Why not just bomb their military parade?
>hundreds of thousands of their troops all in one place
>all of their tanks and missiles in one place
>in a single line that goes for miles
Seriously all you'd have to do is just send some bombers to carpet bomb that stretch and destroy their whole military.
Why aren't we doing this?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
webcache.googleusercontent.com
twitter.com
Because it's an act of war
They're threatened to pre-emptively nuke us. We're being nice by not just fucking destroying them now.
Let me elaborate; if we were to carpet bomb North Korea, that would be an act of war. Therefore, in order to do this, The president would have to have explicit permission from Congress and the Congress would declare war on NK. Then, as we prep to carpet bomb them, they stop these demonstrations, because they know an attack is imminent.
It would work though.
You're not hearing me. It would not work. If the president were too, without a declaration of war against North Korea, find them, he would be impeached and tried as a war criminal.
how is that an act of war but syria and afghanistan isnt?
That sounds like a win for everyone. Fuck Trump and Norks.
Genuine question. There was never an armistice treaty signed. Wouldn't that legally mean that they don't need a declaration of war, since there is a lawful state of war between the United States and North Korea?
Afghanistan moab was against ISIS, supported by the Afghanistan government
Syria, probably should be an act of war but Syria doesn't want to start anything yet.
>Bomb their parade
>Mobile artillary and missile installations hidden in the forests get the call and begin their rain on Seoul, millions dead.
>Norks attempt to nuke Tokyo.
>China sees and portrays US as brutal 'sneak attack' aggressor, goes to war with USA in the ruins of the Korean peninsula, pacific sino-US war ensues.
>75 million Korean refugees.
>Putin uses the chaos to invade eastern Europe.
>WWIII begins.
Great plan, burger.
Not an expert, but I thought the pres could go to war if there was imminent danger to the US? So if KJU manages to put a nuke on an ICBM, and Pres honestly believes Un is insane and publicly states he wants to nuke the US, then Pres can pre-emptively attack without congress?
My gut feeling is that the moment Trump believes Un can put a nuke on an ICBM, then Trump will launch surprise attack on NK, regardless of legality
>hundreds of thousands of their troops all in one place
>all of their tanks and missiles in one place
>in a single line that goes for miles
Nigga,its just the portion of the troops. Also everyone would condem US and supply norks with gear as a result.
>americans
>in charge of a military operation designed to bring peace and prosperity to a region
Haha, nope
We're currently at war with them. We're not currently at war with NK. Not a hard concept
Because they don't hold parades when they expect to get bombed, and just pulling a surprise attack is difficult due to the process behind starting a war (at least a proper one against a nation that will fight back, not against a bunch of goatfucking terrorists in the middle of nowhere)
us and nk have been at war since the 1940s
ever notice the how the big nork stories seem to always happen around easter and christmas? this shit is just part of a big cycling circus on the world stage, if you believe anything you see on tv you deserve to be played.
we need to deal with north korea before they are a real nuclear power
luckily you dont have any authority
Theres that whole thing about not hitting civilians / civilian targets (cities), actually being the one that starts the war, and about a half dozen things outlined in the geneva convention.
You are at war with the norks technically
USA have threatened to pre-emptively many countries, whats your point?
Striking them would obliterate South Korea and kill millions.
Seoul is like 40-50km to the boarder.
Even Howitzer artillery from world war 2 era could easily hit their targets.
They have spent generations figuring out how to raise Seoul to the ground.
Seoul is one of the most dense populated places on earth.
Literally hundres of thousands or millions would die in no-time.
It aint that simple burger.
You are though
I thought you guys were still technically at war with NK
Would be easier just to use the W.O.P.R. to frame an ICBM launch from NK to US, then "destroy it" and perform a revenge strike with hundreds of nuclear missiles.
Re: Afghanistan
It's not an act of war to drop bombs in a country which asks you to drop bombs in it.
Syria is more complicated and should probably be considered an unconstitutional act of war, but almost everyone in Congress quietly supported it. The President does have the authority to act without a declaration of war from Congress to combat imminent threats to US security. Syria obviously doesn't qualify for that, but that's their official line.
There's only about 5 Republicans who actually give a crap about that. No Democrats give a crap about it, but I wouldn't be surprised if one or two are running around calling for his impeachment based on it (and everything else he says or does).
Put differently, if a police officer observes you commit a criminal act but decides not to act on it, does the law matter?
Nah, we're still at war with NK, the Korean war never ended so no need for approval. Still probably not a great idea to bomb the shit out of them when they are keeping to themselves.
Not to mention evil as fuck, instant moral high ground lost.
The Korean Armistice Agreement still technically has us at war, but the US wouldn't violate an armistice without provocation.
It's a rare example of an armistice which doesn't quickly get tossed aside for hostilities to erupt again. North Korea knows it would get glassed if they openly resumed hostilities and the US doesn't want to for political reasons.
SMART
Trump doesnt need to inform congress when invading NK. There was no peace treaty so we are still at war with them. A war congress approved of at the start. Legally both in the US and internationally Trump could strike without warning at any time.
>implying china wouldnt take the opportunity to help the U.S and make a deal so they can continue with their islands.
China would not help the USA. They would meet them in the middle of NK and push them out, then proceed to conquer NK and SK for themselves.
