Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2017 7:07:01 GMT 7
|
|
|
|
Post by Soutpeel on Aug 10, 2017 7:39:18 GMT 7
Better stock up on kimchi then i guess, and what will i do without any K Pop ? |
|
|
|
Post by Soutpeel on Aug 10, 2017 7:43:06 GMT 7
"The war of words flared up after US officials reportedly confirmed the Pyongyang regime has successfully produced a miniaturised nuclear warhead that can fit inside its missiles. If true, the development means the rogue state has crossed a key threshold on the path to becoming a fully-fledged nuclear power. It also means it is potentially capable of packing the weapon of mass destruction inside an intercontinental ballistic missile. The claims were made in the Washington Post , citing a confidential assessment by the US Defense Intelligence Agency." The same people who said Sadaam Hussian had weapons of mass destruction and Chemical weapons ?....remind me again how all that turned out ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2017 8:01:48 GMT 7
"The war of words flared up after US officials reportedly confirmed the Pyongyang regime has successfully produced a miniaturised nuclear warhead that can fit inside its missiles. If true, the development means the rogue state has crossed a key threshold on the path to becoming a fully-fledged nuclear power. It also means it is potentially capable of packing the weapon of mass destruction inside an intercontinental ballistic missile. The claims were made in the Washington Post , citing a confidential assessment by the US Defense Intelligence Agency." The same people who said Sadaam Hussian had weapons of mass destruction and Chemical weapons ?....remind me again how all that turned out ? Better. Was just talking a work colleague here about his home country Afghanistan. Since those Saudi taliban have been removed , the country is better. Thanks to America. |
|
|
|
Post by Soutpeel on Aug 10, 2017 8:43:09 GMT 7
"The war of words flared up after US officials reportedly confirmed the Pyongyang regime has successfully produced a miniaturised nuclear warhead that can fit inside its missiles. If true, the development means the rogue state has crossed a key threshold on the path to becoming a fully-fledged nuclear power. It also means it is potentially capable of packing the weapon of mass destruction inside an intercontinental ballistic missile. The claims were made in the Washington Post , citing a confidential assessment by the US Defense Intelligence Agency." The same people who said Sadaam Hussian had weapons of mass destruction and Chemical weapons ?....remind me again how all that turned out ? Better. Was just talking a work colleague here about his home country Afghanistan. Since those Saudi taliban have been removed , the country is better. Thanks to America. Are you suggesting Lil Kim is infact Saudi Taliban in disguise ? |
|
me
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,342 
Likes: 3,980
|
Post by me on Aug 10, 2017 8:51:51 GMT 7
"The war of words flared up after US officials reportedly confirmed the Pyongyang regime has successfully produced a miniaturised nuclear warhead that can fit inside its missiles. If true, the development means the rogue state has crossed a key threshold on the path to becoming a fully-fledged nuclear power. It also means it is potentially capable of packing the weapon of mass destruction inside an intercontinental ballistic missile. The claims were made in the Washington Post , citing a confidential assessment by the US Defense Intelligence Agency." The same people who said Sadaam Hussian had weapons of mass destruction and Chemical weapons ?....remind me again how all that turned out ? Better. Was just talking a work colleague here about his home country Afghanistan. Since those Saudi taliban have been removed , the country is better. Thanks to America. The colleague is not in Afganistan, the ones to ask are still there. |
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,537
Likes: 5,655
|
Post by chiangmai on Aug 10, 2017 8:59:30 GMT 7
Hand on heart, does anyone really think that the US will actually take a significant first strike military action against NK?
