Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yeah, with consequence

    Eating a sandwich has consequences too. No moral or rational being wants deadly violence, environmental degradation, or any negatively perceived thing. Kim Jong un is also not a utopian deity that has what is objectively best for the eternal multiverse in mind. That maniac has control of an entire nation of the human species that he has publicly shown to be utilized as a programmable means to a lunatics end. The solution to our global policy formula is multivariable, but we must exterminate the bs of the world first so an empire democratic global technoanarchy has a real chance to start.
    Conclusion: 2 options
    1.)destroy (easy and hard to deal with) and rebuild ( difficult and righteous)
    2.) have a logical debate and try to reason with a maniac(diplomatic)

    f diplomacy because it doesn't work without reason

    sometimes sacrifice is necessary to improve the world.
    Knowledge may be power unless you have a nut job with human capital at full disposal, and makes information inaccessible to his people. Power is power. And cowards respond to fear. So nuke the son of a bitch and unfortunately millions of innocents. If you empathize hard enough you could even feel for Kim, but cancer doesn't care. He is promising to attack and as days go by the possibility is more promising. Why wait for more innocents to die.

    Option 3.) wait for global pissing contests to stop and hope that all nations corporations and primal instincts seize to give a crap and become indifferent to one another and just exist.

  • Yes we should

    North Korea now has missiles that can hit the U.S and kill many of our citizens, you also have to think what if they just want us to think that they are waiting for us to strike first so they seem like the bigger "MAN" then they launch one out of no where killing hundreds of thousands people in the U.S. Think can we wait for them to attack first or wipe them out before they get us.

  • Yes we should

    If we nuke North Korea, then the entire world would be happy, because we'll be living in a happy post apocalyptic world. That might sound bad, but many people are playing a game called "Fallout". If this game is so popular, then people obviously want to live in a world like this.

  • Nuke the hypocrite

    He threatens the US relentlessly with not only his words but with posters, videos and even during concerts. The first time Trump responded with "fire and fury", the fat little prick starts to whine and cry saying it's a declaration of war. And your threats are not? Nuke the dumb ass hypocrite.

  • North Korea is a threat.

    I personally believe that there are a lot of good reasons as to why it would benefit more than hurt this world. Think of Germany, if we had waited 10 more years, their army would've continued growing, and we may have not been able to defend against them in World War II. If we continue to stand idly by as North Korea tests their nukes, it's only a matter of time until they can successfully take down our country in one swoop. Sure, we have anti-air and all that, but I think it's better to just be done with it. Sure, it could hurt the environment, but 50 years of unsafe northern Korea is worth the loss of a potentially "explosive" nation.

  • We should nuke

    They are going to nuke us, they are torching people over there, if they don't have enough humanity to treat their citizens like humans we shall not treat them like humans, they all need to leave. There is no need for that negativity, North Korea has put the world on edge we should not give them that power!

  • Nuking the NorKs would do the world a favor.

    Nuking the NorKs would do the world a favor by eliminating a destabilizing world threat. Next we should aim at Iran, Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and throw Madagascar in there for good measure. A post apocalyptic world is one tat we all so desperately need and want more than anything.

  • No we should not.

    First of all, nuking North Korea will cause china to attack us, then we will attack china, and so on and so forth. Second of all, Kim Jong un is a pussy, and is not going to try and attack us with their two 50 year old Chinese warheads. Now a lot of zealots are going to try and couner this with their bullshit, but don't listen to them.

  • Kim up your bum fat boy

    Let's nuke the little chubby fucker how dare he threaten our world. No one wants North Korea so nuke it and then make it into one big prison camp where all the shite of society can go to live until they die from radiation poisoning that includes terrorists pervs murderers etc

  • Kim up your bum fat boy

    Let's nuke the little chubby fucker how dare he threaten our world. No one wants North Korea so nuke it and then make it into one big prison camp where all the shite of society can go to live until they die from radiation poisoning that includes terrorists pervs murderers etc

  • No, we should not nuke North Korea.

    First, they are no threat to us. They are all talk, no action. If we make the first move, we are inviting them to start a war with us. Is that what we want? We have a good standing with most of the countries, and there is no need for us to be the "bully."

  • No, because that would completely destroy our reputation.

    The world looks at Americans as aggressive bullies. Dropping a nuclear bomb on North Korea would only reinforce that image and destroy a lot of lives needlessly. There may come a time when it may be necessary to take such drastic action, but we still have a long way to go before we reach that point.

  • No, it is cruel!

    We should never use weapons of mass destruction. For starters, the fallout will affect other regions and people of the world. Secondly, the civilian casualties would be enormous. We would be killing all the people of North Korea along with their leaders. It would be a humongous catastrophe without justification!

  • Nuclear weapons would cause untold devastation in North Korea and surrounding countries.

    We should never use nuclear weapons as a preemptive strike. While there are many problems with the government of North Korea, a nuclear weapon would cause unnecessary civilian casualties and massive damage to the environment that would impact neighboring countries. While something should be done about North Korea, nukes are certainly not the answer.

  • No we should not.

    First of all, nuking North Korea will cause china to attack us, then we will attack china, and so on and so forth. Second of all, Kim Jong un is a pussy, and is not going to try and attack us with their two 50 year old Chinese warheads. Now a lot of zealots are going to try and couner this with their bullshit, but don't listen to them.

  • We are OK

    On the subject of whether America, having received extensive threats from North Korea, should make the first attack, apparently a lot of Americans think it's a good idea. The problem with doing so is that firstly, there would be many North Korean citizens in harm's way. Some may believe that such sacrifice is necessary, but when other countries are seeing the US attacking and killing innocent civilians, they are likely to then determine us as irrational and dangerous, and hence try to stop America from making anymore outlandish acts. There are already countries in the world that hate America, and thus by obliterating an entire nation it would only worsen their negative perception of America, further diving them from the United States. It is extremely important that we as a nation preserve the trust of our allies and encourage trust amongst other nations, and landing the first attack on a nation that may or may not pursue its threats would only backfire on our reputation.

    Secondly, if North Korea was to attack, America's military has the capability of stopping and preventing any directed missile or weapon from reaching us, and such attack would give us the open opportunity to justifiably fight back, with other countries supporting our decision in reaction as well.

    Thirdly, China is a potential threat that America must at least consider when making such a serious decision. China has been supplying North Korea and finds North Korea as a loyal patron for their country. It isn't clear whether China is North Korea's ally, but it is possible. If America decides to nuke North Korea, it may cause serious conflict between China and America and potentially other countries as well.

    In summary, it's too early to decide if initiating an attack is in anyway necessary, and even if North Korea went to try to accomplish attacking America, our military defenses are able to prevent it.

    Right now America is being closely watched by other countries and so it is of the upmost importance that America sets a credible reputation for itself. Nuking North Korea is risky because it can cause severe damage to surrounding areas and may enrage China and other countries, causing more problems needed to be handled.

    North Korean lives should not be put on the line because of a possible but unlikely attack from their leader. If America goes to abolish them then there would never be a way to really know if such a destructive choice of action was needed. The nation will from then on always carry the burden of uncertainty of whether the lives that were lost were taken for a legitimate threat of an event that may have occurred otherwise, if there really was any real threat at all. Sometimes it's best not to stir the pot and wait before making a rash decision.

  • We are OK

    On the subject of whether America, having received extensive threats from North Korea, should make the first attack, apparently a lot of Americans think it's a good idea. The problem with doing so is that firstly, there would be many North Korean citizens in harm's way. Some may believe that such sacrifice is necessary, but when other countries are seeing the US attacking and killing innocent civilians, they are likely to then determine us as irrational and dangerous, and hence try to stop America from making anymore outlandish acts. There are already countries in the world that hate America, and thus by obliterating an entire nation it would only worsen their negative perception of America, further diving them from the United States. It is extremely important that we as a nation preserve the trust of our allies and encourage trust amongst other nations, and landing the first attack on a nation that may or may not pursue its threats would only backfire on our reputation.

    Secondly, if North Korea was to attack, America's military has the capability of stopping and preventing any directed missile or weapon from reaching us, and such attack would give us the open opportunity to justifiably fight back, with other countries supporting our decision in reaction as well.

    Thirdly, China is a potential threat that America must at least consider when making such a serious decision. China has been supplying North Korea and finds North Korea as a loyal patron for their country. It isn't clear whether China is North Korea's ally, but it is possible. If America decides to nuke North Korea, it may cause serious conflict between China and America and potentially other countries as well.

    In summary, it's too early to decide if initiating an attack is in anyway necessary, and even if North Korea went to try to accomplish attacking America, our military defenses are able to prevent it.

    Right now America is being closely watched by other countries and so it is of the upmost importance that America sets a credible reputation for itself. Nuking North Korea is risky because it can cause severe damage to surrounding areas and may enrage China and other countries, causing more problems needed to be handled.

    North Korean lives should not be put on the line because of a possible but unlikely attack from their leader. If America goes to abolish them then there would never be a way to really know if such a destructive choice of action was needed. The nation will from then on always carry the burden of uncertainty of whether the lives that were lost were taken for a legitimate threat of an event that may have occurred otherwise, if there really was any real threat at all. Sometimes it's best not to stir the pot and wait before making a rash decision.

  • We are OK

    On the subject of whether America, having received extensive threats from North Korea, should make the first attack, apparently a lot of Americans think it's a good idea. The problem with doing so is that firstly, there would be many North Korean citizens in harm's way. Some may believe that such sacrifice is necessary, but when other countries are seeing the US attacking and killing innocent civilians, they are likely to then determine us as irrational and dangerous, and hence try to stop America from making anymore outlandish acts. There are already countries in the world that hate America, and thus by obliterating an entire nation it would only worsen their negative perception of America, further diving them from the United States. It is extremely important that we as a nation preserve the trust of our allies and encourage trust amongst other nations, and landing the first attack on a nation that may or may not pursue its threats would only backfire on our reputation.

    Secondly, if North Korea was to attack, America's military has the capability of stopping and preventing any directed missile or weapon from reaching us, and such attack would give us the open opportunity to justifiably fight back, with other countries supporting our decision in reaction as well.

    Thirdly, China is a potential threat that America must at least consider when making such a serious decision. China has been supplying North Korea and finds North Korea as a loyal patron for their country. It isn't clear whether China is North Korea's ally, but it is possible. If America decides to nuke North Korea, it may cause serious conflict between China and America and potentially other countries as well.

    In summary, it's too early to decide if initiating an attack is in anyway necessary, and even if North Korea went to try to accomplish attacking America, our military defenses are able to prevent it.

    Right now America is being closely watched by other countries and so it is of the upmost importance that America sets a credible reputation for itself. Nuking North Korea is risky because it can cause severe damage to surrounding areas and may enrage China and other countries, causing more problems needed to be handled.

    North Korean lives should not be put on the line because of a possible but unlikely attack from their leader. If America goes to abolish them then there would never be a way to really know if such a destructive choice of action was needed. The nation will from then on always carry the burden of uncertainty of whether the lives that were lost were taken for a legitimate threat of an event that may have occurred otherwise, if there really was any real threat at all. Sometimes it's best not to stir the pot and wait before making a rash decision.

  • Nuclear Weapons are a detterant and should never be used as a first strike option.

    It's sad to say that North Korea has been developing nuclear weapons for decades and now that they have finally got them (allegedly), it is far too late to do anything about them. Russia, China, India, UK, France and Pakistan all have them but never used them. In fact, USA are the only nation to have used them which is quite ad in itself. There is no evidence to say that they would ever use them apart from in defense of an invasion by someone like the U.S. If other Countries have them, then one more doesn't make any difference.

  • Nuclear weapons would cause needless casualties and would affect surrounding countries.

    Kim Jong Un would be dead, but nearly every citizen of North Korea would be as well. It would be also pointless to use a nuke on North Korea. More civilians would die than actual combatants and surrounding countries would be effected. With how much nuclear weapons have developed, North Korea would most likely become no more than an irradiated wasteland if a nuke were to be used. The effects on other countries would be very similar to what happened after the nuclear reactor in Pripyat exploded. In a nutshell, more North Korean civilians and citizens of other countries would die than actual combatants.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
robika says2017-08-02T08:35:25.313
All the B1 Bones` tours did was put US in the soup, although Britney Spears` Bones` tour didn`t bomb as much (tongue in cheek remark), the B2 `Spirit`, as second beast of Revelation, only set the scene for the last Trump. Does the US think it`s Walt Disney`s Revelation? What about the other 50% of the Korean population. The women? AIDS is the `biological weapon` for men, which seems to be the historical paradigm. Men kill each other. But why should the enslaved race of women be extinct because of Trump`s desire to hasten on Judgment Day for the sake of a big budget Disney feature.