Comments by "ZIPZ" (@zipz8423) on "Trump Threatens North Korea With 'Fire And Fury'" video.

Sorry Navieoli, the radioactive components of a nuclear detonation dont normally go through border control to pass from one country to the next. The wind takes them wherever it wants which can include spanning continents. Even a limited Nuclear exchange in that peninsula will mean the deaths of millions, both north and South Korean as well as Chinese. I dont want to be sitting in my house one day saying "I told you so" to every dumb assed Trump supporter, whilst looking for my 1 million Sun Block so I am saying it now before its too late.
3
Then I hope both Trump and yourself STFU.
2
The Dragon cannot be controlled once its been released.
1
Nuclear, you completely misunderstand the geopolitical realities of the peninsula, including the nuanced relationships between each representative nation. It is not in China's interest to go to war with the US, nor see the US engaged in a war on its border. That thinking is Cold War thinking not relevant in 2017.
1
@Nuclear; My point is China is quite happy with the existence of the DPRK "as is", they fulfill their role as a buffer state for China, since Kim is no threat to China they really have zero desire to do anything about him. Just because the USA is now bleating about Kim`s nukes that isn't enough reason for them to change China`s foreign policy tenets..
1
Further, I think the DPRKs missile forces capability is being grossly overstated. Think "Saddam`s WMD". If you watch their missile launches its pretty obvious they are using some very old propellant technology, I am talking vintage 1950`s. For the layman, youtube some Chinese D-4 missile launches and compare what you see with the exhaust plumes. I am not saying "old tech" cannot get the job done but there are plenty of doubts regards the efficacy of their weapons, the ability to properly shroud their warheads, miniaturize them to less than 1 cubic meter in size , decoy payloads if any and most of all, guidance, I don`t think they will have the same stellar cameras we or the Russians have in their RV`s. The Russians don`t like exporting nuclear weapons technology nor do the Chinese, they both have phobias regards doing that. In many ways Trump is laying the ground work making this bogeyman more threatening than he is in my opinion.
1
USA Ballistic missile defence is virtually useless against ICBMs with even a simple decoy payload.
1
John, you didn't say shit when China, Russia etc developed their nuclear capability, do you think Stalin or Mao were any better than Fat boy? Please explain yourself.
1
@Samiamng, North Korea carried on enriching Uranium secretly anyway, they got found out thats when the shit hit the fan, the DPRK were never honoring the deal in the first place.
1
@Crazyjack, I spat my coffee all over my keyboard that`s the best diss` I have read all week :P
1
Edward thats a dumb post. Stop thinking of War and think of a way to find peace instead, that way you may just live to see your grandchildren grow up.
1
Lu Fo, I understand very well what happened dont be so condescending. My suggestion is peace rather than a nuclear holocaust if that is what you wish for, then enjoy your front row tickets to your funeral pyre. The world could do with one less idiot.
1
Sandy, are you sure about that?? China is more than happy to have the DPRK act as a buffer nation between themselves and the US allied south. Its why China has done nothing overtly against the North. I admit, a destabilized region is not what China wants but there are limits to what China is willing to do.
1
Edward, your idea and evidently American military contingency plans tally with that idea, at least partially is a "hard" solution using military force. One plan may be to carry out a decapitating strike against Kim, ALL of his nuclear weapons program components and all offensive "special" weapons. It would be a layered plan, part one would be a hard kill against his most dangerous weapons. Then what?? Would that be enough to bring Kim to heel? Unlikely because his national credibility would crumble if he did nothing in response. That`s a game of diminishing returns because they wont be able to neutralize every item or guarantee killing Kim. Every outcome spells a position which will spiral out of control into a limited nuclear exchange. No thanks. Only boots on the ground and a defacto ground invasion can realistically achieve that aim and thats never going to be a US invasion. A military solution would have to be an "all or nothing" affair, and only with China's consent which is a dead end. So, the only viable solution is a diplomatic one and I believe that is the stance the USA is taking, Presidential bluster aside.
1
@Leon Wilson, I can only agree with you, what Trump is doing is running scared, Obama and Bush followed a containment strategy , now Trump is overreacting trying to push his narrative, that of the Republican WarHawk. He got into the Whitehouse, was given the national security briefs and shit his pants, we need a cooler head in the Whitehouse.
1
Sandy they were never going to strike Guam, apart from taking 1,000 TLAMs what else would they get in return which would be of their benefit. The fact Kim stood down should tell you all you need to know.
1
Also,. China is perfectly happy with Kim and North korea, they have the DPRK as a buffer between themselves and the US backed ROK.What China doesnt like is having their economy messed with and that is what the US is going to focus on next, in the coming months you will watch the US threaten China with economic measures until they are forced to do something about Kims nukes.
1
Mathew the plan was not to rile the DPRK into the use of nuclear weapons, Trump is doing so right now. They already HAVE Nukes, there is nothing the USA can do about it. Its in China`s hands and always has been but since China is happy to allow the DPRK to act as a buffer between itself and US Allies, the status quo will remain.
1
Infinite fantasy, Clinton didn't do shit to the DPRK in terms of hard military action, can you be so sure Trump will not?
1