What would you do?

[markharr]

This is a discussion about what would you do if you were president.

Simple. I would resign.

As a result of my association with a Colorado Senator when I was considering going into politics, I have come to believe with all of my heart that if you go into politics, you will almost certainly be one of only two things:

1) Corrupt.

-OR-

2) Ineffective.

I do not believe there is an option 3. I am fully aware of my great susceptibility to corruption, and I don't need any additional opportunities to screw my life up.

So at a time when your country could be facing its biggest crisis and with eight minutes to act you would resign???

[shadow]

And yet you still don't have a solution that hasn't already been tried and failed. You just criticize those that are trying to solve the problem.

We tried deploying the THAAD missile system to our military bases in S. Korea and Japan and it failed to shoot down a missile headed for Guam? Oh, my apologies. I thought that would work like the 14 other times it succeeded in intercepting missiles during practice.

Or are you referring to failed diplomacy? Because threatening nuclear annihilation isn't really my kind of diplomacy. In fact threatening to turn them into a smoking crater doesn't even fit the definition of diplomacy.

Definition of diplomacy
1 the art and practice of conducting negotiations between nations
2 skill in handling affairs without arousing hostility : tact handled the awkward situation with diplomacy

How about you? Can you think of anything that might work besides "finishing the job we started in the 1950s"? Or is that the only "correct" answer you're willing to accept?

It wouldn't matter what is done. You would smugly criticize the end result when it was over.

Actually, if we achieved peace without nuking or killing anyone, I would applaud loudly and sincerely. Heck, I might even develop a smidge of respect for Trump (or whoever pulled it off). If we could somehow then bridge the gap in culture and politics that seems to be driving a wedge between us, that would be even better. I hope you want the same.

Do you remember how we ceased to be enemies with Russia? How the wall came down? How we made peace with China? We have made peace with nuclear armed enemies in the past, and we have done so without killing millions of them. I want that again. Reagan pulled it off. Nixon pulled it off. Can Trump?

We ceased to be enemies with Russia?? All we did was postpone the big shootout. Peace with China? Nope, just another postponed fight.

[skmo]

So at a time when your country could be facing its biggest crisis and with eight minutes to act you would resign???

Apologies. I did not read your second sentence correctly. Allow me to rephrase:

I would not need to make that decision because I would not be foolish enough to allow myself to get into it. Great good men do not generally go into politics because if they truly are good, they realize what a pile of reordered organic material governments are. The Democrats generally don't care if you prosper or starve, the Republicans generally don't care if you're free or a slave. They care about whether they can make you believe in them enough to give them power.

That said, were I stupid enough or unlucky enough to be in that situation, if an attack was detected from N. Korea, I'd order the military to do everything they could to defend against the missile with whatever defensive systems the military has to use: THAAD, systems aligned with the Cobra Dane or AEGIS BMD systems, MEADS, or any others we, the general public may or may not know about.

As for a directed response, I'd need more information from my senior military about how to proceed. There are too many unknown variables in this scenario. Was it actually N. Korean military who launched it? Was it a rogue officer or a technological mistake? Is there any more information we don't have which we may need to make the best sound military decision for our country?

All of those are things we'd need to know and consider. I'm never against a full out offensive response if everything we have points to needing it. That's certainly how I defend my home. However, I can't make national decisions for our whole country based on my preferences and personality alone. Trust me, no one wants a person like me solely in charge of what the military does. I get pissed off too easily. My own history has shown that when I act hastily and in the heat of the moment, there is harm done to one degree or another.

[Irrelevant]

This isn't a thread to bash on Trump or any other president. This is a discussion about what would you do if you were president.

The scenario is North Korea just launched an ICBM toward Guam which is a US territory and has US military bases. . There is no way to tell whether it is nuclear tipped or not while it's in the air.

I wonder... What would you do?

(Edited to add) This scenario, of course, presupposes that our intelligence somehow missed all of the communication, movement, and preparation necessary to pull off such a thing and we were caught completely unawares.

[markharr]

This isn't a thread to bash on Trump or any other president. This is a discussion about what would you do if you were president.

