I never blamed him @Huskaris. Thankfully Trump isn't as mental as his North Korean counterpart to start lobbing bombs yet.
Whoever mentioned brinkmanship hit the nail on the head. The mad man of North Korea does this stuff for a response and what Trump can be blamed for are his own actions and after Trump's comments in response to the last launch, anything short of a nuclear strike on North Korea sees Trump lose face cos he backed himself into a corner. Problem is that he can't go through with it because of the risk to Seoul in particular but also Japan from doing so, so he loses face and this will carry on
As much as I hate Donald Trump, no I don't think this is his fault. With that said, after all this he needs to keep his mouth shut and not provoke North Korea.............
I despise Trump but I think it is right to draw a line in the sand as he did. He could have puthis threat a bit better, but that is Trump. What North Korea seem to be doing is trying to edge to that line as closely as they can. It seems to be very stupid and dangerous and does pose the question whether they will push beyond the line. Something I was sure they wouldn't do but am less so now.
The minute China has had enough of them - even if they don't go any further, they are toast!
I despise Trump but I think it is right to draw a line in the sand as he did. He could have puthis threat a bit better, but that is Trump. What North Korea seem to be doing is trying to edge to that line as closely as they can. It seems to be very stupid and dangerous and does pose the question whether they will push beyond the line. Something I was sure they wouldn't do but am less so now.
The minute China has had enough of them - even if they don't go any further, they are toast!
I still can't see China stepping in, to stop NK, or allowing anything to happen to them, I know I've said it before but there's just no way they will allow a border with the US to exist.
Look at what's just been happening regarding Bhutan over the last two months, Beijing takes it borders very seriously, especially if they see a chance to expand them.
A problem for Trump here is that like a lot of Republican types, he gave it large about how Democrats generally and Obama especially, were very soft on terrorism and rogue states, and he as an All American hard man, would rectify that by standing up for America. Now he is in office, the grim reality of world politics begins to intrude on his dim mentality. Other countries don't instantly back down on demand, and while he may be able to devastate other countries with his WMDs, they may get off a couple themselves and kill millions of Americans. The current situation may not be of Trump's bungling doing, but he's not any use as a world statesman, and well out of his depth now.
I'm not defending Trump here and certainly his "fire and fury" comments were ill conceived and should have been more measured but I'm not convinced that this latest NK missile launch crosses the line in the sand that Trump has drawn. Yes the launch was reckless and provocative but there was no attack on the USA or its friends and allies. KJU has walked as far as the line and his toes are nearly touching it but it's not been crossed yet. Should the mad little fool fire on the States or its allies then I think most people would expect there to be a military response.
I still believe that this missile launch was mainly for home consumption. If KJU wanted to start a fight he could have already and turkeys generally don't vote for Christmas.
As much as I hate Donald Trump, no I don't think this is his fault. With that said, after all this he needs to keep his mouth shut and not provoke North Korea.............
So I think it was this got closer than either of those? I apologize, the reports in the English speaking media have been a little scrambled (and I wrote that right as it was breaking).
So I think it was this got closer than either of those? I apologize, the reports in the English speaking media have been a little scrambled (and I wrote that right as it was breaking).
The Beeb was also pretty vague, but it did mention they had launched missiles over Japan on both those occasions.
I just heard on the radio the Japanese predidnt has described the North Korean missle launch as an umprecidented attack on Japan.
In no expert on Japanese history, but I can think of at least two missiles that have landed on Japan and caused slightly more damage than Norh Korea did.
I just heard on the radio the Japanese predidnt has described the North Korean missle launch as an umprecidented attack on Japan.
In no expert on Japanese history, but I can think of at least two missiles that have landed on Japan and caused slightly more damage than Norh Korea did.
Well, if it's not a nuke then it doesn't count, right?
I just heard on the radio the Japanese predidnt has described the North Korean missle launch as an umprecidented attack on Japan.
In no expert on Japanese history, but I can think of at least two missiles that have landed on Japan and caused slightly more damage than Norh Korea did.
I just heard on the radio the Japanese predidnt has described the North Korean missle launch as an umprecidented attack on Japan.
In no expert on Japanese history, but I can think of at least two missiles that have landed on Japan and caused slightly more damage than Norh Korea did.
