Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   North Korea threatens pre-emptive nuclear strike in retaliation for Dennis Rodman   (foxnews.com) divider line 277
    More: Scary, Dennis Rodman, North Koreans, United States, Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, international sanctions, nuclear wars, U.N. Security Council, ballistic missiles  
•       •       •

10609 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Mar 2013 at 8:26 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



277 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-07 09:54:10 AM  
Isn't that kind of like a guy standing in the middle of the street with a pellet gun surrounded by swat, threatening to shoot everyone dead. Ok then N Korea.....draw.
 
2013-03-07 09:54:20 AM  

Danack: BillCo: The only reason they continue to support them is because they know it annoys the rest of the free world.

No, look at a map.

Beijing is about 500km from China's border with North Korea. If the Koreas are ever re-united, they will probably be dominated politically by the Southern politicians, who may allow the US to station troops (or more likely short range missiles) within range of the Chinese capital.

That's the reason why China is supporting the North Korean regime.


Well the States can always agree to keep their armed forces firmly behind the existing DMZ once the Norks are defeated and quite frankly keeping the peace in a former NK should be the problem of the UN or SK. It's not an unsurmountable problem.
 
2013-03-07 09:56:33 AM  

pag1107: ferretman: MmmmBacon: GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.

No, but they can place bombs in a container ship and make San Francisco harbor useless for quite a while. It would be a "blow against the Imperialist Dogs", symbolic and ultimately deadly to the NK leadership. SF wouldn't be destroyed, but a lot of damage near the bay and probably thousands of sick and injured civilians, deaths under 5000 at most.

you obviously no nothing about nuclear weapons. Best Korea doesn't have tactical battlefield nukes (which would cause small casualties. They would have something similar to Hiroshima or Nagasaki...you'd be talking high 5 figure deaths at a a minimum.

Here's your scenario mapped out.  I was generous and gave them a 25 kT bomb (larger than anything they've tested so far) smuggled into the harbor in San Francisco and detonated on a docked ship.  You'd probably lose a few city blocks around the immediate blast area and have a lot of broken windows but it wouldn't be the conflagration you're making it out to be, especially in a major West Coast city with earthquake-hardened buildings.  Sure people would be killed and everybody would be pissed off but we wouldn't lose a city by any stretch of the imagination.

http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/gmap/hydesim.html?dll=37.80437,-122.3 96 58&yd=25&zm=11&op=156


Yes, I think San Francisco has four of them.
 
2013-03-07 09:56:57 AM  

Zenith: Danack: BillCo: The only reason they continue to support them is because they know it annoys the rest of the free world.

No, look at a map.

Beijing is about 500km from China's border with North Korea. If the Koreas are ever re-united, they will probably be dominated politically by the Southern politicians, who may allow the US to station troops (or more likely short range missiles) within range of the Chinese capital.

That's the reason why China is supporting the North Korean regime.

Well the States can always agree to keep their armed forces firmly behind the existing DMZ once the Norks are defeated and quite frankly keeping the peace in a former NK should be the problem of the UN or SK. It's not an unsurmountable problem.


Technically speaking NK is at war with SK and the UN, not the US...

i.qkme.me
 
2013-03-07 09:57:07 AM  

SuperChuck: deanis: Theory Of Null: TheShavingofOccam123: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7630360/82905127#c82905127" target="_blank">SubBass49</a>:</b> <i>Basically North Korea is the global version of Milton from Office Space.

[www.investitwisely.com image 300x225]

Everybody thinks his mumbling threats are full of shiat...and usually they are...but one of these days something bad will probably happen if something doesn't change.</i>

So we should drop cakes on them instead of nukes? Or big red staplers? Your strange metaphor confuses and frightens me.

/I'm just a caveman
/I will sue you and your whole crummy airline!

Drop the entire 1996 Chicago Bulls Team on them.
[www.nba.com image 350x240]

This is way off topic but there is a stunning lack of tattoos in that photo. Also, who the fark is #54 and #34? Looks like they picked those guys right out of my local YMCA.

Only if your local YMCA tends to have 7 footers running around. I'm pretty sure 34 is Bill Wennington


I have never seen a one foot tall person, let alone 7 of them! Go home Superchuck, you are drunk!
 
