Quantcast
Should North Korea nuke Guam? - Beyond.ca - Car Forums
Page 1 of 3 1 2 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 56

Thread: Should North Korea nuke Guam?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pallet Town
    Posts
    809
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Should North Korea nuke Guam?

    Guam is arguably solely used as a military base for the USA and about as pure a military target as one could possibly hope for as a target.

    It would suck to be a native there, but they have only themselves to blame for neither repelling the USA through strength or arms, or demanding to be a full USA state (with all the benefits, like getting $60,590 a year as a USA/Hawaii welfare recipient) instead of just a "slave" state as a territory.

    I don't think Kim Jong could get away with nuking Hawaii (full state status) And its also pretty damn easy to just sail a nuke in at 5 miles per hour, on one of his submarines if an ICBM should miss such a small target. Arguably Hawaii would be just as easy to nuke as Guam, as again - if you miss with the ICBM, just sail one in mixed in with the dolphins (no nuclear miniaturization needed)

    Arguably, both Hawaii and Guam were used as forward operating bases when the USA bombed both Korea and Vietnam for one million and two million civilian losses respectively. I would not be surprised at all if Kim Jong has already planted a nuke on the beach of both islands as a backup on ICBM miss.

    Does beg the question: Should the US apologize for killing off people in countries nowhere near their soil?
    Last edited by ZenOps; 08-09-2017 at 05:13 AM.
    0.5 gram microsd delivered by 12,000 pound combustion vehicle and driver.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    calgary
    Posts
    1,749
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Zen you really have to stop posting so early in the morning, you're saying some pretty terrible things. How can you possibly put any blame on the native Guam citizens if the North Korea decides to nuke them. That is a horribly immoral thing to say, get some sleep and rethink your post...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    calgary
    My Ride
    CLK 55 / 2g Eclipse / EP3
    Posts
    4,422
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    I dont think his drugs kick in until later on in the day. A 5am posting about nuclear war is pretty absurd - unless hes over seas.
    Last edited by revelations; 08-09-2017 at 12:49 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    A slow bike & an even slower car.
    Posts
    6,336
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    The actual fuck did I just read?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pallet Town
    Posts
    809
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40871416

    From a military perspective. The US has an airforce and naval base there, it would make sense for Kim Jong to triple nuke it just to be sure.

    There probably a solid trillion dollars worth of aircraft that could be disabled if not destroyed in 1/4 second. More importantly it would destroy a good portion of the US response from that base (which does have enough firepower to kill billions of people, also in 1/4 second)

    Makes perfect sense to me. Morality aside it would definitely bring the US down a notch if they lost a handful of stratofortresses, of which the stratofortress only has one use - to deliver the end of the world.

    Add: I am arguing for North Korea on the fact that the USA is the single greatest threat to the survival of the human species as they have proven multiple times in the past. It might have been Germany for a few decades, but without doubt its the USA now. North Korea was fighting for its right to exist, as do we all.
    Last edited by ZenOps; 08-09-2017 at 01:54 PM.
    0.5 gram microsd delivered by 12,000 pound combustion vehicle and driver.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    6,852
    Rep Power
    26

    Default

    ...
    Last edited by Sugarphreak; 08-17-2019 at 11:53 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Chinatown
    My Ride
    NC1
    Posts
    10,841
    Rep Power
    86

    Default

    do you prefer *shock and awe*? lol

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cowtown
    My Ride
    10' 4Runner SR5
    Posts
    6,345
    Rep Power
    58

    Default

    Trump is going to do something really idiotic to satisfy his ego, piss off North Korea who will in turn level Seoul. Like two insecure kids comparing dicks.

    I hope not but it doesn't seem that far fetched either...
    Last edited by msommers; 08-09-2017 at 02:00 PM.
    Ultracrepidarian

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Only 15min from Aspen!
    My Ride
    Nothing interesting anymore
    Posts
    8,406
    Rep Power
    100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sugarphreak View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    A lot of saber rattling lately

    What is with Trump's "Fire and Furry" comment...
    He's going to send in an army of Furries


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 1987
    Location
    SK
    My Ride
    Fit Dugan Signature (2016)
    Posts
    3,375
    Rep Power
    100

    Default

    Originally posted by SJW
    Once again another useless post by JRSCOOLDUDE.
    Originally posted by snowcat
    Don't let the e-thugs and faggots get to you when they quote your posts and write stupid shit.
    Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
    I say stupid shit all the time.
    ^^ Fact Checked

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pallet Town
    Posts
    809
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I think Trump knows that Kim has the upper hand.

    I mean really, its not like North Korea is a part of the greater trade network of the world. It really isn't going to get "worse" for North Korea, other than loss of life - which they are already used to. Now, the US losing a single trillion dollar military base or worse yet a single civilian city like Los Angeles... That is worth mentioning.