The Trump one is keeping quiet and i suspect that the US are getting into position to defend S. Korean and Guam and ready to attack. I'm sure our subs are in the vicinity to support the US. Someone has got to make the next move on whether to withdraw military exercises and leave the area or go further than the nose to nose confrontation. It's a big question for the sake of mankind on which path to take; walk away or eliminate this and future threats, and global damage? I'm glad that I don't have that responsibility on such a global scale but bring it down to a local confrontation say in a pub as a 60 year old then I would walk away.
The Trump one is keeping quiet and i suspect that the US are getting into position to defend S. Korean and Guam and ready to attack. I'm sure our subs are in the vicinity to support the US. Someone has got to make the next move on whether to withdraw military exercises and leave the area or go further than the nose to nose confrontation. It's a big question for the sake of mankind on which path to take; walk away or eliminate this and future threats, and global damage? I'm glad that I don't have that responsibility on such a global scale but bring it down to a local confrontation say in a pub as a 60 year old then I would walk away.
The Trump one is keeping quiet and i suspect that the US are getting into position to defend S. Korean and Guam and ready to attack. I'm sure our subs are in the vicinity to support the US. Someone has got to make the next move on whether to withdraw military exercises and leave the area or go further than the nose to nose confrontation. It's a big question for the sake of mankind on which path to take; walk away or eliminate this and future threats, and global damage? I'm glad that I don't have that responsibility on such a global scale but bring it down to a local confrontation say in a pub as a 60 year old then I would walk away.
I'm pretty sure they are not! A report which was strongly denied by the MoD (but they would wouldn't they) earlier in the year suggested our entire fleet of hunter/killer subs (all seven of them) were out of action. Whatever, it seems at least five are in for maintenance or having refits, including one of the new ones which are hardly fit for purpose anyway. One is reported to have a “irreparable generic fault”. To you and me, that's a crack in the nuclear reactor!
And only one of the four Trident fleet is at sea at any one time.
So, in summary, the Royal Navy has a barely usable fleet of submarines, an aircraft carrier with no planes and a fleet of Type 45 destroyers which can be heard by submarines about 100 miles away, break down if the water is marginally tepid and have other inherent faults. The Royal Navy is striving to keep two of these in operation readiness until the refit next year. Presumably when the duff american parts will be replaced.
I'm amazed we still have a Frigate stationed in the Falklands. Frankly at present I doubt the Royal Navy could defend a duck pond let alone attack North Korea.
The Trump one is keeping quiet and i suspect that the US are getting into position to defend S. Korean and Guam and ready to attack. I'm sure our subs are in the vicinity to support the US. Someone has got to make the next move on whether to withdraw military exercises and leave the area or go further than the nose to nose confrontation. It's a big question for the sake of mankind on which path to take; walk away or eliminate this and future threats, and global damage? I'm glad that I don't have that responsibility on such a global scale but bring it down to a local confrontation say in a pub as a 60 year old then I would walk away.
I'm pretty sure they are not! A report which was strongly denied by the MoD (but they would wouldn't they) earlier in the year suggested our entire fleet of hunter/killer subs (all seven of them) were out of action. Whatever, it seems at least five are in for maintenance or having refits, including one of the new ones which are hardly fit for purpose anyway. One is reported to have a “irreparable generic fault”. To you and me, that's a crack in the nuclear reactor!
And only one of the four Trident fleet is at sea at any one time.
So, in summary, the Royal Navy has a barely usable fleet of submarines, an aircraft carrier with no planes and a fleet of Type 45 destroyers which can be heard by submarines about 100 miles away, break down if the water is marginally tepid and have other inherent faults. The Royal Navy is striving to keep two of these in operation readiness until the refit next year. Presumably when the duff american parts will be replaced.
I'm amazed we still have a Frigate stationed in the Falklands. Frankly at present I doubt the Royal Navy could defend a duck pond let alone attack North Korea.
I read the book "lions donkeys and dinosaurs" once about the UK armed services. Left me in no doubt that it's run by idiots, and most of our equipment is cack. To think, if the money has been invested in.... Ooooh I dunno, education? We'd be in a much better position as a country
The Trump one is keeping quiet and i suspect that the US are getting into position to defend S. Korean and Guam and ready to attack. I'm sure our subs are in the vicinity to support the US. Someone has got to make the next move on whether to withdraw military exercises and leave the area or go further than the nose to nose confrontation. It's a big question for the sake of mankind on which path to take; walk away or eliminate this and future threats, and global damage? I'm glad that I don't have that responsibility on such a global scale but bring it down to a local confrontation say in a pub as a 60 year old then I would walk away.