2013-03-07 09:57:55 AM  

spentmiles: We should chopper into North Korea, kidnap The Dear Eater, and take him to a warehouse set-up with video equipment.  We then start the cameras rolling and record Dolf Lundgren pulling down Fatty's pants, bending him over his knee, and spanking him.  Then use our broadcast laser to play it on the moon, over and over again, for six weeks.  Then, carpet bomb the entire stretch of desolate shiat farms until every last soldier, civilian, and animal is dead.  Then spray radioactive fluid over every square inch.  Then delete every mention of North Korea from every book on the planet.  Then just wander around, looking at one another, knowing how awesome we are.


Ooh, kinky. What are you doing Saturday night?
 
2013-03-07 10:00:25 AM  

SubBass49: AverageAmericanGuy: Thanks, Dubya. Pre-emptive strikes as foreign policy were a really great idea.

NOT.

I'm not exactly a pro-war guy, but I'd love to see China stand off to the side and say, "Sorry guys, you're on your own...take your best shot USA, we're not getting involved."  Just park a few destroyers and carriers off the coast and light the damn place up like the 4th of July.  Make sure we've got a STABLE shadow government waiting in the wings.

Then reunification, etc.



www.thewhirlingwind.com
 
2013-03-07 10:00:57 AM  

MythDragon: Best Korea:
[www.nicklasholmgren.com image 850x531]

They think they want our attention. They don't.


That's just all kinds of awesome!

And spentmiles has another awesome post. I feel bad that a little part of me likes the idea.
 
2013-03-07 10:02:51 AM  

wraithmare: MythDragon: Best Korea:
[www.nicklasholmgren.com image 850x531]

They think they want our attention. They don't.

That's just all kinds of awesome!

And spentmiles has another awesome post. I feel bad that a little part of me likes the idea.


You like the spanking part.
 
2013-03-07 10:02:56 AM  

doglover: ferretman: you obviously no nothing about nuclear weapons. Best Korea doesn't have tactical battlefield nukes (which would cause small casualties. They would have something similar to Hiroshima or Nagasaki...you'd be talking high 5 figure deaths at a a minimum.

ಠ_ಠ

Have you never heard of Ohio? the midwest?


:)
Best Korea's ballistic missile technology can not reach that far...yet.
 
2013-03-07 10:03:30 AM  

DanInKansas: Love the Bush hate on the thread.  Because you know, for the thousands of years civilization has existed, no armed power ever threatened anyone else with a pre-emptive attack or invented a reason to go to war out of thin air.   And certainly before Bush there were never any power mad dictators who got too big for their britches with inevitable results.


Take a deep breath, and say this out loud:

"Fark is a left-wing echo chamber."

Any time you get the urge to reply to a b-b-b-b-but Bush post, stop what you're doing, and say it out loud again. It'll help you get a grip on the political tone of Fark.

/For the love of FSM stay out of the Politics tab
//It's the left-wing version of Freepers
 
2013-03-07 10:04:32 AM  

Mad_Radhu: ferretman: MmmmBacon: GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.

No, but they can place bombs in a container ship and make San Francisco harbor useless for quite a while. It would be a "blow against the Imperialist Dogs", symbolic and ultimately deadly to the NK leadership. SF wouldn't be destroyed, but a lot of damage near the bay and probably thousands of sick and injured civilians, deaths under 5000 at most.

you obviously no nothing about nuclear weapons. Best Korea doesn't have tactical battlefield nukes (which would cause small casualties. They would have something similar to Hiroshima or Nagasaki...you'd be talking high 5 figure deaths at a a minimum.

But don't you actually have to be sending shipments of things to a country first before you can run the nuke in a container ship gambit. They have no trade with the US, so sending a container ship to us seems a bit suspicious. Maybe they could sneak something in through China, but you'd think the Chinese would frown upon shenanigans that threaten its global trade.


or through their ally Iran.
 
2013-03-07 10:05:10 AM  
They've certainly got a better claim of clear and imminent danger really: the US than the US has had about any of the countries it has sacked in the past couple decades.
 
2013-03-07 10:06:42 AM  
img.photobucket.com
SUBASS49 You inspired me.
 
