So why believe N Korea ICBM capabilities?

So why believe N Korea ICBM capabilities?  | HOW MANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION DID WE FIND IN IRAQ? | image tagged in memes,steve harvey | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
1,923 views, 6 upvotes, Made by damagedgood 11 months ago memessteve harvey
Steve Harvey memeRe-caption this meme
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
[deleted]
5 ups, 1 reply
Steve Harvey Meme | HOW MANY ARE YOU WANTING THEM TO FIRE AT US BEFORE YOU ARE WILLING TO ADMIT SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE | image tagged in memes,steve harvey | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
[deleted]
5 ups, 1 reply
Third World Skeptical Kid Meme | SO YOU ARE TELLING ME IT IS BETTER TO WAIT TO BE HIT WITH A MISSILE THAN TO RESPOND TO THE THREATS YOU ARE A SPECIAL KIND OF STUPID, AREN'T  | image tagged in memes,third world skeptical kid | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Kim has it pretty good over there doesn't he? Even if at the expense of his people. Why would he launch a missile at us when he surely knows he and his people will be destroyed? You are responding to idle threats that can't be taken seriously just to jerk off to your display of power. shock and awe indeed. Let those who share a border with that country deal with it. Stop insisting the USA has to be the world's cop.
reply
[deleted]
4 ups, 3 replies
Why would he create nuclear weapons, or even threaten to create nuclear weapons, unless he has a plan to use them? Why has N.K. agreed with the U.N. on different occasions to cease making nuclear weapons, then to later break the treaty and start making weapons again? How much do you think he really cares about his people when he killed the majority of his staff after inheriting his position from his dad? Do you think a man who is willing to attack innocent people, constantly break multiple treaties, and continue to do weapon testing on a regular basis really cares what the outcome will be, even if it includes the destruction of his own country? Do you think Hitler cared? South Korea wants something done about it, including other surrounding countries. But to say we shouldn't do anything when threats are being made, and mind you that these are not idle threats as with just a trajectory change one of their latest missiles could have hit as far in as Chicago, just goes to show how stupid you really are. When a country has missile capabilities that can attack far beyond their borders, they are not just a problem for their neighbors. It also isn't a matter of saying that the USA should be the world's cop, in fact I am against that myself. This has nothing to do with that when the threats are not idle and we really don't know how close they are from not only attacking us with any bomb, but knowing they are working on developing nukes we don't know how close they are from having that capability as well. They are not going to stop peacefully, cause they have already proven multiple times they are willing to break any treaty they desire, so there really is no other option than to respond with a strategic attack by just taking out their leadership. No reason to send troops in and have another 5-10 year war with a country and accomplish nothing. An idle threat would be if I was to threaten your life right now. I have no idea what your real identity is to know where you live to even be able to try to attack you. There would be no possibility I could do anything, even though I possess the capabilities if I did have that information. We may not know exactly what they have, but we also don't know what they don't have. There is absolutely no way you can say that they are just giving out idle threats. He doesn't care what the outcome will be for his country or his people, and to state otherwise is just being stupid.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
TFW Reaction | image tagged in tfw reaction | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
My reaction when people go on rants about how America should be the "world police."
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
And where exactly did I say that America should be the world police? N.K. threatened to attack us, and also directly threatened to attack Guam, which is apart of the United States and that we vowed to protect. So when any country threatens to attack us in any way, how is that saying we should be the world police?
reply
1 up, 1 reply
You have a good point by the way. You can't threaten the USA without repercussions.
reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 1 reply
If you had actually read my comment instead of jumping to conclusions like damagedgood kept doing, then you wouldn't make yourself look like a fool. In no other comment that I made did I state we should be the world police, that was a false claim damagedgood made to try to make me look like the bad guy. Nice to know how gullible some people are here.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I was proving that you could have made your point by using three sentences just like you did in your comment to me! But I'm the "gullible" one?
[deleted]
3 ups
How about you go back and read the comment I was responding to. There was more in that comment than just the claim that I was stating we should be the world police. My response covered how little Kim cares about his people or his country, and that he doesn't really care if they get bombed in the process of making threats. I then continued to cover the false claims that were made about the threats being idle and only those countries that border N.K. should deal with them and why. In only 1 sentence in that comment did I cover that I don't think we should be the world police. So what you claim to be excessive wordiness is your lack of understanding that the response was covering more than just 1 false claim. And yes you are gullible because you were willing to believe 1 comment from someone without reading the entire conversation to be able to come up with a conclusion all on your own.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
"He doesn't care what the outcome will be for his country or his people, and to state otherwise is just being stupid."

