IndoAssassin
Banned
Why do shooter who do mass shootings end up killing themselves after?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NBC News: U.S. May Launch Strike If North Korea Reaches For Nuclear Trigger
- Thread starter iMax
- Start date
- Status
Why do shooter who do mass shootings end up killing themselves after?
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
You guys have links for these assertions you're making? Or sources that disprove the ideas you're getting riled up about? Lots of "I know more than you" here without evidence.
littleworm
Member
But then doesn't that undermine the whole purpose of NK nuclear ambitions? If your main bargaining chip in a negotiation is the use or threatened use of force and your opponent calls your bluff where do you go from there?
jakonovski
Member
North Korea is not a school shooter. In fact they've started zero wars after original post-WW2 conflict.
You either decide to go double down on your bluff or you back down because doubling down will be too costly.
I have yet to see any proof that Kim is some suicidal psychopath that would rather get himself nuked than live a happy life as some 3rd world dictator.
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
Yeah, I think some people need to consult Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_North_Korea. It's spelled out simply for us:
At this point, I have no idea what mental picture some people have of North Korea.
Herr Schwarz
Banned
The nature of a dictatorship isn't one of mutual disagreement. He *has* to do something eventually, he has to keep the hysteria of the general public at boiling point.
What dictactors out there don't end up making some kind of aggressive play?
Vlad is chomping at Ukraine and in the Mid East.
Assad is at the later stage of the dictatorship process undergoing the "people have had enough" phase.
You either drum beat for war, or your own people consume you, unless you kill them all first. Ergo all dictatorships.
Let's be clear here, there is no possibility whatsoever that N.Korea doesn't continue to escalate and destabilise in someway.
I struggle to find a functional dictatorship that isn't warlike. Maybe in Africa.
I never said nor do I believe NK would attack U.S even if they did get a nuke. At most all I see them doing is selling nuclear information (as they have been before), I doubt they would even sell a miniaturized nuke to someone they believe would use it on U.S or it's allies. I wonder who will be willing to stop and board a ship of a ICBM capable NK to stop proliferation attempts...
Who knows how their policy will change if they did get the capability to do so.
I said before, I fully believe in non-proliferation. Allowing one country for "reasons" to obtain nukes, sets a precedent. Just as I believe allowing everyone and anyone buy a gun is foolish, so too is letting everyone obtain nukes, because it only increases the likelihood of someone using it.
littleworm
Member
Which in either case would seem like a huge loss for North Korea. Where doubling down would likely lead to an armed conflict and result in the end of the regime, or lose all face in negotiations with the outside world, which could result in the loss of support for Kim from his regime followers. Now Kim isn't some ISIS stylized psychopath who would use these weapons the moment he has them this we can agree on. However the acquisition of feasible nuclear weapons on the part of the North Koreans dramatically raises the stakes in a situation where a group or groups of persons can find themselves in a lose lose situation.
jakonovski
Member
So how do you get from the above to starting a war that will inevitably ruin not only the target dictatorship but one of the most important economies of the world, causing death that conceivably goes to millions?
A lot of people are dismissing a New York Times piece that seems to imply NK already might have the capability of striking the continental US and as far away as Spain with a missile miniturized ICBM.
Lol, your post is laughable.
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
Go on!
immortald3ath
Member
Problem with American ppl is that they believe everything they see on TV or read online. They believe everyone out there is out to get them....when it's actually the other way around.
Well aware of that, but that only reaches Alaska, I am pretty sure when most people think of U.S (in this scenario) they think of California as the starting point.
Well at some point you must think of when you have to step in, that is when it should be. I do not believe an attack on U.S would happen, but I do believe it would give them a shield to do more than they can now such as sell nuclear information to those who will use the situation as a reason to obtain a nuke.
As I told you, the precedent is set, everyone knows it isn't safe to attack a nuclear power and even a power as great as U.S would likely not risk it. If everyone starts getting nukes, then it is only a matter of "when" not "if" a country will use it. There will be a country that will call out a bluff and end up being wrong about it.
True, and there can't be any since it needs to be an immediate decision unfortunately. Though we all hope that there are sane people who will receive these orders enough to make their own decision.
U.S won't strike first, though U.S do consider chemical and biological weapon attacks to be the same as a nuclear one.
Mainly your quote, since all of that is subject to their interpretation. I can say "All men are created equal" and start committing racist genocide and you will defend me using that statement as evidence? lol
jakonovski
Member
Funny how fear of US aggression is driving the quest for nukes. Time to look in the mirror? The UN is our best hope here, not threats of war.
Also, AQ Khan already sold nuclear tech to NK and god knows who else, and we're all still alive. Certainly didn't warrant war with Pakistan. Somehow non-Americans aren't all psychos despite what American media likes to portray.
And god knows who else? Come on man, you should realize how silly what you are saying is. Proliferation of nuke tech is being curtailed by U.S and its allies as best it can, including using defense treaties which is why the Saudis, SK, and Japan have no nukes despite having the knowledge and cash flow to obtain it.
It is fear of any threat that drives countries to nukes, not just U.S.
Diplomacy is the best hope, but war would be the last resort.
Sir Rugdumph
Member
jakonovski
Member
Checking Wikipedia, the beneficiaries were Libya, North Korea, Iran and China. All psychos if American propaganda is to be believed, yet here we are, alive. Not that proliferation is a good thing.
Your myopic pro-America view is not doing you any good.
IndoAssassin
Banned
With the stuff you hear about how he treats his populace, isn't it similar to Hitler?
Yet Hitler is considered to be a crazy fool.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Like I said before, playing a game of chicken when you're the side with everything to lose just doesn't work.
jakonovski
Member
What is your actual point? You originally wanted to tell me that North Korea is suicidal, now you switched to explaining how they treat their own people.
Bobnob
Member
cnn reporting a failed test.
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
Wow, crisis averted due to technicality?
jakonovski
Member
What a fucking sad state of affairs. These are the actions of a paranoid dictatorship deathly afraid for its own existence, not some mastermind out to destroy everyone.
They were never gonna test a working ICBM this year unless western intelligence is way off.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
The intent is all the same though, they were willing to go through with it despite the warnings.
Did you just describe Kim Jong-un or Trump?
Bobnob
Member
I got a bad feeling about this
Yeah, seems like this could be treated like an act of war from our dear leader.
Are you aware of how many tests have been conducted this year? This is nothing new, guarantee the U.S. knew this was coming. If they wanted to they could've done a preemptive strike.
Bobnob
Member
Have you not watched the news this week? This is'nt I he same situation as a month ago
jakonovski
Member
The risk is that even a failed test may puncture Trump's ego.
IndoAssassin
Banned
I never said they were suicidal, I implied you can never understand a person's mental state, until it's too late.
They seem determined to accomplish it, and I think, or fear, they will soon enough. I'm recalling that Times article about how the Obama administration got nervous near the end of its term at North Korea's progress.
IndoAssassin
Banned
I don't understand how people think NK will never be able to build world wide ICBM's. India was able to send a probe to Mars. The gov't in India is one of the most corrupt gov't in the world.
That is why I say, give SK and Japan enough nukes to level NK and China and call it a day. Nobody will attack anybody then.
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
Trial and error, they are learning from failures.
Not sure how you get China and Iran as being psycho (I don't know much about Libya), we are more informed than average populace, we can ignore the propaganda.
Iran and Libya don't have nukes.
Only 7 countries of the world's 196 countries have nukes and capabilities to launch them. Not even 10% of the countries that exist.
Again, since I seem to have to keep repeating it, I am talking about if diplomacy fails and that failure means they are absolutely close to obtaining it and won't back down. Unfortunately, they are already close and when negotiation attempts fail, I will fully support intervening.
If every country in the world have nukes, do you really think it would still never be used? That is quite some confidence you have.
Also its not just ICBMs... NK still have to miniaturize the nuke to fit it in a warhead (which we don't think they have done yet). For other countries, there are plenty of warning signs of them developing nuclear energy for military purposes over civilian ones. But you are indeed right, sooner or later many countries are going to have the capability of sending rockets accurately into space, which is basically what an ICBM is. This is why the IAEA exist, to give those warning signs I mentioned earlier.
Are you joking? The North Korean constitution says they're super peaceful, so it must be so! Was crossing the 38th parallel (and massacring South Koreans on their way) in the Korean War in line with their peaceful ideals? Shelling Yeongpyeongdo? Sinking the Cheonan? Attempting (on multiple occasions) to assassinate Park Chunghee? Kidnapping (for decades) South Korean and Japanese citizens? Constantly issuing threats to turn either South Korea or the U.S. (or both) into a "sea of fire"? Just FYI, North Korea's elite makes most of its foreign currency through smuggling weapons, drugrunning, prostitution, and goods created with slave labor.
Neither the North Korean constitution nor its penal code contains any prohibition for North Korean women having sex with black men, but why is it that African exchange students and engineers testify that North Korean women who engaged in relationships with them ended up spirited away by the state? Are they all liars? Do you presume those women were sent to one of North Korea's many gulags and internment camps, or do those not exist?
I mean, seriously, what the fuck does the constitution (a fucking sham document in most countries and especially in North Korea) have anything to say about what kind of behavior the state engages in? Do you extend the same credulity to the U.S. constitution? Do you think the American state doesn't engage in cruel and unusual punishment? Does it really guarantee all of its citizens equal protection under the law? Then why would you not apply the same skepticism to claims of the North Korean constitution?
Xyrmellon
Member
Well said.
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
Probably because that war is still going on
iRAWRasaurus
Banned
:lol that sounds like a wonderful idea..
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
They are surrounded by Russia, China and South Korea (with American backing). They never signed a peace treaty for the end of the Korean war and they've been a deplorable, oppressive regime ever since.
Good post.
Being an apologist for NK's regime is so disrespectful of the many North Koreans who have been killed, tortured, or imprisoned by the whims of the regime.
With that said, I agree that NK, while an awful country and a pariah state such that even China is horrified by its human rights record, is not an irrational actor. It has actually done a fairly good job of going right up to the line of irrationality without fully crossing it, and has benefited from that with aid that it would not have otherwise received.
- Status