2013-03-07 10:07:22 AM  

pag1107: ferretman: MmmmBacon: GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.

No, but they can place bombs in a container ship and make San Francisco harbor useless for quite a while. It would be a "blow against the Imperialist Dogs", symbolic and ultimately deadly to the NK leadership. SF wouldn't be destroyed, but a lot of damage near the bay and probably thousands of sick and injured civilians, deaths under 5000 at most.

you obviously no nothing about nuclear weapons. Best Korea doesn't have tactical battlefield nukes (which would cause small casualties. They would have something similar to Hiroshima or Nagasaki...you'd be talking high 5 figure deaths at a a minimum.

Here's your scenario mapped out.  I was generous and gave them a 25 kT bomb (larger than anything they've tested so far) smuggled into the harbor in San Francisco and detonated on a docked ship.  You'd probably lose a few city blocks around the immediate blast area and have a lot of broken windows but it wouldn't be the conflagration you're making it out to be, especially in a major West Coast city with earthquake-hardened buildings.  Sure people would be killed and everybody would be pissed off but we wouldn't lose a city by any stretch of the imagination.

http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/gmap/hydesim.html?dll=37.80437,-122.3 96 58&yd=25&zm=11&op=156


Windows can break at 0.1 so everyone within a dozen miles is going to need new pants.

/Smuggling a nuke is a horrid, high-risk way of doing business, and it's incredibly unlikely
 
2013-03-07 10:07:24 AM  

deanis: SuperChuck: deanis: Theory Of Null: TheShavingofOccam123: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7630360/82905127#c82905127" target="_blank">SubBass49</a>:</b> <i>Basically North Korea is the global version of Milton from Office Space.

[www.investitwisely.com image 300x225]

Everybody thinks his mumbling threats are full of shiat...and usually they are...but one of these days something bad will probably happen if something doesn't change.</i>

So we should drop cakes on them instead of nukes? Or big red staplers? Your strange metaphor confuses and frightens me.

/I'm just a caveman
/I will sue you and your whole crummy airline!

Drop the entire 1996 Chicago Bulls Team on them.
[www.nba.com image 350x240]

This is way off topic but there is a stunning lack of tattoos in that photo. Also, who the fark is #54 and #34? Looks like they picked those guys right out of my local YMCA.

Only if your local YMCA tends to have 7 footers running around. I'm pretty sure 34 is Bill Wennington

I have never seen a one foot tall person, let alone 7 of them! Go home Superchuck, you are drunk!


Shesh! You sound like my boss!
 
2013-03-07 10:07:35 AM  
That's it! This has to stop. I'm sending in that cocksucker Hans Brix!
 
2013-03-07 10:07:50 AM  
Re: the us.

Fugging spell check.
 
2013-03-07 10:08:54 AM  

neongoats: MmmmBacon: GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.

No, but they can place bombs in a container ship and make San Francisco harbor useless for quite a while. It would be a "blow against the Imperialist Dogs", symbolic and ultimately deadly to the NK leadership. SF wouldn't be destroyed, but a lot of damage near the bay and probably thousands of sick and injured civilians, deaths under 5000 at most.

Why do you people keep prattling this derpy nonsense.

"Omg NK might send a container ship to San Francisco! how ever will stop this great menace."

I dunno, our huge navy, satellite surveillance, or one guy with a tug boat and some farking binoculars. Jesus fark this container ship thing you tards keep repeating is the dumbest thing ever.


You know how I know you don't know how shipborne containers are tracked (which is to say, barely tracked at all)? North Korea couldn't send a ship from its ports to SF without being stopped, sure. But with enough bribes to the right Chinese bureaucrats, they conceivably could sneak a container into China, put it on a ship full of crap headed for Wal-Mart, and accomplish the same purpose. I'm not saying it's likely, but it's practicable.
 
2013-03-07 10:09:25 AM  

pag1107: ferretman: MmmmBacon: GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.

No, but they can place bombs in a container ship and make San Francisco harbor useless for quite a while. It would be a "blow against the Imperialist Dogs", symbolic and ultimately deadly to the NK leadership. SF wouldn't be destroyed, but a lot of damage near the bay and probably thousands of sick and injured civilians, deaths under 5000 at most.

you obviously no nothing about nuclear weapons. Best Korea doesn't have tactical battlefield nukes (which would cause small casualties. They would have something similar to Hiroshima or Nagasaki...you'd be talking high 5 figure deaths at a a minimum.

