Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)
61 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
OPPOSE! Aristus Mar 2017 #1
I oppose too, but supremacy doesn't have much to do with this, I think. randome Mar 2017 #9
Good grief, NK by itself. Then CHINA Hortensis Mar 2017 #38
I know. NK is a tragedy with no clear solution. randome Mar 2017 #40
Sorry but the wording is confusing ProudLib72 Mar 2017 #2
Oppose maryellen99 Mar 2017 #3
NK cannot be allowed to continue building longer range delivery vehicles Calculating Mar 2017 #4
Depends on what China might do. If they stand back, then yes. SharonAnn Mar 2017 #27
Sounds like something the UN/international community should address. meadowlander Mar 2017 #28
If no one has a pre-emptive strike, we would have eliminated war HoneyBadger Mar 2017 #5
We are treaty bound to defend Japan and South Korea* if they are attacked. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #6
South Korea, maybe? randome Mar 2017 #10
I support preemptive diplomacy... Blanks Mar 2017 #7
Yes! I am totally in favor of not preemptively using nuclear weapons on the DPRK NurseJackie Mar 2017 #8
N.K. nuke sub over halfway built already Tom the Mechanic Mar 2017 #11
North Korea has the technology to build a nuclear submarine? DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #12
You can see it from satelite Tom the Mechanic Mar 2017 #15
Do you have a link? DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #16
It's for real and even though by all standards it's rudimentary, if completed it would change a lot. NWCorona Mar 2017 #30
Even if it is not mechanized DK504 Mar 2017 #33
I'd like to see a link to that too. nt cwydro Mar 2017 #23
See post #30 NWCorona Mar 2017 #32
Thanks! cwydro Mar 2017 #55
Really... Why are Republican policies given equal credence here? procon Mar 2017 #13
There are defenses of a pre-emptive strike in this thread. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #14
An incidental happenstance; and not the focus of this thread, yeah? procon Mar 2017 #18
Oh, I knew it would be lopsided. I was trying to get the pre-emptive strikers to reveal themselves. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #20
Hogwash. procon Mar 2017 #24
Wow. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #25
The assumption of any "value" in the rhetorical question presented is open to debate. procon Mar 2017 #54
My thread has fostered discussion as intended, your pomposity and pretentiousness notwithstanding. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #56
As stated above, this is just another attention seeking poll. procon Mar 2017 #59
I intended to foster discussion on a discussion board. The tragedy. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #60
I Support Regime Change erpowers Mar 2017 #17
Oh sure MFM008 Mar 2017 #19
It would probably be a preventative strike, not pre-emptive wiggs Mar 2017 #21
I oppose. LP2K12 Mar 2017 #22
He's going to kill us all, but first he'll take his family and fly to Mother Russia to live. SummerSnow Mar 2017 #26
I say favor ExciteBike66 Mar 2017 #29
Not only no, but Hell NO! haele Mar 2017 #31
Sorry, N Korea has nowhere near the megatonnage needed for what you said. EX500rider Mar 2017 #37
Nine nuclear weapons going off is nine nuclear weapons too much. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #43
It's not just what they can deliver in a strike. haele Mar 2017 #46
So would just assassinating him work? Kittycow Mar 2017 #39
No, there are too many levels of NK political crazy down for outsiders to do it. haele Mar 2017 #50
I'm against the Bush doctrine except for extreme cases. NWCorona Mar 2017 #34
I apposed it for the obvious reason, the war thing. Javaman Mar 2017 #35
SHIT! get the red out Mar 2017 #36
By "pre-emptive", you mean before they strike? Thanks. nt. NCTraveler Mar 2017 #41
Yes, of course... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #42
If a strike by them was certain, of course we should strike them ahead of time. NCTraveler Mar 2017 #44
We have military treaties with Japan and South Korea. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #45
"It's also the moral thing to do. " That poses little significance. NCTraveler Mar 2017 #47
All I know is if they attack Japan or South Korea we should do whatever is necessary to repel the... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #48
Fucking hell no!!!! Initech Mar 2017 #49
We don't need another war we're bound to LOSE. eom BlueCaliDem Mar 2017 #51
no 'preemptive wars. period heaven05 Mar 2017 #52
Strongly Oppose JDC Mar 2017 #53
I voted "No vote" because I need more context for the question. stevenleser Mar 2017 #57
Why isn't ARE YOU NUTS? a choice? tavernier Mar 2017 #58
No! I would like Seoul and the rest of SK to remain intact...please Kimchijeon Mar 2017 #61
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Do you favor or oppose a ...