    Again, US - much to lose. North Korea - war is pretty much a part of daily life anyhow. Which definitely gives advantage to North Korea if real conflict starts raining down on US soil.

    I would totally condemn North Korea if they nuked Los Angeles. But I'm actually pretty much ok with North Korea nuking Guam. I don't even think Trump thinks that Guam is a part of the US anyhow.
    0.5 gram microsd delivered by 12,000 pound combustion vehicle and driver.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Calgary, Ab
    My Ride
    2021 Zonda CRV
    Posts
    1,008
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    I don't think Seoul would surfer heavy losses as people make out to be. South Koreans have had 50 years tracking the artillery of the north. If the norther artillery fires it gives away its position. There was a interesting article I read about this the other day.
    The problem with Kim is that if he attacks, then its the end game for him. Or if he shuts up, he just has to see out the term of the president.

    Either way, Republicans prob would not mind a war. Distracts from domestic issues, generates growth for the military sector.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pallet Town
    Posts
    809
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    In no small way, both Mexico and Canada should be thanking North Korea. It just proves that the full force of the US military can not push over even a tiny stubborn nation.

    If both Korea and Vietnam fell, I can imagine the US would have tried to invade Mexico (again) and Canada (again) sometime in my lifetime. Now, its not even on the radar.
    0.5 gram microsd delivered by 12,000 pound combustion vehicle and driver.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    407
    Rep Power
    39

    Default

    Makes perfect sense to me. Morality aside it would definitely bring the US down a notch if they lost a handful of stratofortresses, of which the stratofortress only has one use - to deliver the end of the world.
    The B52 is only part of the nuclear triad, and the nuclear capability of the B52 is just a small, tiny fraction of what it does. The B52 has been used in conventional missions, and is tasked to dropping conventional weapons, far more than it has been used as a bomber on standby to deliver nuclear cruise missiles and bombs. In fact the B52s took over the loiter/heavy bombing role from the B1B in the "war on terror" last year. Also, the B1 bombers stationed in Guam and elsewhere aren't nuclear capable, by treaty which includes inspections.

    So you characterizing the B52 as having only "one use" is about as ridiculous as the rest of your post(s).


    Regarding the artillery threat to Seoul - I can understand that point of view TonyTiger, it's the larger caliber guns that have the range to threaten Seoul, and these are mostly large fixed emplacement guns that the DPRK has which frequently are on retractable platforms in specially made bunkers. These would be priority targets, and likely already have dedicated counter battery already sighted on them, as well as dedicated fire-finder radars ready to track any mobile larger guns. One thing that shouldn't be discounted is the mobile free rocket over ground type weaons the DPRK has too, it isn't just artillery, it's rocket artillery too, frequently truck mounted which makes them much harder to find and fix, and thus destroy in the kill chain. I do agree that I think that the media has somewhat overblown the whole "Seoul will be destroyed by an immediate DPRK artillery attack" shtick, but I do think Seoul will absolutely take damage and some serious casualties, as will all of South Korea near the DMZ, or any targeted bases and areas the DPRK may choose to hit with long range missiles it has. I do agree though that the estimates are a lot of fear mongering, and that that the DPRK certainly won't, and can't, destroy Seoul by any means. Outside of a nuclear weapon that is at least.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Calgary, Ab
    My Ride
    2021 Zonda CRV
    Posts
    1,008
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZenOps View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    In no small way, both Mexico and Canada should be thanking North Korea. It just proves that the full force of the US military can not push over even a tiny stubborn nation.

    If both Korea and Vietnam fell, I can imagine the US would have tried to invade Mexico (again) and Canada (again) sometime in my lifetime. Now, its not even on the radar.
    I don't think the US physically needs to invade Canada or Mexico. It already has economically with cheese burgers, Ipads and Coca-Cola.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    calgary
    My Ride
    CLK 55 / 2g Eclipse / EP3
    Posts
    4,422
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Whats really silly is that people think after 70 years of military development, the nuclear option is the worst.

    There are, apparently, far more destructive tools out there (think energy weapons) - tools that can literally incinerate any given area, with a push of a button, without any form of conventional delivery system; and its not just the Americans with this technology.

    Also silly that the little kids in power (who know a lot about this) just wave their big Nuke sticks around, when they have weapons in the background that could cause much more damage and harm.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pallet Town
    Posts
    809
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I always felt the US had a very narrow individual set of criteria before they would kill off a million of your citizens.

    If you are not aligned with the USA in any of these criteria, you are subject to invasion:

    1) Religious difference.
    2) Economic difference.
    3) Being a ruler or ruled under a dictatorship or monarchy.
    4) Being an island.
    5) Speaking French or Spanish.
    6) There is oil under the ground you are standing on.

