Trump condemns

Discussion in 'Just Talk' started by Deleted member 33931, Aug 13, 2017.


  1. So you support vigilante style law and order? Biggest gang wins huh ?
     
  2. "We resign".

    "NO YOU DON'T - YOU'RE FIRED!" “Rather than putting pressure on the businesspeople of the Manufacturing Council & Strategy & Policy Forum, I am ending both. Thank you all!”


    I wonder if, according to some, this might be another example of Trump about to be 'damned for doing right'?
     
  3. Very very funny - if it were not so tragic.


     
  4. Harry Stottle

    Harry Stottle Screwfix Select

    Don't underestimate Donald Trump; by using strong words against Kim J.N. he's alerted other countries to the dangers and most are taking action. By the way, what would the D.T. haters out there have done if someone threatened to fire missiles at the Falklands?
     
  5. Agree you should never understimate the chump.

    He is capable of anything!

    If you see the USA as the biggest bully in the world, then you might see him as the biggest bully there.

    Suits the vigilante style people I guess.
     
  6. joinerjohn1

    joinerjohn1 Screwfix Select

    Aww come on JoT,, If someone targeted the UK with missiles and was threatening to launch them, what would you expect our government to do? (don't answer that,, I reckon you'd expect them to roll over like a puppy wanting it's belly rubbed) I have to ask if you or DA suffer from jaundice, because from here , you're both looking slightly yellow.
     
    longboat likes this.
  7. longboat

    longboat Screwfix Select

    I think you will find that 'the Trump's' hands are tied right up to his shoulder blades by congress and the Senate to be nowhere near "capable of anything".
    Kim-jun-crackpot, on the other hand isn't restrained by such forces. The man can, and will do what he likes, how do you deal with someone like him?
    Diplomacy? Compromise?
    No, you tell the **** to go for it, and make him aware of the consequences if he chooses to do so.
     
  8. fillyboy

    fillyboy Screwfix Select

    I'm not sure everyone would take that approach longboat.

    [​IMG]

    After the Iraq aftermath, I know who I would rather see in control at this point in time.
     
  9. joinerjohn1

    joinerjohn1 Screwfix Select

    Keep on smiling DA. It'll serve you well when some foreign nuclear power is marching through North Devon, rounding your family up.
     
  10. I suspect you aren't even being sarcy?
     

  11. Isnt that a good reason why we should be active members of NATO and an active member of a joint Europe, the more friends we have, the more we can continue our way of life, rather than dictating our way of life on others?

    Pity we are in the process of alienating Europe generally.

    But dont worry, we will be part of the USA soon. Hope that is what you wanted.
     

  12. Are these bad countries more likely to attack small independant countries, or members of big setups like NATO?

    You want us to fight the world on our own ? Sounds expensive to me.
     

  13. Isnt the real question, why is N.K. so anti USA ?

    Having to remind him of the consequences of an attack is a result of not understanding that maybe?

    We are all told what to believe about NK and its regime leader, and no doubt some of it is correct, but probably not all. Now transfer that to your own circumstances. If somebody was threatening you, forcing you to do things that you dont want to, do you sit back and let them continue? Even if they are a bigger gang than you, or got bigger sticks than you? Or do you stand up for yourself?

    No doubt you will read that as I am supporting NK? But its not that at all, its open eyes and thoughts. Not just headlines and blindness.
     
  14. joinerjohn1

    joinerjohn1 Screwfix Select

    Almost forgetting that we are an active part of NATO there Jack. No need to be an active part of an EU army though, whilst we're in NATO
     
  15. Dr Bodgit

    Dr Bodgit Super Member

    The US won't attack NK as NK would launch attacks on SK before they are neutralised which will likely kill millions of people

    NK won't attack the US as it would assure their complete destruction.

    So it won't happen, but the rhetoric doesn't help at all.
     
    Deleted member 164349 and btiw2 like this.
  16. btiw2

    btiw2 Screwfix Select

    Just to add to Dr.B's assessment.

    Why did Kim Jong-un say what he said?

    He said the same thing in 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, ...and I'm now bored with Google but probably other years too.

    Let's recap.

    North Korea has a brown water navy. It has no open water subs with nuclear ballistic missile platforms.
    If it's going to launch against the US it'll be from land.
    Against a country with land & sea based anti-missile defence capabilities, spy satellites/planes and other-worldly firepower.
    If it were going to launch (from land) it'd need the element of surprise (because land based launches against the US would be seen during preparation).
    So saying you're going to hit the US (if you were going to do it) would be monumentally stupid.

    An aside: A picture from Jane's of the NK air force practising hitting aircraft carriers in June of this year.
    [​IMG]
    Yes. Those planes in the bottom right are biplanes.
    The An-2 biplane is a remarkable machine. In a strong headwind it can even fly backwards!
    But I don't think American aircraft carriers will consider them that much of a threat.

    So why does Kim Jong-un say it?
    Because the US isn't the audience. He's talking to his own population.

    So why does Donald Trump respond?
    Because the NK isn't the audience. He's talking to his own population.

    Does this mean we should ignore the problem? Obviously not.

    Does this mean that we should respond with (basically) "go on then, see what happens. I dare you."?

    What to do? ...and before you answer... would you say the same thing if you lived in South Korea?
     
  17. Dr Bodgit

    Dr Bodgit Super Member

    I think the best thing to do is to get China on the hook for sorting out the NK problem - if anything happens then we blame China and hold them responsible. But this doesn't mean nuking China if NK starts dropping bombs.

    One scenario is if NK stupidly goes through with its threat of dropping bombs near (not on) Guam. It would be stupid to obliterate NK, but getting China to be responsible for this problem could be the least worst option for a sustainable solution of some kind.
     

  18. Not forgetting at all. Explaining why it is a good reason to be an active member.

    Like it would be good to be an active member of a combined Europe. Not for its armies (thats Nato), but for the combined pressure it is able to exert. Unlike us on our own.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice