The Trump Presidency - how I stopped worrying and learned to love the Hair

Hearsay is when someone tells you what they heard. Wolff was inside the Whitehouse and is reporting on what he saw and on the results of dozens of interviews.

prizrak;n3544630 said:
Certainly a possibility. Though NK is interested in talking now and wasn?t before so something changed?

P.S. I still need to read the fire and fury book

Yeah, they have nuclear weapons and a working delivery system. Kim wants that recognition on a global level and attending the Olympics in the south is a great way to get it.
 
Last edited:
Blind_Io;n3544649 said:
Yeah, they have nuclear weapons and a working delivery system. Kim wants that recognition on a global level and attending the Olympics in the south is a great way to get it.
They?ve had short and medium range for a while now, it?s the long range they keep working on and failing.
 
Short, medium, or long range doesn't really matter much when there's a nuke on top. Regardless of whether they nuke South Korea, Japan, or Hawaii - all the shit hits all the fans.
 
They can hit Alaska, Hawaii, and anyone in their neighborhood - including northern Europe. Now they have the ability to put a nuclear warhead on those missiles.

Just because they can't hit New York yet doesn't mean they aren't a global nuclear power. Their advancement in the last couple years took analysts by surprise. We thought they were a couple decades away from a 10,000-12,000 km range missile, now it looks more like 1-2 years.
 
I didn't say that short and medium range wasn't a threat simply that it was something that they've had for a while.
 
It?s not a concern to the media until the glorious NYC or northeastern seaboard is a target.
 
I'm not the media... though it seems that video might be somewhat outdated as I have found some later dated stories that state U.S. intelligence believes they actually have a small enough nuke now.

To be honest I don't have much concern about it not because NYC couldn't be hit but they simply don't have a global kill capability, even if they could deliver a couple of nukes to HI or AK they would be completely obliterated by the response, which they know.
 
Last edited:
prizrak;n3544659 said:
I didn't say that short and medium range wasn't a threat simply that it was something that they've had for a while.

The difference is that now they can tip those missiles with nuclear warheads. They developed the missiles before they managed to miniaturize the nuclear warhead - it's the combination of the two that have changed the game.
 
'North Korea acts like they're dealing with Mutually Assured Destruction when everyone knows it's really Singularly Assured Desctruction . . . SAD.'
 
kunedog;n3544787 said:
'North Korea acts like they're dealing with Mutually Assured Destruction when everyone knows it's really Singularly Assured Desctruction . . . SAD.'


Is it just me, or does anyone else feel that the USA (i.e. Trump), North Korea, Iran, Russia....none of these players are going to shoot off nukes. The only nuclear threat is from a loose nuke, like from Pakistan etc...or if it becomes a failed state (not that its succeeding in any way)
 
Firecat;n3544801 said:
Is it just me, or does anyone else feel that the USA (i.e. Trump), North Korea, Iran, Russia....none of these players are going to shoot off nukes. The only nuclear threat is from a loose nuke, like from Pakistan etc...or if it becomes a failed state (not that its succeeding in any way)

Sometimes war comes from something nobody was expecting.

A little event who cause the spark that put fire to the powder barrel. The missile alert in Hawaii could have been one if they did not cancelled it after ten minutes. A military exercice that turn bad, a civil plane/boat shut down or anything else.

We don't always know from where it will come from. The more players you have around the table, the more chances it can happen.
 
Firecat;n3544801 said:
Is it just me, or does anyone else feel that the USA (i.e. Trump), North Korea, Iran, Russia....none of these players are going to shoot off nukes. The only nuclear threat is from a loose nuke, like from Pakistan etc...or if it becomes a failed state (not that its succeeding in any way)

NK could be a threat, Russia and China are not likely simply because they have a lot to lose. A regime like NK cannot appear weak and if they do threaten and get called on their bluff there is a good chance of them following through. They will get annihilated by the response for sure but if they hit any major target...
 
Chibouki;n3544816 said:
Sometimes war comes from something nobody was expecting.

A little event who cause the spark that put fire to the powder barrel. The missile alert in Hawaii could have been one if they did not cancelled it after ten minutes. A military exercice that turn bad, a civil plane/boat shut down or anything else.

We don't always know from where it will come from. The more players you have around the table, the more chances it can happen.


True. Like Stanislav Petrov... "The man who single-handidly saved the world from nuclear war"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Petrov

Definitely makes the argument for nobody to have nukes
 
Chibouki;n3544816 said:
The missile alert in Hawaii could have been one if they did not cancelled it after ten minutes.

For what it's worth, it was 38 minutes. About 26 minutes longer than it would have taken a missile (capable of hitting Hawaii) to hit Hawaii.
 
NecroJoe;n3544834 said:
For what it's worth, it was 38 minutes. About 26 minutes longer than it would have taken a missile (capable of hitting Hawaii) to hit Hawaii.

38 minutes? Wow... That's a long time for something to happen... Thanks for the precision.
 
Hang on, I'm putting a reminder in my calendar to point you back to this thread in five years when your cuts expire and you blame the Democrats for raising taxes and increasing the debt.
 
Top