>south korea
Its almost as if you believe china is mentally retarded.
If USA attacked NK there would be no SK left. Seoul would be leveled in hours. USA would eventually be pushed out. China would take the land for itself and claim that it was for humanitarian interests and helping the broken people of SK. The world would gobble it up.
Why do you think Chinese troops are lining up along the NK border? It's not to help the USA, it's to help themselves.
Still a win for China then? They can even annex the Koreas for dat der coal.
Dude, there was never a peace treaty signed.
It would be a terrible move politically and diplomatically; but legally it would probably be more in the right than firing that missile at Assad
I believe this is correct.the president doesn't need the congress' s authority to go to war with North korea
You're forgetting the UN - the world would shit their pants if we did that. And it would be a legit war crime, as we'd take out enormous numbers of citizens, you know, the unarmed people not in uniforms in the lower left of the photo.
Yeah, that would be really cool to do, in the eyes of the world.
Because murdering millions of innocent civilians is considered a serious war crime.
President has 90 days to fuck around before going to congress to get permission
Canadian posts are the worst
Correct. We're technically just in a cease fire.
that's dishonorable cowardly shit.
Both actions are covered:
en.wikipedia.org
It should be noted, a bill made it's way through Congress to allow Obama the use of military intervention in Syria, for using chemical weapons, that was never used. Voted for and sponsored by the Dems.
Odd, that.
But, pay attention, dummy. The Congress has been debating wether the 2001 legislation needs to be updated, and if this current involvement in Syria should be covered. Of course, the Dems, who were all for it under Obama, are against it now. Kind of. The Pubs are split on it.
The more you know - when you pay fucking attention.
Wrong. The President has broad powers to fight terrorists, that is covering these events.
en.wikipedia.org
The debate going on right now is if that authorization needs to be updated or changed.
Obama used that very legislation to drone people and drop a shit tonnage of bombs on other countries.
...
The truth hurts.
>Seoul is one of the most dense populated places on earth.
>Literally hundres of thousands or millions would die in no-time.
It's also fortified to shit. All of South Korea is.
We have a MASSIVE military presence there, and decades of rescue and evacuation planning ready to be deployed if the fat kid gets too feisty.
We could take his weak ass air force out in minutes, and bomb his infrastructure to dust in hours - there isn't a whole lot of it to begin with.
Then we drop some MOABs on his nuke facilities, and embargo the entire country, and starve them out.
The citizens will deliver fat boy's naked, beaten to shit body to the DMZ line in days.
>it's to help themselves
It's to make sure that North Korean refugees stay in North Korea
Yes, that falls under helping themselves. They will also absorb NK and possibly the ruins and ashes of SK as well.
>that would be an act of war
oh noes.
As if this would matter to your war criminal country.
You got illegal torture camps. You violate international law at least once every year.
They might absorb them. I think that both China and South Korea want to keep the civilians contained until they can modernize the country, so any annexing wouldn't happen for at least 10 years.
>how is that an act of war but syria and afghanistan isnt?
All of those are, but Syria and Afghanistan (and Iraq) do not have nukes, not even weapons of mass destruction, so 'murica knows for sure that they can't really do much about it.
Why don't you bomb your niggers before acting against other countries?
Why would you want to destroy this ? It's beautiful.
No, we're not.
>Despite the fact that there is no official peace treaty between North Korea and the United States, it's not quite correct to say that we're at war (even in a technical sense) because, technically, we weren't at war to begin with. The 1950-53 conflict was conducted under the aegis of the United Nations and was dubbed a "police action" by President Harry Truman. Congress never actually declared war, nor did it authorize a military engagement.
>leafs knowing shit about anything
Yes, this would be logical. Besides, the people of NK are so indoctrinated that they would literally cease to function in any other form of society.... Like an ant colony without a queen.
>>Putin uses the chaos to invade eastern Europe.
Are you retarded, bad teeth man?
Why would he do this? To have to take care of more poor people? It would be idiotic and wouldn't make sense.
Putin already needs to clean up 'muricas shit.
The us should park a nuke in a cargo ship in between North Korea and Japan, then during the next launch, detonate the nuke and blame it on Kim
Dude, koreans are the niggers of Asia, it's cool.
>wtf is Cambodia?
No they are not, retard. Everyone know that it's the Jungle Asians and even Chinks that are the niggers of Asians.
Because that's not their entire armed forces. You'd end up getting every NK soldier proven to his face that Kim was right, followed by missile launches and Seoul getting plowed under.
Also, the odds that such a massive bombing run would go undetected approaches zero, and would likely trigger every defense pact NK has with China as a grossly disproportionate response.
I'll be the first to say it: If nobody sees it, the CIA doesn't give a shit about international laws.
This is part of the reason even Americans want their secret police fitted with choke chains.
Is fat kim at the parade? Kill him and its game over. A few drones could do it. Then let china invade and take half as a buffer it alway wanted.
pretty sure all the pink bit are civillians too
Yes, let's kill all the fish in the Sea of Japan, and the entire eastern seaboard of Japan, so we can nuke the fat kid. Fucking dumbass.
Technically yes.
South Koreans will die, but they've also been preparing for this for a very long time. Death toll will be in the thousands, not millions