Here's your scenario mapped out.  I was generous and gave them a 25 kT bomb (larger than anything they've tested so far) smuggled into the harbor in San Francisco and detonated on a docked ship.  You'd probably lose a few city blocks around the immediate blast area and have a lot of broken windows but it wouldn't be the conflagration you're making it out to be, especially in a major West Coast city with earthquake-hardened buildings.  Sure people would be killed and everybody would be pissed off but we wouldn't lose a city by any stretch of the imagination.

http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/gmap/hydesim.html?dll=37.80437,-122.3 96 58&yd=25&zm=11&op=156


You have to take into account the radiation as well...look how many died from radiation in Japan in WWII.
 
2013-03-07 10:09:44 AM  

Daercoma: [img.photobucket.com image 300x225]
SUBASS49 You inspired me.


Well done!
 
2013-03-07 10:09:59 AM  

JackieRabbit: Scary, Subby? I see you don't know much about North Korea. They posture like this in response to our posturing to them -- which is precisely what our joint exercises with South Korea is. We go through this every few years as a prelude to some negotiation. We've been playing this stupid game with them for 60 years. Their beloved leader has to do what is expected of him, but he isn't stupid enough to launch a nuclear weapon at the US (even if he had a vehicle capable of this, which he doesn't). China would would roar over his his boarder within days and Russia, China and the US would wipe every major NK city off the map in retaliation.


You realize we do these joint exercises with the South Koreans damn near every year right?  My dad did Team Spirit back in 1989, And I did UFL back in the late 90's/Early 00's.  They're our allies.  We run exercises with lots of other countries too.  I participated in some exercise in Norway once.  We train with the Brits, the Thais, and a stack of other countries.  It isn't posturing, it's good training.  Hell, the Soviets used to run yearly exercises in East Germany, and we'd do the same in West, but I don't remember anyone threatening preemptive nuclear attacks.
 
2013-03-07 10:10:02 AM  

Ring of Fire: A country was mean to his daddy so now that he's in the big chair he's gonna launch a preemptive strike. Wants to be a "war president".

Kim Jong Un or George W Bush.


As an American, I am sad that this comparison is even possible, sadder that it is reasonable.
 
2013-03-07 10:10:13 AM  

GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.


Problem I see is they don't really need an ICBM if they have cargo freighters; not THAT hard to get a dirty bomb near our coastline, upwind.
 
2013-03-07 10:11:04 AM  

spentmiles: We should chopper into North Korea, kidnap The Dear Eater, and take him to a warehouse set-up with video equipment.  We then start the cameras rolling and record Dolf Lundgren pulling down Fatty's pants, bending him over his knee, and spanking him.  Then use our broadcast laser to play it on the moon, over and over again, for six weeks.  Then, carpet bomb the entire stretch of desolate shiat farms until every last soldier, civilian, and animal is dead.  Then spray radioactive fluid over every square inch.  Then delete every mention of North Korea from every book on the planet.  Then just wander around, looking at one another, knowing how awesome we are.


24.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-03-07 10:11:09 AM  

mbillips: neongoats: MmmmBacon: GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.

No, but they can place bombs in a container ship and make San Francisco harbor useless for quite a while. It would be a "blow against the Imperialist Dogs", symbolic and ultimately deadly to the NK leadership. SF wouldn't be destroyed, but a lot of damage near the bay and probably thousands of sick and injured civilians, deaths under 5000 at most.

Why do you people keep prattling this derpy nonsense.

"Omg NK might send a container ship to San Francisco! how ever will stop this great menace."

I dunno, our huge navy, satellite surveillance, or one guy with a tug boat and some farking binoculars. Jesus fark this container ship thing you tards keep repeating is the dumbest thing ever.

You know how I know you don't know how shipborne containers are tracked (which is to say, barely tracked at all)? North Korea couldn't send a ship from its ports to SF without being stopped, sure. But with enough bribes to the right Chinese bureaucrats, they conceivably could sneak a container into China, put it on a ship full of crap headed for Wal-Mart, and accomplish the same purpose. I'm not saying it's likely, but it's practicable.


There are so many obstacles to overcome that the physical practicality of trying to get a container with a nuke in it to the US is the least of the hurdles.
 
2013-03-07 10:11:13 AM  
I know NK missle cannot reach Florida, so no worries.
 
2013-03-07 10:11:48 AM  
And here I thought it would be Gandhi that got us:

i212.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-07 10:12:39 AM  

Pick: I know NK missle cannot reach Florida, so no worries.


Maybe we could help them with that.
 
2013-03-07 10:12:47 AM  

neongoats: Mad_Radhu: ferretman: MmmmBacon: GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.

No, but they can place bombs in a container ship and make San Francisco harbor useless for quite a while. It would be a "blow against the Imperialist Dogs", symbolic and ultimately deadly to the NK leadership. SF wouldn't be destroyed, but a lot of damage near the bay and probably thousands of sick and injured civilians, deaths under 5000 at most.

you obviously no nothing about nuclear weapons. Best Korea doesn't have tactical battlefield nukes (which would cause small casualties. They would have something similar to Hiroshima or Nagasaki...you'd be talking high 5 figure deaths at a a minimum.

But don't you actually have to be sending shipments of things to a country first before you can run the nuke in a container ship gambit. They have no trade with the US, so sending a container ship to us seems a bit suspicious. Maybe they could sneak something in through China, but you'd think the Chinese would frown upon shenanigans that threaten its global trade.

Only a few of the eleventhousandmillionbillion reasons why the entire "OMGZ Container ships!!11eleventy!!" scenario is so completely retarded that only the criminally stupid keep bringing it up.


So..... are you saying that the Obama administration is criminally stupid for quietly ramping up, over the last 4 years,  the container inspection programs at Long Beach and San Francisco.... and at sea through USCG intercepts?
 
2013-03-07 10:12:50 AM  

SuperChuck: Danack: BillCo: The only reason they continue to support them is because they know it annoys the rest of the free world.

No, look at a map.

Beijing is about 500km from China's border with North Korea. If the Koreas are ever re-united, they will probably be dominated politically by the Southern politicians, who may allow the US to station troops (or more likely short range missiles) within range of the Chinese capital.

That's the reason why China is supporting the North Korean regime.

If Korea were to reunite, the most likely result is far fewer US troops there, not more.


That's what I'm thinking, or if China were to stabilize NK by installing a puppet government or making it an unofficial province. most US troops would leave, at the moment China is holding them there by propping up NK.
 
2013-03-07 10:13:21 AM  

PunGent: GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.

Problem I see is they don't really need an ICBM if they have cargo freighters; not THAT hard to get a dirty bomb near our coastline, upwind.


A dirty bomb isn't a terribly useful weapon.

And there are reasons countries generally develop missiles rather than arming stealth cargo containers, and it's not because missiles look more like penises.
 
2013-03-07 10:14:08 AM  

Pick: I know NK missle cannot reach Florida, so no worries.


NK surely is not worried about Florida...The citizens of that state are nuking themselves....
 
2013-03-07 10:14:19 AM  

yagottabefarkinkiddinme: Never more appropriate

In response, what does our country do now?

Do we preempt their attack now?

Never thought I would actually see nuclear war. WWIII is at our doorstep.


kunochan.com

I hate to interrupt your panic, but North Korea neither has a viable strategic nuclear weapon to deploy, nor has a delivery mechanism in place. Unless you think that they are going to load an experimental bomb into a panel truck and drive it into Seoul.

It's a long way to go from this:

nnsa.energy.gov

To This:

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-03-07 10:15:20 AM  
So when will the U.S. take these threats seriously? Why aren't we at like DEFCON 2 or something? Is it just because we think they are full of shiat? Yeah we are pretty sure they don't have the capability of launching an ICBM at us, but we been wrong before. After all we were damned sure Iraq had WMD's that we never found.

I guess it's because we are used to their ramblings
 
2013-03-07 10:15:33 AM  
The thing I find amusing about the Norks is that let's say they do launch a bomb at Seoul or place a bomb in a container ship and set it off on the US coast.  Yes, innocents will die.  But they lack the ability to sustain a lengthy war.  We would turn that country into glass, as would Worst Korea and China.  They can barely feed their massive army.  They sure as hell could not continue to do so if major instructive is taken out by targeted bombings on our part.
 
