If we weren’t talking about two nuclear-armed states with unhinged leaders, the war of words between the US and North Korea would be hilarious. Trump’s threat Tuesday that “”North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen” was empty rhetoric and the government of Kim Jung-un knows it, which is why they immediately teased Trump that they were going to hit Guam with a missile strike. The counter-threat was just as absurd as the initial one.
It isn’t the absurdity of the threat professor, it is the absurdity of the gamble. When it comes to nuclear war, any gamble whatsoever is near insanity since the bet is the lives of millions of people!
A long drawn out quagmire is to be preferred to a short and sweet nuclear holocaust anytime. Not the choice of any peace loving progressive to be sure but if you had to choose between those two options, only a madman would wantonly kill millions at a stroke!
The big danger here is that Kim views his nukes as equalizers. All he has to do is launch one and he’s done as much damage as if the US wiped out his whole nation. But he’s counting on the US to decline to retaliate in kind. And if the US were to strike first, we would be condemned by the world and both China and Russia would come to NK’s aid. India or Pakistan might chime in with their nukes.
A quagmire would be a relief. We’re already in one with our gangs in South Korea, where most people are terrified that their long-lost family in NK will be wiped out by them. We need to rely on the rest of the world to help get this ratcheted down so we can bring the threat level down and let the Koreans reassemble their peninsula.
Indeed Wereflea, indeed.
Same could be said of the gamble over ignoring human induced climate change and ecosystem destruction. 2 simultaneous insane, suicidal gambles we are (forcibly) facing at this point in time on earth. We do this collectively—as both will impact every living thing on earth.
A curious pair these dire outcomes. One of the death of millions in an instant and the other it’s direct opposite - of the prolonged suffering and death of millions over decades. At the high population figures for our species, such ends should seem to be expected. Perhaps they are but reading of them in books many years ago when they were mere theoretical projections is different from feeling their actual presence daily.
Trump and Kim are the tragicomic jesters of destiny with our lives held in the balance, the pair dance to a similar tune but invariably step on each other’s toes!
There’s an idea: djt once said he’d be “honored” to meet Kim. Let’s put them in a safe room somewhere, without access to their Armageddon buttons, and let them dance and stomp all they want. Only, I’m afraid without an audience they’d both just pout.
And here I thought that elementary school was in the distant past for me. Now we have two childish leaders playing king of the,(boasting) mountain. Trouble is one of them has deliverable nukes that could touch off WW III. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail although with 3 Generals surrounding Trump,(and many others in close proximity) I remain highly skeptical.
I actually take heart from the presence of the generals. “Mad Dog” has so far been a calming voice. These are mature men who know what’s entailed.
If the USA drops just one nuke on Korea what will they do if China or Russia or India etc. intervene and drop a nuke or bomb an American military base somewhere. Note the USA has over 700 military bases outside the USA. Russia has only three such bases. So who will America attack then? How far is the Deep State and the Mainstream Media willing to go. If you watch MSNBC Rachel Maddow as a supporter of Hillary Clinton believes the USA should go to war with Russia even it means using nukes.This is the insanity into Naive Trump has been dropped into . So instead we will have a proxy war in Syria and North Korea or maybe John McCain will convince Trump to take on Iran or mexico or Canada it all makes as much sense . So what matters is more war doesn’t really matter with whom?
Do you have a quote to that effect? I’m gonna watch her show in about 20 minutes, so I’ll know.
That’s exactly the tune the MIMIC .01% is singing. Quagmires pay very handsomely, thank you.
Nuclear Armageddon may present some long-term ‘shock doctrine’ opportunities, should anyone be around to collect. But it’s hell on the next quarterly statement.
The priority is people not money. To save the lives of millions is worth any price.
This is a matter of deductive logic : Hillary Clinton said a cyberattack on the USA should be treated as equivalent to a military attack (2016)
Hillary proclaims a cyber attack on the DNC / Hillary’s server/ Podesta / DWS/Donna Brazile is equivalent to an attack on the USA
Hillary proclaims Russia/Putin and Wikileaks and Assange are one and the same working together
Hillary proclaims Russia/Putin hacked not just DNC but US election and was influence peddling etc.
Therefore USA has right to bomb Russia or at least threaten military action
(any military threat to Russia the Russians could take as imminent danger threat and therefore retaliate as the USA also says it has the right to retaliate to any existential or possible threat.
Now Rachel Maddow has been propagandizing that Russia hacked interfered and affected the results of US election and was responsible for leaks from DNC/Hillary Clinton server and devices
Maddow further claims it was Russia that was backing Bernie supporters whom she refers to as “Bernie Bros” as paid Russian operatives or Russian dupes.
Then Hillary and Maddow claim Russia colluded not only with Bernie Bros but also with Donald Trump and his family and associates to defeat Hillary Clinton
Maddow has been a 100% supporter of Hillary Clinton from the beginning of the DNC primaries to the present.
Therefore it is logical to conclude that like Hillary and her inner circle and the rest of the Media would be all for a nuclear threat against Russia.
As I and numerous experts would say any overt threat to Russia could in a moment turn into all out Nuclear war.
Hillary has been prodding the usa for war with Russia since the mid 1990s if not earlier.
Hillary was a supporter and campaigner for Barry Goldwater who wanted to use Nukes in Vietnam and wanted the USA to stand up to Russia and China even if it meant war.
My own opinion is that this is key to understanding the psychology of Hillary R. Clinton who has always been rabidly anti-communist, anti-socialist and anti-progressive and is Xenophobic esp in terms of Russia , China, North Korea and Iran .
So I do not need a direct quote from Maddow who supports Hillary and is peddling her anti-Russian propaganda for the past year now to conclude Maddow is antagonistic towards Russia and would have no issue with threatening military action against Russia or one of its supposed client states ie Syria or any other country with a treaty with Russia.
The new sanctions against Russia was forced upon Donald Trump who signed it under duress and noted that he believed it was unconstitutional.
The European Union and the rest of the world is against these new sanctions and sees them as merely a way to force the EU to buy expensive US oil and gas rather than the cheaper Russian gas and oil.
And remember according to various insiders and Obama it was Hillary Clinton who as Secretary of State who was the most Hawkish in his cabinet and insisted on war with Libya, Syria , the coups in Honduras and the Ukraine and she helped foment and then scuttle the Arab Spring to replace various government with more US friendly leaders and regimes.
Given the injustice done to Libya and Qaddafi the Russians or other nations could have taken military action against the USA at that time but didn’t.
It was Obama who encircled both China and Russia with IBMs etc. and threatens both China and Russia. As far as I know Rachel Maddow and the Media have all been in favor of this saber rattling the last 8-9 years and appear to want more wars . In response the Russians, Chinese and now India are forming various alliance along with nations in Africa and South America to counter act the threat to all of them by the USA.
The rest of the world outside the USA and its circle of friends views the USA as the most dangerous nation in the same way as Martin Luther King said about the USA in the 1960s as the greatest purveyor of terrorism across the globe.
Nope, it’s a matter of your taking ancient history to tar a current reporter by association, and still nary a source given. I can’t wade through your diatribe, let alone take it on in this other topic. I think that’s deep enough to consider on its own.