I'm pretty sure they are not! A report which was strongly denied by the MoD (but they would wouldn't they) earlier in the year suggested our entire fleet of hunter/killer subs (all seven of them) were out of action. Whatever, it seems at least five are in for maintenance or having refits, including one of the new ones which are hardly fit for purpose anyway. One is reported to have a “irreparable generic fault”. To you and me, that's a crack in the nuclear reactor!
And only one of the four Trident fleet is at sea at any one time.
So, in summary, the Royal Navy has a barely usable fleet of submarines, an aircraft carrier with no planes and a fleet of Type 45 destroyers which can be heard by submarines about 100 miles away, break down if the water is marginally tepid and have other inherent faults. The Royal Navy is striving to keep two of these in operation readiness until the refit next year. Presumably when the duff american parts will be replaced.
I'm amazed we still have a Frigate stationed in the Falklands. Frankly at present I doubt the Royal Navy could defend a duck pond let alone attack North Korea.
But we are the fifth biggest economy in the word. That's a fact. Boris said it was.
The Trump one is keeping quiet and i suspect that the US are getting into position to defend S. Korean and Guam and ready to attack. I'm sure our subs are in the vicinity to support the US. Someone has got to make the next move on whether to withdraw military exercises and leave the area or go further than the nose to nose confrontation. It's a big question for the sake of mankind on which path to take; walk away or eliminate this and future threats, and global damage? I'm glad that I don't have that responsibility on such a global scale but bring it down to a local confrontation say in a pub as a 60 year old then I would walk away.
I'm pretty sure they are not! A report which was strongly denied by the MoD (but they would wouldn't they) earlier in the year suggested our entire fleet of hunter/killer subs (all seven of them) were out of action. Whatever, it seems at least five are in for maintenance or having refits, including one of the new ones which are hardly fit for purpose anyway. One is reported to have a “irreparable generic fault”. To you and me, that's a crack in the nuclear reactor!
And only one of the four Trident fleet is at sea at any one time.
So, in summary, the Royal Navy has a barely usable fleet of submarines, an aircraft carrier with no planes and a fleet of Type 45 destroyers which can be heard by submarines about 100 miles away, break down if the water is marginally tepid and have other inherent faults. The Royal Navy is striving to keep two of these in operation readiness until the refit next year. Presumably when the duff american parts will be replaced.
I'm amazed we still have a Frigate stationed in the Falklands. Frankly at present I doubt the Royal Navy could defend a duck pond let alone attack North Korea.
Cafcfan: how are you so sure? Not wanting a prolonged discussion on our current national defence situation but only a few weeks ago my colleague became worried that her son had to suddenly return from leave and go to sea; They had planned to see each before he returned to duty and is she is now worried. 3+ 2= 7 could mean they they headed to the troublesome area or just a reschedule of their duty. I can't see our pond not being protected and strategically placed to react accordingly if need be.....Worrying times indeed.
The Trump one is keeping quiet and i suspect that the US are getting into position to defend S. Korean and Guam and ready to attack. I'm sure our subs are in the vicinity to support the US. Someone has got to make the next move on whether to withdraw military exercises and leave the area or go further than the nose to nose confrontation. It's a big question for the sake of mankind on which path to take; walk away or eliminate this and future threats, and global damage? I'm glad that I don't have that responsibility on such a global scale but bring it down to a local confrontation say in a pub as a 60 year old then I would walk away.
I'm pretty sure they are not! A report which was strongly denied by the MoD (but they would wouldn't they) earlier in the year suggested our entire fleet of hunter/killer subs (all seven of them) were out of action. Whatever, it seems at least five are in for maintenance or having refits, including one of the new ones which are hardly fit for purpose anyway. One is reported to have a “irreparable generic fault”. To you and me, that's a crack in the nuclear reactor!
And only one of the four Trident fleet is at sea at any one time.
So, in summary, the Royal Navy has a barely usable fleet of submarines, an aircraft carrier with no planes and a fleet of Type 45 destroyers which can be heard by submarines about 100 miles away, break down if the water is marginally tepid and have other inherent faults. The Royal Navy is striving to keep two of these in operation readiness until the refit next year. Presumably when the duff american parts will be replaced.
I'm amazed we still have a Frigate stationed in the Falklands. Frankly at present I doubt the Royal Navy could defend a duck pond let alone attack North Korea.