The scenario is North Korea just launched an ICBM toward Guam which is a US territory and has US military bases. . There is no way to tell whether it is nuclear tipped or not while it's in the air.

I wonder... What would you do?

(Edited to add) This scenario, of course, presupposes that our intelligence somehow missed all of the communication, movement, and preparation necessary to pull off such a thing and we were caught completely unawares.

Yep, because they never miss anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

[lundbaek]

To consider what a constitutionalist POTUS could do to alleviate the conditions the globalists have gotten the world into requires that we take into account the following:

The U.S. Congress ("House" and Senate) has many globalist members and other members beholden one way or more to the globalists.

The U.S. State Dept. is, I believe, ridden with globalists and other employees beholden one way or more to the globalists.

The mainstream news media is largely supportive of the globalist goals of world government.

President Trump is either oblivious to most of this, or else, as Silver suggests, secretly in cahoots with the globalists.

It looks to me like the globalists are doing end runs with impunity around President Trump, calling shots that frustrate Trump's goals and promote the globalist agenda. I think the best a constitutionalist POTUS could do is to replace the "yes-men" generals and admirals that Obama elevated to their current positions and replace them with the generals and admirals that Obama canned and who would support an anti-globalist agenda. He would also need to identify and fire those in the State Dept. and other government offices who are thwarting a constitutionalist agenda. None of this would be easy, since the globalists have now gotten themselves so firmly above us. Is it conceivable ? I doubt most American voters could be educated enough to make the difference.

[Irrelevant]

This isn't a thread to bash on Trump or any other president. This is a discussion about what would you do if you were president.

The scenario is North Korea just launched an ICBM toward Guam which is a US territory and has US military bases. . There is no way to tell whether it is nuclear tipped or not while it's in the air.

I wonder... What would you do?

(Edited to add) This scenario, of course, presupposes that our intelligence somehow missed all of the communication, movement, and preparation necessary to pull off such a thing and we were caught completely unawares.

Yep, because they never miss anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

That's your answer? That's fine. I get it. You ask the questions and pick apart the answers. I really was just curious to know if you had a plan.

[lundbaek]

If an antagonist launches a punch toward you and you can dodge or parry it, how would you respond ? For me it depended on whether I thought I could immediately diffuse the situation or expected an immediate follow-up punch. And that can be a tough call.

There have been many small scale attacks against U.S. forces ever since the end of WW2, on the ground, at sea, and in the air. I think the ones I am aware of resulted in American fatalities. Yet none of them led to war.

I assume if missiles are launched toward Guam the Russians and the Chinese will be monitoring the U.S. response for the express purpose of observing the technical details in the response, thus gaining intel that the U.S. may not want to reveal. Hence, if POTUS, I might not try to destroy the incoming missiles, and launch retaliation strikes only if and after the missiles damaged the Island and/or injured and killed U.S. citizens. Depending on the technology involved, I might not want to reveal at this point in time the ability of the U.S. to protect against such a missile attack.

[lundbaek]

Skmo's last post above causes me to think how sad it is that many great Americans shy away from involvement in government because of the rot that I agree does infest it. Years ago a few Church authorities did encourage members to get involved, including by running for legislative and executive offices. I ran for Congress as an independent write-in candidate on the Constitution Party platform in 2008, and would do it again if I had the financial means. If nothing else, I think I woke a few people up to our "awful situation" and woke up a few Mormons to our responsibility to the US Constitution.

[markharr]

This isn't a thread to bash on Trump or any other president. This is a discussion about what would you do if you were president.

The scenario is North Korea just launched an ICBM toward Guam which is a US territory and has US military bases. . There is no way to tell whether it is nuclear tipped or not while it's in the air.

I wonder... What would you do?

(Edited to add) This scenario, of course, presupposes that our intelligence somehow missed all of the communication, movement, and preparation necessary to pull off such a thing and we were caught completely unawares.

Yep, because they never miss anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

That's your answer? That's fine. I get it. You ask the questions and pick apart the answers. I really was just curious to know if you had a plan.

I'm not a military commander or a politician. I don't have any intel on North Korea's military capabilities. I don't know what I would do. The point of this excercise was to show the armchair presidents on here that it isn't as simple as they claim it is.

[markharr]

I wonder... What would you do?

(Edited to add) This scenario, of course, presupposes that our intelligence somehow missed all of the communication, movement, and preparation necessary to pull off such a thing and we were caught completely unawares.

Yep, because they never miss anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

That's your answer? That's fine. I get it. You ask the questions and pick apart the answers. I really was just curious to know if you had a plan.

I'm not a military commander or a politician and don't claim to be one. I don't have any intel on North Korea's military capabilities. I don't know what I would do. The point of this excercise was to show the armchair presidents on here that it isn't as simple as they claim it is.

[iWriteStuff]

I'm not a military commander or a politician. I don't have any intel on North Korea's military capabilities. I don't know what I would do. The point of this excercise was to show the armchair presidents on here that it isn't as simple as they claim it is.

Or, maybe it's exactly like I said it was in post #2 on this thread:

Trump's approval rating up after tough North Korea talk, new poll shows

President Donald Trump’s approval rating jumped to 45 percent in the days following the president suggesting U.S. military action against North Korea, a poll released Friday shows.

Trump’s approval rating increased from 39 percent last week, according to a daily presidential tracking poll by conservative-leaning Rasmussen Reports.

The president’s approval rating is now at 37 percent, according to the non-partisan Gallup poll, with a new report scheduled for Monday.

Trump’s predecessor, former President Barack Obama, had an approval rating of 54 percentage at roughly the same point in his presidency.

The Rasmussen poll shows Trump’s approval rating increased after North Korean leader Kim Jung un threatened a missile strike on the nearby island of Guam, a U.S. territory with an American military base. And Trump responded Tuesday by saying that such action would be met with “fire, fury and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before.”

In the ensuring days, Trump continued the tough talk -- including him saying the United States is “locked and loaded" -- despite calls for him to tone down such rhetoric to avoid a war.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08 ... shows.html

trumpoval.jpg (25.01 KiB) Viewed 853 times

Both leaders are trying to redeem their public image by saber rattling and tough talk. Plus THAAD. We were never in any danger. The only people in danger are the politicians who are accomplishing nothing in DC. Hence the distraction and ratings drive.

But whatever. Your armchair looks different than mine.

[skmo]

The point of this excercise was to show the armchair presidents on here that it isn't as simple as they claim it is.

Oh, I'm quite certain it could be if the president and the military wanted to fight it all out. They're North Korea for heaven's sake. I maintain an earlier position I took, that my Boy Scout troop from the 1970s could take North Korea with one patrol handling combat, one patrol handling cooking detail, and one patrol playing Capture the Flag while they wait to go in and police the area for trash after it's over.

Okay, hyperbole aside, One B1B, one Ohio sub, a single squadron of FA-18 Hornets, and a couple of Burke-class cruisers could take out almost all of N. Korea's military in 3 days from the start. The question comes in how much do we want to demonstrate our capabilities? Russia is still our enemy, so is China. China has largely embraced capitalism, having seen that Communism is still the stupidest idea since Custer decided he didn't need to take any Gatling Guns or the additional troops he was recommended to take. However, many still see us as enemies which is not likely to change anytime soon.

Same with Russia. Even with as popular as Putin has become with many "conservative" Americans, in many ways he's still seen as a Russian thug. Our relationship with Russia certainly has warmed since when I was in elementary school doing emergency drills in class under our desks. However, no one's under the illusion that warmth is enough to toast a slice of bread or even soften butter.

I don't think the internal political issues are a concern. Many liberals will still be opposed to military action and the current administration, many conservatives will still cry "Kill 'em all let God sort 'em out." International relations will matter, but I think the biggest concern is not tipping off other countries what we have and how effective it might be.

[Irrelevant]

I wonder... What would you do?

(Edited to add) This scenario, of course, presupposes that our intelligence somehow missed all of the communication, movement, and preparation necessary to pull off such a thing and we were caught completely unawares.

Yep, because they never miss anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

That's your answer? That's fine. I get it. You ask the questions and pick apart the answers. I really was just curious to know if you had a plan.

I'm not a military commander or a politician. Almost one in the same these days ;)I don't have any intel on North Korea's military capabilities. They are far more capable than most Americans give them credit for and should not be dismissed so easily. I don't know what I would do. I disagree with the scenario to begin with as we would not find out about a launch only after it is in the air. The point of this excercise was to show the armchair presidents on here that it isn't as simple as they claim it is. I feel like my hands are somewhat tied in this conversation because I do not want to cross, or even get near the line. I have a good understanding of this topic. I will say, however, we do not want war with North Korea. Given the abundance of open source intel, I feel comfortable enough saying that at the first sign of real threat, Seoul will be toast. I won't go into detail but you can expect millions of casualties within hours. It makes my stomach turn when I hear people talk about "taking Kim out" or "putting him in his place" or any form of "pre-emptive" anything. We've never seen blood like we would see in that war, on both sides- let's not kid ourselves. (Us in general.)

Edited- "valuable" should have read "capable". Darn that predictive text!

[Ezra]

8 minutes. Sweet. Good thing as president I actually brought the troops all home to take care of America frist. So bombs away. No worries

[Silver]

Yep, because they never miss anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

That's your answer? That's fine. I get it. You ask the questions and pick apart the answers. I really was just curious to know if you had a plan.

I'm not a military commander or a politician. Almost one in the same these days ;)I don't have any intel on North Korea's military capabilities. They are far more valuable than most Americans give them credit for and should not be dismissed so easily. I don't know what I would do. I disagree with the scenario to begin with as we would not find out about a launch only after it is in the air. The point of this excercise was to show the armchair presidents on here that it isn't as simple as they claim it is. I feel like my hands are somewhat tied in this conversation because I do not want to cross, or even get near the line. I have a good understanding of this topic. I will say, however, we do not want war with North Korea. Given the abundance of open source intel, I feel comfortable enough saying that at the first sign of real threat, Seoul will be toast. I won't go into detail but you can expect millions of casualties within hours. It makes my stomach turn when I hear people talk about "taking Kim out" or "putting him in his place" or any form of "pre-emptive" anything. We've never seen blood like we would see in that war, on both sides- let's not kid ourselves. (Us in general.)

Thank you for giving the discussion some legitimacy and for the good dose of reality. Did you know that the US attacked Korea back in 1866 and again in 1871? We killed hundreds of them. Japan had been attacked and overwhelmed by US forces a decade and a half earlier by Commodore Perry. The US has long considered its duty to force others into trading with us. We set up bases without permission and then blame the citizens of that country if they feel some patriotic stirrings and animosity towards us. One-sided, Pharisaical, close-minded, haughtiness like that will eventually lead to blowback. Sackcloth and ashes.

[Sirocco]

build a wall

[Irrelevant]

build a wall

=)) =)) =))
The biggest wall. The best wall. Believe me, you've never seen a wall like the one we'll build between North Korea and Guam. Believe me. And we'll make little Kim pay for it! Believe me.

[markharr]

Yep, because they never miss anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

That's your answer? That's fine. I get it. You ask the questions and pick apart the answers. I really was just curious to know if you had a plan.

I'm not a military commander or a politician. Almost one in the same these days ;)I don't have any intel on North Korea's military capabilities. They are far more capable than most Americans give them credit for and should not be dismissed so easily. I don't know what I would do. I disagree with the scenario to begin with as we would not find out about a launch only after it is in the air. The point of this excercise was to show the armchair presidents on here that it isn't as simple as they claim it is. I feel like my hands are somewhat tied in this conversation because I do not want to cross, or even get near the line. I have a good understanding of this topic. I will say, however, we do not want war with North Korea. Given the abundance of open source intel, I feel comfortable enough saying that at the first sign of real threat, Seoul will be toast. I won't go into detail but you can expect millions of casualties within hours. It makes my stomach turn when I hear people talk about "taking Kim out" or "putting him in his place" or any form of "pre-emptive" anything. We've never seen blood like we would see in that war, on both sides- let's not kid ourselves. (Us in general.)

Edited- "valuable" should have read "capable". Darn that predictive text!

I wasn't on here claiming to know more about foreign policy than our president and his advisers who actually have all of the intelligence.

And with these latest developments it looks like Trump and his advisers just might have made the right call.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/north-kore ... 1502751054

[Silver]

That's your answer? That's fine. I get it. You ask the questions and pick apart the answers. I really was just curious to know if you had a plan.

I'm not a military commander or a politician. Almost one in the same these days ;)I don't have any intel on North Korea's military capabilities. They are far more capable than most Americans give them credit for and should not be dismissed so easily. I don't know what I would do. I disagree with the scenario to begin with as we would not find out about a launch only after it is in the air. The point of this excercise was to show the armchair presidents on here that it isn't as simple as they claim it is. I feel like my hands are somewhat tied in this conversation because I do not want to cross, or even get near the line. I have a good understanding of this topic. I will say, however, we do not want war with North Korea. Given the abundance of open source intel, I feel comfortable enough saying that at the first sign of real threat, Seoul will be toast. I won't go into detail but you can expect millions of casualties within hours. It makes my stomach turn when I hear people talk about "taking Kim out" or "putting him in his place" or any form of "pre-emptive" anything. We've never seen blood like we would see in that war, on both sides- let's not kid ourselves. (Us in general.)

Edited- "valuable" should have read "capable". Darn that predictive text!

I wasn't on here claiming to know more about foreign policy than our president and his advisers who actually have all of the intelligence.

And with these latest developments it looks like Trump and his advisers just might have made the right call.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/north-kore ... 1502751054

Only in a world where morals and charity have been forgotten could the biggest bully on the block threatening a 98-pound weakling be the right call.

[iWriteStuff]

Only in a world where morals and charity have been forgotten could the biggest bully on the block threatening a 98-pound weakling be the right call.

Headlines read: "Dog Chases Squirrel Up Tree While House Burns - Spectators Cheer."

[Irrelevant]

I will say that it looks like the situation is diffused for now. I don't like his approach but I guess it "worked".

Now when winter rolls around I anticipate things going in a different direction as they're in a terrible drought which means even worse famine. It's bad there now, even by their standards, but it will only get worse in the coming months.

[skmo]

Only in a world where morals and charity have been forgotten could the biggest bully on the block threatening a 98-pound weakling be the right call.

When the 98 pound weakling is a teenager mentality psychopath who runs around in his house filled with 35 pound, underfed 5 year olds who are unable to escape, all the while screaming that he's the world heavyweight champ so he can bask in their fearfully delivered pretend worship, people who believe he's the victim need help.

When you factor in that he's got a vial of live plague virus which he's going to blow up in his next door neighbor's house, if people complain about the fact that almost EVERYONE on the block has warned him to stop being an idiot, and especially the largest of the neighbor who's been a policeman (willingly or unwillingly) for most of his adult life, well, those people complaining really are in need.

[markharr]

So it looks like what Trump did here was to use the threat of additional trade restrictions with China to pressure China into putting pressure on North Korea. China in turn threatened North Korea that they would stop importing north Korean coal and seafood if they didn't knock it off.

The tough talk on the part of Trump was necessary to show both China and North Korea that he was serious after years of empty threats from other presidents.

It looks very much like he's employing a similar strategy against Venezuela who has just requested talks with the US due to Trump's threats of military intervention.

I would say all in all it wasn't a bad strategy with the following exceptions.

Did nothing to stop the human rights crisis in North Korea
Does nothing to address the trade deficit with China. In fact, it makes us dependent on it to keep North Korea reigned in.

[brianj]

In the 1960s President Kennedy threatened nuclear war, going so far as to load nuclear weapons on aircraft and have the pilots sit in the cockpits with the jets running. Within minutes of an order those jets would have been in the air, flying toward the Soviet Union. For this game of brinksmanship JFK is considered a hero.

In the 2010s President Trump threatened extreme retaliation if North Korea attacked the south or the US. He was nowhere near as provocative as JFK and threatened retaliation as opposed to a first strike, and for doing something less than what JFK did he is being castigated.

Come on, lefitsts. You can't have it both ways! Either support Trump or condemn Kennedy!