|
|
me
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,342
Likes: 3,980
|
Post by me on Aug 10, 2017 9:11:14 GMT 7
Hand on heart, does anyone really think that the US will actually take a significant first strike military action against NK? If and only if a us possession is attacked in any way. |
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,537
Likes: 5,655
|
Post by chiangmai on Aug 10, 2017 9:18:50 GMT 7
Hand on heart, does anyone really think that the US will actually take a significant first strike military action against NK? If and only if a us possession is attacked in any way. That would make the US response a retaliatory second strike, not a first strike. I was just reading about the debate that's taking place now regarding whether bracketing fire is considered hostile. It seems the current rules for these things are that if a missile is fired as a test and it doesn't enter a defended area, it can't be shot down or considered a hostile act. But if four missiles (as planned for mid August) are fired at Guam and bracket the island, I guess that means one on each corner (40 miles out), that's considered hostile. I'd say no sh*t it's hostile, those four missiles by the way will go over the top of Japan. Reminds me of kids when their parents tell them not to cross the line and they put their foot right up against it to try and push the envelope. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2017 9:50:31 GMT 7
Better. Was just talking a work colleague here about his home country Afghanistan. Since those Saudi taliban have been removed , the country is better. Thanks to America. The colleague is not in Afganistan, the ones to ask are still there. He's been here for 4 months. Moved here with his 2 sisters sponsored visas. He's full afghan but speaks english well although heavy accent. Nice guy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2017 9:51:33 GMT 7
Hand on heart, does anyone really think that the US will actually take a significant first strike military action against NK? Yes. I think its imminent. There's not a whole lot of other options. |
|
|
|
Post by Soutpeel on Aug 10, 2017 9:55:09 GMT 7
Hand on heart, does anyone really think that the US will actually take a significant first strike military action against NK? If little Kim decides to let loose a missle heading anywhere near the vicinity of Guam, nuclear or not, Yanks will let loose on NK, contray to the talking heads the Pentagon will be frothing at the bit, looking for any excuse to take on NK In the right circumstances this provides a perfect vehicle for Trumpton to become the saviour of the free world and to show who has the biggest d×ck |
|
Mosha
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 5,788
Likes: 2,997
|
Post by Mosha on Aug 10, 2017 10:31:57 GMT 7
If and only if a us possession is attacked in any way. That would make the US response a retaliatory second strike, not a first strike. I was just reading about the debate that's taking place now regarding whether bracketing fire is considered hostile. It seems the current rules for these things are that if a missile is fired as a test and it doesn't enter a defended area, it can't be shot down or considered a hostile act. But if four missiles (as planned for mid August) are fired at Guam and bracket the island, I guess that means one on each corner (40 miles out), that's considered hostile. I'd say no sh*t it's hostile, those four missiles by the way will go over the top of Japan. Reminds me of kids when their parents tell them not to cross the line and they put their foot right up against it to try and push the envelope. Don't they need to fly over Japan? Would that be considered a hostile act? |
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,537
Likes: 5,655
|
Post by chiangmai on Aug 10, 2017 11:16:08 GMT 7
That would make the US response a retaliatory second strike, not a first strike. I was just reading about the debate that's taking place now regarding whether bracketing fire is considered hostile. It seems the current rules for these things are that if a missile is fired as a test and it doesn't enter a defended area, it can't be shot down or considered a hostile act. But if four missiles (as planned for mid August) are fired at Guam and bracket the island, I guess that means one on each corner (40 miles out), that's considered hostile. I'd say no sh*t it's hostile, those four missiles by the way will go over the top of Japan. Reminds me of kids when their parents tell them not to cross the line and they put their foot right up against it to try and push the envelope. Don't they need to fly over Japan? Would that be considered a hostile act? Imagine I threw four elephant turds at The Duck and it went over your head and missed you, would you think I was being hostile towards you. |
|
|
|
Post by Soutpeel on Aug 10, 2017 11:27:28 GMT 7
That would make the US response a retaliatory second strike, not a first strike. I was just reading about the debate that's taking place now regarding whether bracketing fire is considered hostile. It seems the current rules for these things are that if a missile is fired as a test and it doesn't enter a defended area, it can't be shot down or considered a hostile act. But if four missiles (as planned for mid August) are fired at Guam and bracket the island, I guess that means one on each corner (40 miles out), that's considered hostile. I'd say no sh*t it's hostile, those four missiles by the way will go over the top of Japan. Reminds me of kids when their parents tell them not to cross the line and they put their foot right up against it to try and push the envelope. Don't they need to fly over Japan? Would that be considered a hostile act? Well one suspects they will not be happy bunnies in the land of the rising sun...Tora Tora Tora |
|