Cafcfan: how are you so sure? Not wanting a prolonged discussion on our current national defence situation but only a few weeks ago my colleague became worried that her son had to suddenly return from leave and go to sea; They had planned to see each before he returned to duty and is she is now worried. 3+ 2= 7 could mean they they headed to the troublesome area or just a reschedule of their duty. I can't see our pond not being protected and strategically placed to react accordingly if need be.....Worrying times indeed.
The Trump one is keeping quiet and i suspect that the US are getting into position to defend S. Korean and Guam and ready to attack. I'm sure our subs are in the vicinity to support the US. Someone has got to make the next move on whether to withdraw military exercises and leave the area or go further than the nose to nose confrontation. It's a big question for the sake of mankind on which path to take; walk away or eliminate this and future threats, and global damage? I'm glad that I don't have that responsibility on such a global scale but bring it down to a local confrontation say in a pub as a 60 year old then I would walk away.
I'm pretty sure they are not! A report which was strongly denied by the MoD (but they would wouldn't they) earlier in the year suggested our entire fleet of hunter/killer subs (all seven of them) were out of action. Whatever, it seems at least five are in for maintenance or having refits, including one of the new ones which are hardly fit for purpose anyway. One is reported to have a “irreparable generic fault”. To you and me, that's a crack in the nuclear reactor!
And only one of the four Trident fleet is at sea at any one time.
So, in summary, the Royal Navy has a barely usable fleet of submarines, an aircraft carrier with no planes and a fleet of Type 45 destroyers which can be heard by submarines about 100 miles away, break down if the water is marginally tepid and have other inherent faults. The Royal Navy is striving to keep two of these in operation readiness until the refit next year. Presumably when the duff american parts will be replaced.
I'm amazed we still have a Frigate stationed in the Falklands. Frankly at present I doubt the Royal Navy could defend a duck pond let alone attack North Korea.
Not at all convinced of the accuracy of these supposed disclosures. No real way of confirmimg or denying them is there. I've no doubt there are various problems with some equipment and hardware but there always were and always will be and detractors can easily make outlandish statements.......after all, who can question them let alone prove them one way or another.
Comments
Wrong one?
Whoever mentioned brinkmanship hit the nail on the head. The mad man of North Korea does this stuff for a response and what Trump can be blamed for are his own actions and after Trump's comments in response to the last launch, anything short of a nuclear strike on North Korea sees Trump lose face cos he backed himself into a corner. Problem is that he can't go through with it because of the risk to Seoul in particular but also Japan from doing so, so he loses face and this will carry on
The minute China has had enough of them - even if they don't go any further, they are toast!
Look at what's just been happening regarding Bhutan over the last two months, Beijing takes it borders very seriously, especially if they see a chance to expand them.
Now he is in office, the grim reality of world politics begins to intrude on his dim mentality. Other countries don't instantly back down on demand, and while he may be able to devastate other countries with his WMDs, they may get off a couple themselves and kill millions of Americans.
The current situation may not be of Trump's bungling doing, but he's not any use as a world statesman, and well out of his depth now.
I still believe that this missile launch was mainly for home consumption. If KJU wanted to start a fight he could have already and turkeys generally don't vote for Christmas.
In no expert on Japanese history, but I can think of at least two missiles that have landed on Japan and caused slightly more damage than Norh Korea did.
The previous 'missiles' were both rockets sending NK satellites up.
I'm glad that I don't have that responsibility on such a global scale but bring it down to a local confrontation say in a pub as a 60 year old then I would walk away.
And only one of the four Trident fleet is at sea at any one time.
So, in summary, the Royal Navy has a barely usable fleet of submarines, an aircraft carrier with no planes and a fleet of Type 45 destroyers which can be heard by submarines about 100 miles away, break down if the water is marginally tepid and have other inherent faults. The Royal Navy is striving to keep two of these in operation readiness until the refit next year. Presumably when the duff american parts will be replaced.
I'm amazed we still have a Frigate stationed in the Falklands. Frankly at present I doubt the Royal Navy could defend a duck pond let alone attack North Korea.
If it can make it there, it can make it anywhere.!!!
I can't see our pond not being protected and strategically placed to react accordingly if need be.....Worrying times indeed.
Fingers crossed!
I've no doubt there are various problems with some equipment and hardware but there always were and always will be and detractors can easily make outlandish statements.......after all, who can question them let alone prove them one way or another.
If china want it drop it on them and if Putin says anything he can have some too
Simples
Yours sincerely
D trump