What would you do?

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
User avatar
markharr
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6523

Re: What would you do?

Post by markharr »

Silver wrote: August 11th, 2017, 10:57 am Well, it's time to mix it up a bit and ask: WWJD?

Yep, what would Jesus do... I'd bet my life, my testimony, and my family that it wouldn't involve any more deaths or threats.

Everyone here agrees, I'm sure.

I win. I always do.
Great question. What would Jesus do?

https://www.lds.org/manual/book-of-morm ... n?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/manual/book-of-morm ... s?lang=eng

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: What would you do?

Post by Elizabeth »

=)) :D
Silver wrote: August 11th, 2017, 10:57 am I win. I always do.

User avatar
BeNotDeceived
Agent38
Posts: 8960
Location: Tralfamadore
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Post by BeNotDeceived »

What does the law say?

At what point has the law been broken. Nuclear non-proliferation restrictions may not apply to launching missiles?

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Post by iWriteStuff »

markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 11:08 am
Silver wrote: August 11th, 2017, 10:57 am Well, it's time to mix it up a bit and ask: WWJD?

Yep, what would Jesus do... I'd bet my life, my testimony, and my family that it wouldn't involve any more deaths or threats.

Everyone here agrees, I'm sure.

I win. I always do.
Great question. What would Jesus do?

https://www.lds.org/manual/book-of-morm ... n?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/manual/book-of-morm ... s?lang=eng
You're both asking the wrong question. It's:
jesusnuke.jpg
jesusnuke.jpg (135.11 KiB) Viewed 965 times

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: What would you do?

Post by Silver »

iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 11:43 am
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 11:08 am
Silver wrote: August 11th, 2017, 10:57 am Well, it's time to mix it up a bit and ask: WWJD?

Yep, what would Jesus do... I'd bet my life, my testimony, and my family that it wouldn't involve any more deaths or threats.

Everyone here agrees, I'm sure.

I win. I always do.
Great question. What would Jesus do?

https://www.lds.org/manual/book-of-morm ... n?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/manual/book-of-morm ... s?lang=eng
You're both asking the wrong question. It's:
jesusnuke.jpg
Uhm, nobody?

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: What would you do?

Post by Silver »

markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 8:07 am 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.
What would I do?

I would keep my promise and repeal Obamacare, on Day 1.
I would "Lock her up!"
I would turn all the Federal Reserve bankers out on the street.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

What would Jesus do?

Post by iWriteStuff »

Silver wrote: August 11th, 2017, 12:30 pm
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 8:07 am 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.
What would I do?

I would keep my promise and repeal Obamacare, on Day 1.
I would "Lock her up!"
I would turn all the Federal Reserve bankers out on the street.
Wait, what? Trump held completely different views on nearly everything last year? *gasp* and he was even against foreign wars? Golly, how soon we forget.

How about this precious gem:
What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 29, 2013
or
If the U.S. attacks Syria and hits the wrong targets, killing civilians, there will be worldwide hell to pay. Stay away and fix broken U.S.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 3, 2013
Yes, yes, I know. You, much like me, would prefer he go back to the good old days before he was running for President.
“Robert Pattinson should not take back Kristen Stewart. She cheated on him like a dog & will do it again – just watch. He can do much better!”

User avatar
markharr
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6523

Re: What would iwritestuff do

Post by markharr »

iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 12:51 pm
Silver wrote: August 11th, 2017, 12:30 pm
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 8:07 am 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.
What would I do?

I would keep my promise and repeal Obamacare, on Day 1.
I would "Lock her up!"
I would turn all the Federal Reserve bankers out on the street.
Wait, what? Trump held completely different views on nearly everything last year? *gasp* and he was even against foreign wars? Golly, how soon we forget.

How about this precious gem:
What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 29, 2013
or
If the U.S. attacks Syria and hits the wrong targets, killing civilians, there will be worldwide hell to pay. Stay away and fix broken U.S.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 3, 2013
Yes, yes, I know. You, much like me, would prefer he go back to the good old days before he was running for President.
“Robert Pattinson should not take back Kristen Stewart. She cheated on him like a dog & will do it again – just watch. He can do much better!”
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.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: What would iwritestuff do

Post by Silver »

markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:01 pm
iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 12:51 pm
Silver wrote: August 11th, 2017, 12:30 pm
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 8:07 am 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.
What would I do?

I would keep my promise and repeal Obamacare, on Day 1.
I would "Lock her up!"
I would turn all the Federal Reserve bankers out on the street.
Wait, what? Trump held completely different views on nearly everything last year? *gasp* and he was even against foreign wars? Golly, how soon we forget.

How about this precious gem:
What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 29, 2013
or
If the U.S. attacks Syria and hits the wrong targets, killing civilians, there will be worldwide hell to pay. Stay away and fix broken U.S.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 3, 2013
Yes, yes, I know. You, much like me, would prefer he go back to the good old days before he was running for President.
“Robert Pattinson should not take back Kristen Stewart. She cheated on him like a dog & will do it again – just watch. He can do much better!”
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.
Now you're getting it, buddy! All the solutions put forth by the Gadiantons have failed so we'd be insane to continue relying on their ideas. That's why we need to do what Jesus would do. Jesus would not attack or even threaten North Korea. His servants sent food there. That's the grand key for understanding what Jesus would do. Bless them that curse us. Feed them. Help them.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: What would iwritestuff do

Post by iWriteStuff »

markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:01 pm
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?

User avatar
markharr
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6523

Re: What would iwritestuff do

Post by markharr »

iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:15 pm
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:01 pm
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.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

What would iwritestuff do (really)

Post by iWriteStuff »

markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:20 pm
iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:15 pm
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:01 pm
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?

User avatar
markharr
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6523

Re: What would iwritestuff do (really)

Post by markharr »

iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:24 pm
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:20 pm
iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:15 pm
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:01 pm
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?

And then we could go on looking the other way while hundreds of thousands more starve, suffer and die in work camps over the next decade. Pretending it isn't happening because all is well in zion.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: What would iwritestuff do (really)

Post by iWriteStuff »

markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:36 pm
iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:24 pm
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?

And then we could go on looking the other way while hundreds of thousands more starve, suffer and die in work camps over the next decade. Pretending it isn't happening because all is well in zion.
Mao starved more people to death than currently live in North Korea. Yet Nixon made peace with them, opened up their country for trade, and brought them into the civilized world. We killed no one. Stalin killed between 15 and 20 million of his own people, nearly the amount of the current population of North Korea. And yet we are allies with them today, and we didn't drop any bombs on them or assassinate any leaders. Reagan accomplished that.

The only solution Trump seems open to right now is the one policy neither Reagan nor Nixon thought necessary when dealing with nations 100x bigger. No one is pretending "all is well in Zion". I'm saying there are alternatives to death and destruction.

User avatar
markharr
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6523

Re: What would iwritestuff do (really)

Post by markharr »

iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:44 pm
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:36 pm
iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:24 pm
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?


And then we could go on looking the other way while hundreds of thousands more starve, suffer and die in work camps over the next decade. Pretending it isn't happening because all is well in zion.
Mao starved more people to death than currently live in North Korea. Yet Nixon made peace with them, opened up their country for trade, and brought them into the civilized world. We killed no one. Stalin killed between 15 and 20 million of his own people, nearly the amount of the current population of North Korea. And yet we are allies with them today, and we didn't drop any bombs on them or assassinate any leaders. Reagan accomplished that.

The only solution Trump seems open to right now is the one policy neither Reagan nor Nixon thought necessary when dealing with nations 100x bigger. No one is pretending "all is well in Zion". I'm saying there are alternatives to death and destruction.

You have no idea what Trump is doing, but I'm sure that whatever it is, you Silver, and Ajax will have plenty of armchair criticism for those that are trying to do something.

gardener4life
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1690

Re: What would you do?

Post by gardener4life »

"...Wait, what? Trump held completely different views on nearly everything last year? *gasp* and he was even against foreign wars? Golly, how soon we forget..."

You can be against a war and still be dragged into one, especially when they say in mid August they will hit your territory (which has citizens) with 4 nukes and that's days away.

"...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...."

That was a lie, or rather we were lied to as a country. They were undermining us by making us think the war had ended while all the way up they were advancing and building arms as fast as they could still. This was even alluded to by something George Albert Smith said in the past...(it was either him or Joseph F Smith in the 1940s). He described how since there wasn't really two world wars but just one with brief periods where they weren't shooting each other but still all along intended to resume the war as soon as they had the edge, and had rebuilt their arms. (I promise its there and he's right.)

"...skill in handling affairs without arousing hostility : tact handled the awkward situation with diplomacy..." --> This is also incorrect. Both parties have to really want permanent peace. We get lied to as a country under the idea that the other side promises and wants peace but actually they just want us to lower our guard. Consider the story of Zerahemnah and Captain Moroni and their fight. This is also why that story is in the Book of Mormon too; so we won't be deceived.

Recall Moroni and his band of merry men were spanking the Lamanites, badly. This is why indians are red because they were spanked so hard by Nephites. Then the Lamanites are forced to surrendur because Captain Moroni was good at spanking bad kids, but while doing so Zerahemnah never had any intention from the beginning of honoring the peace (Alma Chapter 44). He had in his mind two options; the first was that he'd wait for Moroni and the Nephites to lower their guard. Then he would sneak in and do a second invasion later after and cut them down after they'd disarmed...(OK, so Russia and China wanted us to disarm. Guess why? Same concept.) The other concept option was that he would assassinate Moroni on the spot under the same basic ploy of pretending peace while retaining his arms. (This is in fact what many countries are doing to us now, not just Russia, North Korea, and China.)

Laman and Lemuel had this same mentality with Nephi. Their mindset; we will kill Nephi. But we can't do it while dad is watching and we don't want to get caught. Even with angelic intervention they never truly gave up this mentality. We also see that some of the interventions weren't that they felt bad, but just they didn't want their wives to think they were scumbags. ( a certain verse reads that some of the daughters of Ishmael did plead for Nephi's life...) (There are other verses of the beautiful Nephite women pleading to the Lamanites to spare the people of Limhi, "for they were charmed with the beauty of our women", but the Lamanites never had intentions of honoring it. They planned to come back later, after the women were out of the way. Heck nobody wants to be hated by beautiful women right?

So you can't argue that we have any skill in diplomacy. This is going to be our downfall. None of those countries intends to honor those commitments. They want us to believe that lie. But they've been building up this whole time. Did you know China now has aircraft carriers? How screwed up is that. They never had those before, but pretended to be our buddy this whole time while stealing the tech from us. Their aircraft carrier is also a stolen design just like a certain CV carrier of ours but with modern tech. You can even compare the blueprints of it with the other one and see how close it resembles it.

So basically if you look at it from the scriptural point of view they are waiting for us to turn our backs on them.

Another way of looking at this; consider the Quran. It teaches a lot about how evil works and this isn't just about how Islam works but also how a lot of our enemies work while we are sleeping on the job. It's practically the manual on how to murder. One of the concepts it teaches is that when you can't jihad by the sword, you are still jihading. The jihad never ends, just that it has different gears in its transmission. Gear one of jihad is cut things down by the sword, and then after that the other gears are jihad of the tongue by deception through sweet words, lies, and talking one into lowering their guard and being 'asleep', jihad by economic war, and jihad by preaching or winning men's hearts and loyalty through other lies. But see what's interesting is there's never any end to the war. It's going non-stop until the end of time! It's just switching modes to dupe the enemy.

"...What would I do?

I would keep my promise and repeal Obamacare, on Day 1.
I would "Lock her up!"
I would turn all the Federal Reserve bankers out on the street...."

Liked this comment.

User avatar
skmo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4495

Re: What would you do?

Post by skmo »

markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 8:07 amThis 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.

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: What would you do?

Post by brianj »

Silver wrote: August 11th, 2017, 11:46 am
iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 11:43 am
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 11:08 am
Silver wrote: August 11th, 2017, 10:57 am Well, it's time to mix it up a bit and ask: WWJD?

Yep, what would Jesus do... I'd bet my life, my testimony, and my family that it wouldn't involve any more deaths or threats.

Everyone here agrees, I'm sure.

I win. I always do.
Great question. What would Jesus do?

https://www.lds.org/manual/book-of-morm ... n?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/manual/book-of-morm ... s?lang=eng
You're both asking the wrong question. It's:
jesusnuke.jpg
Uhm, nobody?
Correct. Jesus has much more powerful weapons. He caused a flood to cover the entire planet. He caused mountains to be placed on top of cities, other cities to be burned down, other cities to be sunk in the ocean, other cities to be destroyed in earthquakes and sink into the ocean, and one day He will cause a burning all over the planet to destroy the wicked and purify everything and everybody able to abide the Second Coming.

I have seen many people claim that Jesus would never kill, destroy, or condemn, and these days ever time I hear such a nonsensical claim I think of Elder Holland's talk in the April 2014 General Conference.

User avatar
BeNotDeceived
Agent38
Posts: 8960
Location: Tralfamadore
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Post by BeNotDeceived »

Jesus would do the best thing under the law; whether He would follow man's law or His Own Higher Law is the question. :ymhug:
Last edited by BeNotDeceived on August 11th, 2017, 11:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
BeNotDeceived
Agent38
Posts: 8960
Location: Tralfamadore
Contact:

Re: What would you do?

Post by BeNotDeceived »

... Iran has long maintained that its missile tests don't violate Security Council resolutions because there are no nuclear warheads involved and Iran's conventional defenses are its own business. ... http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2 ... resolution

All kinds of experts on Fox News talking, but never discuss if conventional missile testing breaks any laws.

User avatar
markharr
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6523

Re: What would you do?

Post by markharr »

skmo wrote: August 11th, 2017, 3:54 pm
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 8:07 amThis 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???

User avatar
shadow
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10542
Location: St. George

Re: What would iwritestuff do (really)

Post by shadow »

iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:24 pm
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:20 pm
iWriteStuff wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:15 pm
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 1:01 pm
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.

User avatar
skmo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4495

Re: What would you do?

Post by skmo »

markharr wrote: August 12th, 2017, 6:33 am 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
captain of 100
Posts: 140

Re: What would you do?

Post by Irrelevant »

markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 8:07 am 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.

User avatar
markharr
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6523

Re: What would you do?

Post by markharr »

Irrelevant wrote: August 13th, 2017, 6:04 am
markharr wrote: August 11th, 2017, 8:07 am 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

Post Reply