General Discussion

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,719 posts)

25. Wow.

Tue Mar 21, 2017, 02:29 PM

Mar 2017

I have a question and your post provides the perfect opportunity to ask it. What do internet posters think will happen when they disrespect other posters? Do they think the disrespected party will just cower, especially when he or she is anonymous?

Thank you in advance.

Not cowering.

P.S. Seventy members of our community voted. That indicates the value of my query.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

61 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Do you favor or oppose a pre-emptive military strike on North Korea [View all] DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 OP

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