North Korea has played a bit too rough with the US, US Gov to respond

[FreeDiver]

what if us goes ahead with an attack on north korea but putin decides to support korea and bomb the crap out of the us with its hidden icbm bases in siberia 

I don't know what if?

<edit> Probably something like this

[SpaceCore]

I think you're failing to see that Sony has no other choice if all the major theatres refuse to screen the film.

If I stood to make hundreds of thousands of dollars by showing the movie in my theatre(s). I would.

Unless I was approached by someone at Sony and they "suggested" I didn't. as a sign of "good faith" because of very possible threats.

 

lets be honest, a couple of 100k's compared to Sony's gartitude (a japanese company) is nothing. their gratitude means trust, and some theatres would rather have that than a quick buck.

[mr moose]

I don't know what if?

<edit> Probably something like this

war games?

 

 

Good movie.

[Lord Baal]

I don't know what if?

<edit> Probably something like this

Come on now, no need to worry about or attack Australia and NZ we an't got shit to threaten anyone with.

[Deserter15]

It is highly unlikely that the US will attack NK, eve with the B-2 Spirit.  NK doesn't have any oil and they aren't really a threat.  I feel this will be a cyber attack response.  I'm pretty sure it would be easy for hackers to completely destroy the content filter that NK uses and take down their government network.

[E-Ro]

War should never be an option.

No offense, but this is not only an incredibly naive opinion, its also a rather silly one. Force has solved more problems throughout history then anything else. 

 

News flash: there are shitty people in the world, and sometimes the only way to stop them is to kill. 

[stconquest]

No offense, but this is not only an incredibly naive opinion, its also a rather silly one. Force has solved more problems throughout history then anything else. 

 

News flash: there are shitty people in the world, and sometimes the only way to stop them is to kill. 

 

How long does it take for "you" to become the "shitty person"?

[Xsilent(X)]

I think you're failing to see that Sony has no other choice if all the major theatres refuse to screen the film.

 

Sony has to pirate the movie so anyone can enjoy the movie. Torrent the movie blame it was hackers

[DevilishBooster]

So can the US Gov tell Sony its okay to release the Interview on Christmas day again and can Obama tell North Korea to stop their shit otherwise they'll get another flyby by one of the most deadly machines of war that the world has ever seen? 

 

One of these is scary enough. Would they like the entire fleet of them just casually strolling above their capital? Cause thats what you get for issuing terrorist threats against a US company of this calibre and to this degree. 

 

Good job North Korea. You managed to piss off a lot of people and get the US Gov involved (lets ignore how bad Sony is at securing things for a moment) and most importantly you threatened the release of a James - Seth masterpiece. 

 

Enjoy your newfound freedom.

 

It's a B2 stealth bomber. From what we know, it goes totally undetected on radars and other tracking equipment because of the shape of the aircraft.

 

And the funny thing is, the B2 has been in production for quite a long time I think. Probably scarier things in the arsenal yet to be revealed

I got to go on a base visit to Whiteman AFB, Missouri (the home of the B2) back in 2010. As I was walking across base to the BX just after dusk there was a B2 taking off. The initial thrusters were definitely loud and when if first lifted off all you could really see was the trails of the after-burners. As soon as they got about 300ft up they cut out the after-burners. No lie, it went dead silent and completely disappeared against the night sky. If I hadn't just watched it take off from about 500yds away, I would have never known it was there. The most bad-ass thing I have ever seen.

[DevilishBooster]

And you think that would be right? You think that America being the worldwide police is good? Wtf man? Unless you were being sarcastic, that is fucked up. Thinking nuclear threat is a good idea? Hell no!

The B2 isn't restricted to nuclear armaments. To name the main loadout options: Mk-84 LDGP , Mk-82 LDGP, Mk-62 MINE, GBU-38, CBU-87/B 89/B 97/B & 34/AC, M-117 GP, M-117R, GBU-37/B, GBU-28 B/B, AGM-158, GBU-31(V)1/B, and AGM-154A. 

[Master Disaster]

You obviously know very little about world affairs, politics, and economics. No way in hell NK has more money or power than the US. Sure we wouldn't attack over a hacking thing, but if there are attacks on our civillians, you can bet your ass we will respond. NK might have had all these years to entrench themselves, but it still wouldn't be enough.

Where have I heard that before, oh yeah, Vietnam.

[E-Ro]

Where have I heard that before, oh yeah, Vietnam.

Completely different set of problems with Vietnam. First of all a bunch of guerrillas running around in a jungle is completely different from the conventional army North Korea has. We fought the Koreans once and soundly defeated them, China is the only thing that saved them, and China suffered upwards of 700,000 casualties in the process. And anyway, China wont be coming to their rescue this time, they have too much to lose and nothing to gain. Furthermore, the Korean peninsula doesn't even have the terrain necessary to accomplish what the viet Cong did. The huge struggle in Vietnam was our difficulty building and maintaining an effective south Vietnamese military, as well as our struggles with their leader who was completely ineffective (Ngo Dinh Diem). That problem does not exist in South Korea. They have an extremely effective military that can stand on its own, and they HATE the North Korean government with a passion. If we fight a war in Korea ever again we would never have to do the sort of nation building that we aren't so good at. We would just unleash our forces on the north and let the south Koreans rebuild everything under a unified Korea. 

[Master Disaster]

Completely different set of problems with Vietnam. First of all a bunch of guerrillas running around in a jungle is completely different from the conventional army North Korea has. We fought the Koreans once and soundly defeated them, China is the only thing that saved them, and China suffered upwards of 700,000 casualties in the process. And anyway, China wont be coming to their rescue this time, they have too much to lose and nothing to gain. Furthermore, the Korean peninsula doesn't even have the terrain necessary to accomplish what the viet Cong did. The huge struggle in Vietnam was our difficulty building and maintaining an effective south Vietnamese military, as well as our struggles with their leader who was completely ineffective (Ngo Dinh Diem). That problem does not exist in South Korea. They have an extremely effective military that can stand on its own, and they HATE the North Korean government with a passion. If we fight a war in Korea ever again we would never have to do the sort of nation building that we aren't so good at. We would just unleash our forces on the north and let the south Koreans rebuild everything under a unified Korea.

I wasn't having a pop at America, far from it. Just pointing out that you should never underestimate anybody, especially a country full of crazy bastards.

[Trik'Stari]

Where have I heard that before, oh yeah, Vietnam.

The problem there was us, not the Vietnamese. We wouldn't bomb the parts of the country that we actually needed to in order to win. However if we went back to ww2 tactics and back to the correct mentality for winning a war (which is that the population of an enemy city, must be considered enemies themselves, or else you demoralize your own forces), and just carpet bombed them into submission, we might have stood a better chance. Worked with both Germany and Japan. Although it is arguable that we went a tad overboard on Japan.

 

You can fight a war for moral reasons (ending the holocaust), however you cannot fight a war morally. It just does not, and cannot work. There can be rules like "no raping of the enemy population" obviously, but this "do not fire unless fired upon" bullshit has lost us just about every war we have fought since we instated it.

[Jack.EXE]

Who needs a whole army with jets when all you need is one man?

 

 

(we all know it exists)

[E-Ro]

The problem there was us, not the Vietnamese. We wouldn't bomb the parts of the country that we actually needed to in order to win. However if we went back to ww2 tactics and back to the correct mentality for winning a war (which is that the population of an enemy city, must be considered enemies themselves, or else you demoralize your own forces), and just carpet bombed them into submission, we might have stood a better chance. Worked with both Germany and Japan. Although it is arguable that we went a tad overboard on Japan.

 

You can fight a war for moral reasons (ending the holocaust), however you cannot fight a war morally. It just does not, and cannot work. There can be rules like "no raping of the enemy population" obviously, but this "do not fire unless fired upon" bullshit has lost us just about every war we have fought since we instated it.

Yeah, ive seen it referred to as "pc warfare" and while its  a lovely concept in theory, it doesn't really get the job done. Its tragic but sometimes you have to take the gloves off. 

 

 

I wasn't having a pop at America, far from it. Just pointing out that you should never underestimate anybody, especially a country full of crazy bastards.

I didn't think you were, I was just pointing out why the Vietnam war was a poor example for this. I think the people in the pentagon have a pretty good handle on the norths capabilities.

 

Edit:Not sure what happened here but my post got cut off, fucking touchscreens.

[Lewellyn]

The problem there was us, not the Vietnamese. We wouldn't bomb the parts of the country that we actually needed to in order to win. However if we went back to ww2 tactics and back to the correct mentality for winning a war (which is that the population of an enemy city, must be considered enemies themselves, or else you demoralize your own forces), and just carpet bombed them into submission, we might have stood a better chance. Worked with both Germany and Japan. Although it is arguable that we went a tad overboard on Japan.

 

You can fight a war for moral reasons (ending the holocaust), however you cannot fight a war morally. It just does not, and cannot work. There can be rules like "no raping of the enemy population" obviously, but this "do not fire unless fired upon" bullshit has lost us just about every war we have fought since we instated it.

 

Good thing you are not in charge. This is the same twisted mentality that terrorists used to justify 9/11. The civilian population is never the enemy, and that sort of shit you speak of comes from the dark ages. 

 

Worked with both Germany and Japan.

 

No, the reason why Germany lost the war is because it spread it's line too thin to fight on two fronts. Not because we (or rather the RAF, UK) firebombed Berlin. A huge reason why the Russian population joined their armed forces is because the Nazis dehumanized the people they were invading, they would rape the people of a town not for sexual satisfaction but as a pure act of aggression and humiliation. Both sides, the USSR and The Third Reich condoned violence against civilians because they were out for revenge. The senseless vindication led to one of the most brutal tolls in humanity of the entire war.

[FakezZ]

The B2 isn't restricted to nuclear armaments. To name the main loadout options: Mk-84 LDGP , Mk-82 LDGP, Mk-62 MINE, GBU-38, CBU-87/B 89/B 97/B & 34/AC, M-117 GP, M-117R, GBU-37/B, GBU-28 B/B, AGM-158, GBU-31(V)1/B, and AGM-154A. 

Yeah I don't pretend to know about military aircraft, because I really don't, but the nuke(although definitely my mistake) was not my main point. It was that saying that it is okay for America to play world police is just ignorant and stupid. But yeah it was also quite stupid of me to immediately think about nukes when I saw a military aircraft. Now that I read the post though he did say "the deadliest weapon the world has ever known", which AFAIK is the nuke (right? I might be wrong about that too, I won't be surprised...).

[dalekphalm]

Yeah I don't pretend to know about military aircraft, because I really don't, but the nuke(although definitely my mistake) was not my main point. It was that saying that it is okay for America to play world police is just ignorant and stupid. But yeah it was also quite stupid of me to immediately think about nukes when I saw a military aircraft. Now that I read the post though he did say "the deadliest weapon the world has ever known", which AFAIK is the nuke (right? I might be wrong about that too, I won't be surprised...).

The point he was making is that the B2 Stealth Bomber can carry both conventional weapons (eg: Bombs), as well as Nuclear weapons. It can do either, or both at the same time.

 

The remark about "deadliest weapon the world has ever known" was about the ability to drop a nuke, anywhere in the world, with zero early warning. It would go off before anyone even knew it was coming. Scary thought, but it does send a message of power.

 

Also, in this case, this wouldn't necessarily be America playing "World Police", since the attack WAS directed at an American company, and will cost the US economy hundreds of millions of dollars (Or more, depending on how successful the movie would have been).

 

Most nations would consider an attack like this an act of war. You can be damned sure that North Korea, China, Russia, and Iran would all consider it an act of war, had we done the same to them.

[Trik'Stari]

Good thing you are not in charge. This is the same twisted mentality that terrorists used to justify 9/11. The civilian population is never the enemy, and that sort of shit you speak of comes from the dark ages. 

 

Worked with both Germany and Japan.

 

No, the reason why Germany lost the war is because it spread it's line too thin to fight on two fronts. Not because we (or rather the RAF, UK) firebombed Berlin. A huge reason why the Russian population joined their armed forces is because the Nazis dehumanized the people they were invading, they would rape the people of a town not for sexual satisfaction but as a pure act of aggression and humiliation. Both sides, the USSR and The Third Reich condoned violence against civilians because they were out for revenge. The senseless vindication led to one of the most brutal tolls in humanity of the entire war.

I suppose your tactic of rolling over and letting them do whatever they want to whomever they want is a much much better solution.

 

All the president needs to do is get up on the podium, ask Sony to release the film in America, and say "Any attacks by North Korean agents on American soil will be considered an act of war, and bring about an immediate military response". Basically, get up and say "Bring it bitch".

 

Part of the problem with this "diplomacy only, war bad!" mentality is that it doesn't work. For diplomacy to actually work, you need 1 of 2 things in order to achieve the outcome you want:

1. A sane enemy willing to compromise (good luck with that)

or

2. A position of strength from which to negotiate.

 

If your enemy knows that you are unwilling to fight an actual war, or take things further than them, you have neither. Which is why we have lost essentially every war we have been in since ww2. If your enemy knows "oh they aren't really committed, all we have to do is last for a few years and they will get tired and leave" then you've already lost before you even fired the first shot.

 

My bigger question is why the "DPRK" has been allowed to exist in the first place. Why are we not sanctioning every single last country that does any type of trade with them? That country has, by now, probably committed worse atrocities than the Nazi's ever could have imagined, and yet all we do is sit on our asses and shout "war bad!".

[Master Disaster]

I'd argue that you guys used to get involved in the wrong wars. The UK army also respects "the rules of war" and yet we've never entered a war which we haven't won (Afghanistan is a topic for debate, I don't think we were technically ever at war with them, how'd you declare war on Jihad?), the reason being we pick our fights. Past presidents have adopted the classic American policy of shoot first, ask questions later and have jumped headfirst into wars in which they could never win.

We've only had 2000 years more warfare experience than you guys (we were fighting the Roman invasion), if anything you guys have learned lessons of warfare much quicker than we have and I think you've realised the importance of knowing ones enemy now.

[Lewellyn]

I suppose your tactic of rolling over and letting them do whatever they want to whomever they want is a much much better solution.

 

All the president needs to do is get up on the podium, ask Sony to release the film in America, and say "Any attacks by North Korean agents on American soil will be considered an act of war, and bring about an immediate military response". Basically, get up and say "Bring it bitch".

 

Part of the problem with this "diplomacy only, war bad!" mentality is that it doesn't work. For diplomacy to actually work, you need 1 of 2 things in order to achieve the outcome you want:

1. A sane enemy willing to compromise (good luck with that)

or

2. A position of strength from which to negotiate.

 

If your enemy knows that you are unwilling to fight an actual war, or take things further than them, you have neither. Which is why we have lost essentially every war we have been in since ww2. If your enemy knows "oh they aren't really committed, all we have to do is last for a few years and they will get tired and leave" then you've already lost before you even fired the first shot.

 

My bigger question is why the "DPRK" has been allowed to exist in the first place. Why are we not sanctioning every single last country that does any type of trade with them? That country has, by now, probably committed worse atrocities than the Nazi's ever could have imagined, and yet all we do is sit on our asses and shout "war bad!".

 

I love how you completely ignored what I was talking about and just went full speed ahead on a tangent.

[ComradeHX]

The point he was making is that the B2 Stealth Bomber can carry both conventional weapons (eg: Bombs), as well as Nuclear weapons. It can do either, or both at the same time.

 

The remark about "deadliest weapon the world has ever known" was about the ability to drop a nuke, anywhere in the world, with zero early warning. It would go off before anyone even knew it was coming. Scary thought, but it does send a message of power.

 

Also, in this case, this wouldn't necessarily be America playing "World Police", since the attack WAS directed at an American company, and will cost the US economy hundreds of millions of dollars (Or more, depending on how successful the movie would have been).

 

Most nations would consider an attack like this an act of war. You can be damned sure that North Korea, China, Russia, and Iran would all consider it an act of war, had we done the same to them.

It's irrelevant what it CAN carry. Anyone who saw it would ASSUME it carries nukes and retaliate appropriately.

[stconquest]

NK is NOT involved with the cyber attacks on Sony.

 

 

 

...just having some fun with you war hungry maniacs =)

[Zeruel]

Damn the Chinese for getting involved in the Korean war...NK wouldn't even exist.