    I mean seriously, is there anything that the US will not invade on?
    Last edited by ZenOps; 08-10-2017 at 11:00 AM.
    0.5 gram microsd delivered by 12,000 pound combustion vehicle and driver.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pallet Town
    Posts
    809
    Rep Power
    0

    Default



    CNN now giving tips to Hawaiians on how to survive a nuclear blast...
    0.5 gram microsd delivered by 12,000 pound combustion vehicle and driver.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    My Ride
    Bicycle
    Posts
    9,271
    Rep Power
    49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sugarphreak View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    A lot of saber rattling lately

    What is with Trump's "Fire and Furry" comment... when I saw the video I can't tell if he was planning to say that as some sort of veiled threat, or he just said it in the heat of the moment

    I am starting to think he might authorize a strike on NK
    Basically he is reusing Truman's line before US nuked Japan. Not sure if he knew and understand the significance of what he said but with him you never know.

    End of the day, Un is supported by Chinese and Russian. They want him to have nukes and basically to tie Trump (or/if a successor after impeachment) up into action.

    Then Chinese will pull a Crimea with Taiwan in 2018. The original plan is for 2019/20 waiting to see if next election cycle will return a more unification ready government but they want to do this under Trump administration.

    https://sentinel.tw/taiwan-gun-urgent-call-action/
    Last edited by Xtrema; 08-10-2017 at 11:40 AM.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    407
    Rep Power
    39

    Default

    Whats really silly is that people think after 70 years of military development, the nuclear option is the worst.

    There are, apparently, far more destructive tools out there (think energy weapons) - tools that can literally incinerate any given area, with a push of a button, without any form of conventional delivery system; and its not just the Americans with this technology.

    Also silly that the little kids in power (who know a lot about this) just wave their big Nuke sticks around, when they have weapons in the background that could cause much more damage and harm.
    Or, Bio/Chem weapons that make the effects of nuclear weapons look like a day at the beach. There are biological/chemical weapons that are so persistant now that it takes weeks or months for rain/nature to have much effect on removing them - ie years later somebody touching the underside of a fence board can be infected still, etc. Brutal, frightening weapons. Nuclear warhead yields due to the continually improving accuracy of the delivery systems have actually gotten less powerful for the most part.

    Still, any exchange of nuclear weapons on a peer nation level, would badly and probably forever damage the areas where the warheads detonate, with airbust weapons doing larger scale ecological damage over distance due to the larger fallout patterns they can cause.

    I think large scale EMP weapons pose a large scale threat to our way of life too - imagine every single thing that uses electricity being useless for years, or perhaps decades. Our society would rapidly start breaking down if there was no more electric power from the grid, and only very small scale electricity available for a long time. No functioning vehicles, no hospital/diagnostic equipment, no large scale farming, SO many bad things about that.

    One thing about war with the DPRK, I think KJU wouldn't hesitate to use biochem weapons, and apparently they have a very developed program in this area. Even with the highest level of MOPP protection, the effectiveness of troops is very degraded when using these suits, and they are far from perfect, and some say far from even mediocre.

    Obama was more right about the last thing he said and wrote in office than anything else during his reign - apparently he wrote and told Trump that his greatest threat and problem was going to be North Korea. I guess that deal Clinton made back in the 90s didn't stick, shocking.

    Xtrema, the DPRK having deliverable ICBM nukes = a net gain most likely for Russia and China, China especially, who want to push the USA and Western powers out of the South China sea. Counting on getting any diplomatic or economic help from either of these 2 countries with the North Koreans...why would they do that, when doing nothing helps weaken the USA, right? Unless it comes to war, then China loses big time, as a possibly unified Korea at the end of that really screws up their plans, and puts a huge West/Nato friendly country right on their border, same with Russia. So I agree, unless the intel sources of Russia/China tell them war is imminent, up until that point, they'll just pay lip service at best to the DPRK "problem".
    Last edited by Gman.45; 08-10-2017 at 01:32 PM.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Can/should the USA apologize to North Korea?

    By ZenOps in forum Society / Law / Current Events / Politics
    Replies: 9
    Latest Threads: 07-10-2017, 06:12 AM
  2. North Korea tests Hydrogen nuke.

    By ZenOps in forum Society / Law / Current Events / Politics
    Replies: 5
    Latest Threads: 01-07-2016, 10:54 AM
  3. Island Hopping: Koror, Yap, Guam, Saipan, Honolulu

    By davidI in forum Travel and Vacation
    Replies: 6
    Latest Threads: 10-29-2014, 06:54 PM
  4. North Korea tests another nuke

    By hampstor in forum Society / Law / Current Events / Politics
    Replies: 131
    Latest Threads: 04-08-2013, 07:08 PM
  5. N. Korea tests Nuke!

    By creeper in forum Society / Law / Current Events / Politics
    Replies: 60
    Latest Threads: 10-12-2006, 10:43 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •