up attacking countries based on threats? What happened to every other country that faces some kind of a threat? I'm trying to see the other's perspective as well. Russia is probably also threatened by USA. Should they start attacking first as well?
Very good points. I think it is easy to get locked up in the situation of only seeing it from one side and I am not immune to that - I think it is human nature to get stuck in it sometimes.
War is NEVER necessary. We talk about how we're the best species around but we can't even live next to each other without wanting to shove a gun barrel in our neighbor's faces and murder their children. "But he's building the same weapons that we have. And WE are the only people psychopathic enough to have ever used them. Twice. On civilian populations."
Have you ever noticed countries that DON'T have nuclear weapons get overrun by the USA in the last 20 years?
Disgusting. War is NEVER a solution. If they come to our shores, then we are obliged to meet them and push them back, but it is utterly WRONG to be the aggressor no matter what the circumstances.
We have such great technology, we've dumped billions of dollars into anti-missile technology, so I ask you: why do we need to murder North Korean citizens, whom are allegedly being starved by their leader? We have the technology to prevent any missile launched from hitting our shores. And if we DON'T have that technology, we need to demand the reimbursement of our funds, and the removal from office of any parasite that was involved in the proliferation of the broken weapons system.
War is NEVER the answer. EVER. It's a vile and odious suggestion to the contrary.
Great words but I disagree. War is sometimes necessary.
Ok, imagine this: you live in a world surrounded by communications technology. You can travel around the world in less than 24 hours. You can get your message to MILLIONS of people at the push of a button. Some of the people you share the planet with are orbiting the planet in an artificial ecosystem, and scientists are able to use quantum entanglement to INSTANTLY send information to other locations.
WHY Is war necessary? WHEN is war necessary? War is a failing of human character. We tell our children not to hit other children when they are trying to get their way. We encourage them to negotiate cooperate and share.
Why do we not demand the same of the "Adults" who run the country? They are usually FAR older than general population, I.E. they SHOULD KNOW BETTER than anyone how to effectively communicate.
Do you agree that it would be ok for Chinese troops to start flying over the US bombing your home? Killing your family? The US has violated international law multiple times, would that be justification for other countries to make war on the USA? We seem to think it's our moral impetus to attack other sovereign nations, so how long until someone decides to defend America's "Freedom" via a brutal, violent and malicious attack on your countrymen?
Under what circumstances WOULD you consider that to be their moral obligation? Under what conditions would you accept that China has the right to wage war on your homes, families and businesses?
I get what you are saying and I do agree it is a human failing. The things is we can't always control what other people do and sometimes action is necessary like WW 2. Sometimes you have crazy people or groups in charge of countries that you can't negotiate or reason with.
The US has become that country. When another country comes over and starts bombing the civilians around you will you say, "We were just unreasonable and didn't want to negotiate. China has every right to come over here, killing Americans, burning down our businesses and caging our children in "detention facilities."
Name 1 country that the US has put any SERIOUS effort into negotiating with. And then, find the history about those negotiations, but DO NOT just trust the newspapers and television. Find the official sources and documents and read them. Then ask yourself 3 questions: "Could we have done more? Could we have made a better effort? Did we even try?"
Yes good point. I'm well aware of how these things have happened before.
no, its not time, I should wait, I'm sure these guys will blown theirselves once...
Thanks for the image!
You seem worried. For sure North Korea and Russia are two big powers which don't want to respect international rules. I think North Korea just wants to alert USA.
I think everyone should be worried about this.
The question is - does Kim have the technical capabilities to nuke South Korea or other neighboring country? Because if he does, he is crazy enough to do it if provoked.
It all depends what information do the United States have on that matter. If there is a risk of triggering a nuclear attack, I don't think the US would attack.
Obviously, the US can nuke the hell out of North Korea, but you cannot destroy a whole country because of its crazy leader. A leader the people did not chose and has no means to overthrow.
Also, judging by Kim's behavior lately I think he believes the US won't attack. Let's not forget that being crazy, doesn't mean he's also stupid.
The longer people wait the more likely he is to be able to do it though. From what I understand it is not believed that he has functional nukes yet but there is no way to be 100% sure.
Further I don't think anyone would suggest nuking North Korea.
Not at this point, indeed...there's just being 100% sure they don't yet have the capabilities to do it first.
Is war the only solution to this situation? Why not some policies and treaties should be made to overcome this tensed situation?
It hasn't worked and given the type of leader they have now it is unlikely to ever work.
This Post was Added to the Steemit Social Media Queue.
Thank you!
This will be a total mess @thecryptofiend if we have nuclear weapons in place , it's already scary enough that's its North Korea and I hope our president can make the right decisions for the nation without putting us in danger
It will be even more of a mess if we go to war when North Korea has functioning nuclear weapons.
What do you think is going to possibly happen , is this a sign of WW3 that we have been getting for a long time? As a politics major , there are so many questions , not many answers
Hard to say. For WW3 there would need to be other countries that would side with NK. Right now their only ally is China and the relationship is pretty strained.
China itself is a strong nation , but yes that's right too, other countries will need to be involved . If it ever happens , I hope all the countries that US went against, do not turn against us
The Iraq war was a disaster. The WMDs that were such an imminent threat turned out to be nonexistent. I'm skeptical about the claims being made about NK's capabilities. War is healthy for arms dealers and politicians, for the rest of us...not so much.
I sympathise with what you are saying but if we are wrong in this case I fear we may end up in a much worse situation.
I agree with @bigpanda I have heard that even our troops in south Korea will be a meier speed bump if we were to be attacked by the north. I am most concerned with north Korea's chemical weapons. Nukes imo are nothing compared to chemical weapons. We also need to think about what we will have to do about the entire north Korean population that has been subjected to generations of brain washing. My idea to stop Kim is to remove his only way of repressing his people and that is blaming all its problems on the west and south Korea. So if we could give the people free WiFi and our old cell phones, I think the problem would solve itself in a few years.
Interesting. I'm sure such measures may have been tried on a small scale. I think the brainwashing and fear may prevent them from working.
The universal law of equivalent exchange States that nothing will happen when doing war.. If we attack they attack and the other way around..
Both ways people die..
It would be the best if people actually didn't die.
Cheers for the article and much love from me
Sadly people will die either way. The I don't think there is a perfect solution - as with many things in life.
I'm not sure but it does seem that this time it will get real.
That's the impression I'm starting to get but perhaps I'm seeing the threat as greater than it is. It is hard to be sure.
I don't really take the sabre rattling very serious. It's like rotating countries and it's North Korea turn again. They have not been the great evil since 2012 but this time does feel different. I know they need a major war to solve the problems the whole world is dealing with. #1 the economic collapse. Time will tell and I don't think we will have to wait to long for the answer.
I hope you are right. I just get the feel that this is building up to some kind of war and hence the central point.
It does feel like the pot is being brought to a boil; but I just can not think of any ethical or moral reason to condone warfare, besides maybe having invaders at your doorstep trying to do damage.
Think of how many people, the "Victorious" soldiers, after winning a war, come home only to fight a war with themselves on the inside. Is that right to do to them? Is it right to do that to the civilians who suffer the traumas? What about surviving combatants from the losing side? Do they deserve a lifetime of nightmares and trauma?
One of my friends is a veteran from most recent Iraq. He's an older Navajo man, and started drinking heavily in last couple of years. My wife and I were visiting him last year when he was having a really rough period and he started having a few shots. After about the 3rd one, my 4 year old boy asked him, "Why do you drink that?" and his response was painful. He said "I hurt people, and now it hurts me." He didn't go into detail, but that night he told me about some of his recurring nightmares and his daily battle with PTSD. The worst part is, he's not the only person I know afflicted by war. I know many wounded veterans, some physically destroyed. Others emotionally.
I can't believe anyone can look these men and women in the eye and say, "What happened to you, and what continues to happen, is worth the cost."
Especially John McCain. When I see him getting dreamy eyed at prospect of more war, I ask myself: "Did he really experience what he claims to have experienced? Why does he so eagerly desire to expose the youth of the nation he serves to risk of the same treatment he experienced?"
Very good points. I don't think anyone is left untouched by war, whatever side you are on.
I don't know who I feel most sorry for: us being spoon-fed a biased BBC narrative of the truth or the real people trapped under Communist rule there? I recommend a much deeper Pilgerian historical analysis of the North and South Korean conflict here.
I like Pilger or at least I used to haven't heard from him in a while though. Thanks for the link.
Pilger always make sure that we can peep from the other side of the fence ;)
Yes. I didn't always agree with him but he is very thoughtful and tends to cut through the emotion that is often used to manipulate us. I used to have a DVD boxset of some of his documentaries on Iraq and various other wars.
It's all about the narrative. I'm also a fan of Sargon of Akkad on youtube - he removes all emotion to get to the root of all truths in everything.
Not familiar with them. Will check out when I have a moment.
I've been trying to migrate Sargon over from youtube to Steemit for months - he has one of the largest subscriber bases on youtube - miss him at your peril.
Not an easy question with any tangible solution . So many factors to consider. Not even sure if we have the whole story. Don't really know the answer to this but we must try to avoid war at all cost. Every alternative must be pursued, with America being safe and out of harm of course. Pushing military action will only bring China and Russia to the game and now you have escalated to a Doomsday scenario. With this, Trump could sure use a war , what with his declining popularity poll numbers. Just my thoughts of course.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing your perspective. I think you are right in that Trump and to be honest leaders in general tend to benefit from conflicts - it does sometimes backfire though.
Without doubt and we the people suffer. Not to mention the damage and death we cause to the country we are in conflict with. I know, "in the name of democracy."
1 of our smallest nukes would turn that entire country into liquid
This could lead to biger war including other countries too. China is in aliance and Russia is in alliance with China.
Not exactly. China seems to be losing patience with NK.
I would suggest using conventional military action with ground troops and air support. Using nukes would be very bad.
What if you guys used conventional methods and they surprised you with nukes? There's no telling what will happen but one thing is for sure, the casualties will be on all sides and people will suffer.
It is possible for sure.
Hope there's no hard feeling @thecryptofield. Not looking to offend you in any way. Just do not agree with the concept of war. Have seen too much of killings and bloodshed in my teen. The innocent people are always the biggest victims.
No offense taken you can disagree with me - I am not necessarily right. Also this is meant as a topic for discussion and we should be able to disagree - it is healthy!
Cool. I have been following you for a few days now and I find most of your posts informative and helpful. Cheers :)
Great point
yeah i agree we shouldn't resort to that. we should kill all government offiicials and claim that country as our own and turn it into a capitalist colony
I don't agree with that and I hope you are being sarcastic.
We should use our voices, unity is the greatest weapon , not force but as soon as we learn to love each other, then fair will leave us alone and governments would fall, they are feeding on our fairs
indeed, better to take action before than after a disaster!
Exactly my thoughts. I think we will be forced to take action at some point, so we would be better off choosing the time that is best for us.
I would like to hear north koreans too how they feel about it. Most of exported democracy failed, it's worst than before. I know north korea only from media but i can't trust that so i need independent info.
That is extremely unlikely though. North Korea barely has any internet and there is no other easy way for them to get the word out.
There is only one law there, serving the homeland
That's a no no for me, imaging if they start dropping them nuke? that would bad for the of the world, so before asking thing of the amount of innocent people would die off, not a good idea in reality
Well it is hypothetical I don't think there will be military action (not yet anyway). I just think it could be coming at some point, particularly if they do develop a more functional nuclear capability.
Well i think its best for both country to come to the table with some kind of resolution , it would be in the best interest of both nation and the rest of us, plus they talk a lot about saving the planet, when they can't even save humanity ,, but i accept you point though , looking at the direction things are going now
Yes that would be good. It just does seem like things will continue to get worse.
We can only hope that they don't turn our planet into a star,, its crazy bro
I don't think that is going to happen.
I also followed you, its really nice chatting with y'all
ounce north Korea develops a working icbm we will be well on our way to nuclear proliferation
You mean they might start selling them to others? It could happen I suppose.
No new wars. We don't need any more mass murder and migrant crises. U.S. military adventurism has been an abject failure - and has bankrupted the country in the process.
I agree with your sentiment but what if we are all forced into it at a later date? there is no good solution other than some kind of internal change of regime.
