trump must be grateful for this distraction, the good old trick of aggressive foreign policy when you have massive interior problems
still working, for some time at least



china is the number 1 superpower in the world for quite a while by now

p.s: hillary threatening to openly confront russia in syria and trumps trash talk are two different things entirely

None would even make it over the ocean before being intercepted. They could have 60 shots all intercepted and they would be turned into a parking lot the very same day.


Nav systems have precision drone strikes and missiles launch to return to landing on a dime. You think with all eyes on them there is some sneak attack coming lol?

No point in flaunting any arsenal when they will just be destroyed in your own back yard.

None the less two kids with dynamite is never ideal.

This post was edited by wesley123 on Aug 10 2017 04:27pm

Anyone wants to bomb NK with tabloids and Internet balloons ? ^^

/e: You can buy a lot for the price of a few tomahawks

This post was edited by Knaapie on Aug 10 2017 04:28pm

Lovely post but technically we've been at war since the 50's i believe...ceasefire

Cool story



This is not a dynamite problem kid

You're a child. I understand why no one replies to your here.

==>



Article before the last NK test ...

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-usa-defenses-idUSKBN19Q32F

Despite hundreds of billions of dollars spent on a multi-layered missile defense system, the United States may not be able to seal itself off entirely from a North Korean intercontinental ballistic missile attack.



Find us a guy saying USA is completely protected, Donald Trump, maybe


You humiliated yourself.

aggressive / incompetent / negligent / borderline insane... call it what you will, but yes - it IS a pretty good distraction, nuclear threats tend to take priority over other political issues for some reason...
as predicted btw.



in what regard? economically they are close but not there yet, except labor intensive production obviously. my point was mainly about political leadership though, which i would argue was firmly in america's hands under obama, at the very least for the west - that has deteriorated insanely fast though...



true, hillary stating she will be hard on russia concerning syria (still don't know how this leads to ww3 and nuclear holocaust but sure, i guess that's just trumptard rhetoric, like "fake news") is a completely different thing than:

- stating "wouldn't it be great if we got along with russia?"
- giving them basically a permission to do what they want in syria (just hours later they DID, explicitly targeting civilian infrastructure, inflicting massive casualties)
- then flip flopping, officially because his daughter cried about dead civilians, bombing some airfield - acting "presidential" by becoming a puppet of the hawks
- now talking bad about assad (after he re-established himself with russia's help) without doing anything though
- being forced by congress and senate to sanction russia against his will

one side at least had a plan and a clearly defined stance (if you like it or not), the other one engaged in naive and unrealistic rhetoric and ended up flip flopping on the issue, looking completely incompetent and not in control...

Oh fantastic source. The guy at Starbucks who wants to invoke fear for views.

Speak of humiliating yourself.

Have you seen the technology advancements.

The US defense system would be classified information. Reuters is a good source, but they can only report what they are told by the US govt.