2013-03-07 10:16:24 AM  

KarmicDisaster: SuperChuck: Danack: BillCo: The only reason they continue to support them is because they know it annoys the rest of the free world.

No, look at a map.

Beijing is about 500km from China's border with North Korea. If the Koreas are ever re-united, they will probably be dominated politically by the Southern politicians, who may allow the US to station troops (or more likely short range missiles) within range of the Chinese capital.

That's the reason why China is supporting the North Korean regime.

If Korea were to reunite, the most likely result is far fewer US troops there, not more.

That's what I'm thinking, or if China were to stabilize NK by installing a puppet government or making it an unofficial province. most US troops would leave, at the moment China is holding them there by propping up NK.


The question isn't what we're most likely to do, but what the Chinese think we're most likely to do. China has good reasons not to trust foreigners, and they still smart from the century of humiliation.
 
2013-03-07 10:17:22 AM  

Homer Elmer: So when will the U.S. take these threats seriously? Why aren't we at like DEFCON 2 or something? Is it just because we think they are full of shiat? Yeah we are pretty sure they don't have the capability of launching an ICBM at us, but we been wrong before. After all we were damned sure Iraq had WMD's that we never found.

I guess it's because we are used to their ramblings


No, it's because Benghazi, that's why.
 
2013-03-07 10:17:32 AM  

Homer Elmer: So when will the U.S. take these threats seriously? Why aren't we at like DEFCON 2 or something? Is it just because we think they are full of shiat? Yeah we are pretty sure they don't have the capability of launching an ICBM at us, but we been wrong before. After all we were damned sure Iraq had WMD's that we never found.

I guess it's because we are used to their ramblings


The US has 60 years of experience dealing with Nuclear posturing and threats. First from Russia, then from China before the fall of the Berlin Wall.

60 years of dealing with coming within one person and one computer error away from starting a nuclear war and annihilating the entire human race.

It's hilarious to think that the US would blink because of North Korea.
 
2013-03-07 10:18:20 AM  

Endive Wombat: The thing I find amusing about the Norks is that let's say they do launch a bomb at Seoul or place a bomb in a container ship and set it off on the US coast.  Yes, innocents will die.  But they lack the ability to sustain a lengthy war.  We would turn that country into glass, as would Worst Korea and China.  They can barely feed their massive army.  They sure as hell could not continue to do so if major instructive is taken out by targeted bombings on our part.


North Korea is more rational than people give it credit for.
 
2013-03-07 10:18:30 AM  
At least we will get rid of all those annoying hipsters in Seattle...
 
2013-03-07 10:22:04 AM  

devildog123: JackieRabbit: Scary, Subby? I see you don't know much about North Korea. They posture like this in response to our posturing to them -- which is precisely what our joint exercises with South Korea is. We go through this every few years as a prelude to some negotiation. We've been playing this stupid game with them for 60 years. Their beloved leader has to do what is expected of him, but he isn't stupid enough to launch a nuclear weapon at the US (even if he had a vehicle capable of this, which he doesn't). China would would roar over his his boarder within days and Russia, China and the US would wipe every major NK city off the map in retaliation.

You realize we do these joint exercises with the South Koreans damn near every year right?  My dad did Team Spirit back in 1989, And I did UFL back in the late 90's/Early 00's.  They're our allies.  We run exercises with lots of other countries too.  I participated in some exercise in Norway once.  We train with the Brits, the Thais, and a stack of other countries.  It isn't posturing, it's good training.  Hell, the Soviets used to run yearly exercises in East Germany, and we'd do the same in West, but I don't remember anyone threatening preemptive nuclear attacks.


And UFL is done as a computer-only exercise just to AVOID irritating Best Korea. We have absolutely no reason to poke at North Korea with a stick, and they have every reason to pretend that we ARE provoking them, both for domestic and international PR reasons.
 
