LogFAQs > #884605273

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, Database 1 ( 03.09.2017-09.16.2017 ), DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	AP Twitter: If NK sent missiles towards Guam or US, should US shoot them down?
s0nicfan 08/11/17 5:22:46 PM #23:	Xelltrix posted... s0nicfan posted... darkphoenix181 posted... s0nicfan posted... Read the article. Their main point is if we try to intercept them and fail it causes a LOT of problems globally for the US. The "should" is considering what's best given the possibility of failure to intercept, which is a very real possibility. not shooting them down because we are afraid we would miss sends the same signal to NK as if we tried and missed No it doesn't. It objectively doesn't. You're trading a possibility for a certainty. They wouldn't know if we could if we don't, making it riskier to target real things like cities. If we try and fail, they'll know for certain we can't. Um, yeah it does. It means either our systems were too bad to detect the missiles in time, we didn't care enough to try and stop them, or we were afraid of giving away our defenses being weak. On top of the fact people will die if NK hits the mark. There is no positive to not trying. All I can say at this point is thank god you're not in charge of military strategy. No point in pushing further since you're not going to get it. --- "History Is Much Like An Endless Waltz. The Three Beats Of War, Peace And Revolution Continue On Forever." - Gundam Wing: Endless Waltz <cite>s0nicfan posted [p:884605273] in AP Twitter... [t:75661313]...</cite> <quote><cite>Xelltrix posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote><cite>darkphoenix181 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>Read the article. Their main point is if we try to intercept them and fail it causes a LOT of problems globally for the US. The "should" is considering what's best given the possibility of failure to intercept, which is a very real possibility.</quote> not shooting them down because we are afraid we would miss sends the same signal to NK as if we tried and missed</quote> No it doesn't. It objectively doesn't. You're trading a possibility for a certainty. They wouldn't know if we could if we don't, making it riskier to target real things like cities. If we try and fail, they'll know for certain we can't.</quote> Um, yeah it does. It means either our systems were too bad to detect the missiles in time, we didn't care enough to try and stop them, or we were afraid of giving away our defenses being weak. On top of the fact people will die if NK hits the mark. There is no positive to not trying.</quote> All I can say at this point is thank god you're not in charge of military strategy. No point in pushing further since you're not going to get it. --- "History Is Much Like An Endless Waltz. The Three Beats Of War, Peace And Revolution Continue On Forever." - Gundam Wing: Endless Waltz</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1