@thecryptofiend I have to disagree with your assessment of the situation. I haven't looked at the comment thread yet but I am sure I am not the only one to do so on this issue and I'm sure the comments will really add a lot to the discussion you have begun with your very well written post. From the little I know about you I feel that you are very sincere, decent and obviously very clever but I would have to say that my impression from this post is that you are far too trusting. I freely admit that I myself have become too skeptical but that is because I have been given many reasons to be so, only one of which you have included in your post is the demonstrable lies told by a President and Prime Minister of two of the most powerful and aggressive nations in the world. It might interest you to know if you do not already, that America has been responsible for many more deaths in the years since the second world war than most other countries combined yet are hailed as the saviors of freedom and democracy.
To put it mildly, the BBC is in my opinion, one of the least trustworthy organisations in existence.
I hope you are doing well my friend and enjoy your day off tomorrow!
When you're dealing with the Criminal Class that masquerades as our "Leaders", there is NO such thing as too skeptical. They are untrustworthy, and need to ALWAYS be fact checked. We have the internet these days, it's even easier than ever to know when they are lying these days.
We NEED to demand they stop acting like children, wasting our money, and killing not only people around the world, but our YOUTH as well. The troops should be stationed here, on the borders and ready to wreck and idiot dumb enough to try an attack.
It is my belief that the internet is definitely serving a purpose but I don't think it is a beneficial one from our perspective although it is certainly made to appear that way. Everything in this life has a positive and negative aspect to it and until you have looked at both, you are not in a position to have a considered opinion. The trouble is with most things in life is that the positives are pushed in our faces and the negatives are hidden from view so that our thoughts on any given subject are steered in a certain direction. The most useful form of control is control of the mind and this is the biggest problem we face in our modern world, the organised and orchestrated control of information to the masses by the few.
Thanks for your well thought out comment. You may well be right and I could certainly be wrong. Whatever you think of the BBC though these reports have been through the rest of the press so I don't think it is a fabrication.
Mainstream press is monopolized.
Possibly. But they can't fabricate something like this.
My distrust of media does not stop with the BBC but instead extends to every major news organisation whether media or print. I too am open to being wrong and willing to change my opinion if evidence is forthcoming to prove me so but I feel , though I am not a researcher, I have seen enough evidence to support my case that all media, including social media and this very platform. is designed to misinform and misdirect attention from the true nature of the divide in our world and that is not between race, religion or culture but between those with true knowledge and those without.
Knowledge is the key to everything and in my humble opinion that is what has been occulted and obfuscated throughout history and what continues to be so today in order to maintain the system that has suited those in power for as long as they have been getting away with it.
I could go on but I won't. :)
Thanks for the reply.
Have a good one!
Thanks you too:)
Has anyone bothered to find out what it is that Kim Jong Un wants?
Someone must be supplying North Korea, they obviously can't grow their own food, or manufacture anything while they're starving everyone.
There's a huge outpoint here that everyone seems to be ignoring.
The MSM loves to distract the masses with big scary enemies that require huge expenditures of money and life. It tends to take their attention off of the fact that their politicians and the Fed have pretty much screwed everyone except the people who own "Defense" industry stocks.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
So you think he may be a puppet for someone else beyond China?
I'm not entirely sure what to believe.
Yeah, North Korea is definitely fucked up.
But Kim Jong Un has apparently had his half brother killed and a few of his Generals. Eventually there were German Generals that saw where the train was heading and tried to assassinate Hitler.
I just have a difficult time believing that this pudgy, dim-witted looking fat fuck is some evil mastermind that's ruling North Korea with an iron fist, in between watching Daffy Duck cartoons.
There's just something missing from the narrative that makes my "spidey-senses" tingle.
Lol I think we all find that difficult to believe. It maybe that there is someone behind the scenes that is the brains behind it.
Congratulations @thecryptofiend!
Your post was mentioned in the hit parade in the following category:
Thanks!
They don't listen though !!
This will happen to North Korea.
This is funny ! Hope it will not be the case.
btw promote peace please :/ :'( our whole world was already destroyed during world wars :(
First you spam with a pointless comment, now you are making it clear you didn't even read the post. I am not pro war but sometimes it is necessary.
i didnt spam it was really first comment -- happens when idiots get high vote power -- i really now started hating u -_-
You are the idiot here. Saying "first comment" is just spam - it is not a real first comment. Further calling me an idiot for your mistake is pretty pathetic.