Definition of stupid is believing anything out of Trump's mouth. Kim has a higher IQ than proud Trump supporters. Let the countries that share a border with N Korea deal with it. Because they will suffer just as much a N Korea when we nuke them.
Kim may be crazy. But Trump is crazier and more powerful to boot and that is way more scary than missiles being launched into a nearby sea.
reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 3 replies
Who said anything about f**king nuking them? I never said to send a nuke there. MOAB isn't a nuke, and just 1 or 2 of those will take care of the leaders there and have no negative impact on the surrounding countries.

Those missiles that were launched into a nearby sea reached vertical trajectories, that if modified to be at a more horizontal level, would reach the center of the USA. Yea that shouldn't scare us at all.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
[deleted]
1 up
reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 2 replies
What actual evidence, not provided by CNN, do you have that Trump is a threat to me or this country?
[deleted]
2 ups
So no evidence what so ever. Or is it because I said you are not allowed to use CNN? Either way, good to know that I have absolutely no reason to feel any threat from our president.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups
Well if that doesn't show how much you support Killary (creating a Russian conspiracy) I don't know what other proof people would need. Germany is only twice the size of N.K. and look what they did during the world wars. The size of the country means shit.

Just because the intel was wrong about Iraq, what makes you think we should take the same chance on any country that claims to be making nuclear weapons and than threatens us?

FYI, Guam which is in close proximity to N.K. is a part of the United States and we vowed to defend it. So even if the threat was only to reach as far as Guam, it is our responsibility to defend it.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Kim is developing nukes, or just claiming he has that capability, for the same reason as any other country. MAD mutually assured destruction. He feels threatened and this is his only play.
reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 1 reply
What does he have to be threatened about? When did we start threatening them? When did anyone start threatening them?
reply
[deleted]
1 up
I see you have reverted back to having an 8 IQ in your responses. If you were a fat leader of a starving country, you should only feel threatened that your own people won't just eat you to stay alive. That is absolutely no reason to threaten other countries with nuclear warfare.
reply
4 ups
reply
[deleted]
2 ups
Tons, I was there cupcake
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Tons, I was there. Sarin gas and more
reply
[deleted]
1 up
ty 4 your service
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
Saddam- Fascist dictator who killed the 2nd most people ever as a "fascist"(only hitler killed more under fascism) He killed more people than Mussolini, idi amin and Milosevic(clintons war) combine.He modeled his Ba'ath party after Hitler's 3rd Reich and he caused the worlds worst (non nuclear)environmental hazard ever DELIBERATELY ! this alone should have been enough to warrant his death.. His deliberate oil spill spilled more oil than the other top 10 combined.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups
https://imgflip.com/i/1v72tu?nerp=1504395018#com1740369
reply
[deleted]
1 up
Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much of his nation's wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
-- President Bill Clinton (State of the Union Address), Jan. 27, 1998

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators.""Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
reply
[deleted]
1 up
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
reply
1 up
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
Jarrod L. Taylor, a former Army sergeant on hand for the destruction of mustard shells that burned two soldiers in his infantry company, joked of “wounds that never happened” from “that stuff that didn’t exist.” The public, he said, was misled for a decade. “I love it when I hear, ‘Oh there weren’t any chemical weapons in Iraq,’ ” he said. “There were plenty.” nyt article oct 2014
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
Never claimed chemical weapons weren't there. He used chemical weapons on his own people didn't he? Iraq war was/is a complete failure. I was using WMD as a term for nukes. they kept telling us they had nukes. wasn't true
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 2 replies
chem weapons are wmds
reply
2 ups
amen
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
yes. but not nukes. and they didn't have a way to deliver them to the usa via icbm. it was a bogus war.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
again, Biological wmds have the potential to spread a pandemic far worse than a nuke. Both are very bad. he had them and also chem wmds. Bush's main fault was that he was GOP, had a democrat done the same thing the media would have cheered.
reply
[deleted]
1 up
the dude is smoking crack, wmds are chem weapons
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
and he did have the beginnings of atomic reactor, less advanced than we thought . he had tons of yellow cake uranium, no where near a smoking gun but the the gun powder for that gun, but mustard gas is a wmd, so says the Geneva convention.. also he had Biological weapons(so says bill clinton), that have the potential to kill as many if not more than a nuke
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Look. It was a bogus war. I am tired of the USA being the world's cop. We spend more money on military than the other top 10 countries in the world, COMBINED.
reply
[deleted]
1 up
i agree about the usa being a "cop" but "bogus" because the media said it was? was it fought wrong? yes, but how do you know what saddam might have done? nobody will know. he was an evil man that needed to die, should we sent seal team 6 over there to kill him? yes but hindsite is 20/20
reply
[deleted]
1 up
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
-- Ex President Bill Clinton, Jul. 22, 2003 (Interview with CNN Larry King)
Flip Settings
Steve Harvey memeRe-caption this meme

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

Show embed codes
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
HOW MANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION; DID WE FIND IN IRAQ?
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back