2013-03-07 10:22:05 AM  
RIP, Korean Hookers
 
2013-03-07 10:23:09 AM  

spentmiles: We should chopper into North Korea, kidnap The Dear Eater, and take him to a warehouse set-up with video equipment.  We then start the cameras rolling and record Dolf Lundgren pulling down Fatty's pants, bending him over his knee, and spanking him.  Then use our broadcast laser to play it on the moon, over and over again, for six weeks.  Then, carpet bomb the entire stretch of desolate shiat farms until every last soldier, civilian, and animal is dead.  Then spray radioactive fluid over every square inch.  Then delete every mention of North Korea from every book on the planet.  Then just wander around, looking at one another, knowing how awesome we are.


Why do almost every one of your posts come off as the script to some oddly high budgeted fetish porn movie?

I mean, I know that sometimes a cigar is JUST a cigar, but I gotta ask....
 
2013-03-07 10:24:49 AM  
They would launch a nuke aimed at us. It would blow up on the launchpad. Then, they will tell the rest of the world that we shot a nuke at them, and are the aggressor.
 
2013-03-07 10:25:33 AM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: neongoats: Mad_Radhu: ferretman: MmmmBacon: GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.

No, but they can place bombs in a container ship and make San Francisco harbor useless for quite a while. It would be a "blow against the Imperialist Dogs", symbolic and ultimately deadly to the NK leadership. SF wouldn't be destroyed, but a lot of damage near the bay and probably thousands of sick and injured civilians, deaths under 5000 at most.

you obviously no nothing about nuclear weapons. Best Korea doesn't have tactical battlefield nukes (which would cause small casualties. They would have something similar to Hiroshima or Nagasaki...you'd be talking high 5 figure deaths at a a minimum.

But don't you actually have to be sending shipments of things to a country first before you can run the nuke in a container ship gambit. They have no trade with the US, so sending a container ship to us seems a bit suspicious. Maybe they could sneak something in through China, but you'd think the Chinese would frown upon shenanigans that threaten its global trade.

Only a few of the eleventhousandmillionbillion reasons why the entire "OMGZ Container ships!!11eleventy!!" scenario is so completely retarded that only the criminally stupid keep bringing it up.

So..... are you saying that the Obama administration is criminally stupid for quietly ramping up, over the last 4 years,  the container inspection programs at Long Beach and San Francisco.... and at sea through USCG intercepts?


I think you underestimate how poorly overseen Chinese regional authorities are. Throw enough cash at a Chinese bureaucrat, sell him some believable story about how you're smuggling spies or blood diamonds or something, and your container whisks straight through. And once it's in the legitimate trade pipeline, just about nobody checks on it other than to scan the bar code. Obama has increased container inspections, but it's still a VERY porous barrier.
 
2013-03-07 10:27:49 AM  
I gotta say, I can't see this happening.

And if it did happen, I probably wouldn't see it coming.

So, fear level = 0.
 
2013-03-07 10:28:10 AM  
I came here for a "Back To School" reference or at least a "Beneath The Planet of The Apes" reference or even a "Dr. Strangelove" reference and left disappointed.
 
2013-03-07 10:28:36 AM  

shaunmark: They would launch a nuke aimed at us. It would blow up on the launchpad. Then, they will tell the rest of the world that we shot a nuke at them, and are the aggressor.


And most of the world's governments with more than a $10 budget would know they are lying. Some would say so. Others would say they have no opinion. Still others would confirm it either because the lie is useful or they really don't care what the truth is. And a whole bunch of people here would believe it because their own internal view of the world is confirmed by it, and they will spend years repeating the lie on fark, causing me to cancel my TF and leave forever.

So... win?
 
2013-03-07 10:29:04 AM  

mbillips: I think you underestimate how poorly overseen Chinese regional authorities are. Throw enough cash at a Chinese bureaucrat, sell him some believable story about how you're smuggling spies or blood diamonds or something, and your container whisks straight through. And once it's in the legitimate trade pipeline, just about nobody checks on it other than to scan the bar code. Obama has increased container inspections, but it's still a VERY porous barrier.


I  think you highly overestimate the technological prowess of the North Koreans in this. Their technology level is basically pre-level of the Trinity Shot that US did in 1945, and they have no viable weapon - strategic or tactical - deployed in any capacity with any delivery mechanism at this time.
 
Displayed 50 of 277 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report