Archive 2017-2019 Political Thread

[Matt]

First, these are liberal smears from the 2008 election. Interesting that you are using them.

Secondly, they are almost all false, fabricated, highly misleading, or extremely distorted.

You owe McCain an apology.

Evan, do you not see the irony ?

 

[Evan]

I agree there about the US strike, but when I said they had the world by the nuts I meant more in situation due to the fact no one can really stop them, not that their ICBMs are holding the world hostage. Kim knows that the likelihood of a strike or strangling Chinese sanctions are low because none of the nations want to deal with the consequences.


No the worst part about a Nuclear state North Korea is hawking their bombs on the market for cash.

That's the thing. No one can stop them now because even if they don't have the ability to launch an ICBM with a nuclear warhead today, they probably have the ability to hit South Korea/Japan/China, and we know their conventional artillery and other forces could level Seoul in a day. The Kim family correctly gambled that they could play the sanctions game and start/stop their nuclear program and missile testing while keeping certain parts hidden and play musical chairs with the UN. They knew they just had to get to the point of no return and then they couldn't be stopped. And, because of their ability to destroy Seoul, no one was going to take military action against them. Plus, if someone did take those steps and risked Seoul, they'd still have to deal with millions of potential NK/SK refugees and a huge death toll.


No one wanted to take the risk of a massive preemptive conventional attack because there would be no way to minimize civilian casualties in North or South Korea. South Korea and Japan didn't even want to risk really preparing for such a possibility due to the Kim's incessant paranoia. If you even start staging troops and doing exercises, they start talking about an apocalypse. No one wanted to rip off the band-aid and take the risk, and subsequently with each passing year the band-aid has gotten harder and harder to even get to let alone remove. NK has trained assassins and spies in numerous countries -- especially in SK/Japan, and they would immediately unleash them to commit huge acts of terror if they were attacked. And, in addition to flattening Seoul, their short/intermediate range missiles with conventional warheads could probably hit a lot of Japan and SK and do remarkable damage with an extraordinary number of civilian casualties.


Honestly, we are left with two real military options. A conventional strike in which we accept a massive number of civilian deaths (in South Korea, Japan, and North Korea) – and we would absolutely have to have China’s approval and participation – OR a preemptive nuclear strike to take out North Korean leadership and military infrastructure followed up by numerous additional conventional strikes shortly after to make sure you got all that you needed to. In the first scenario, because of NK’s paranoia and spy network, you’d have to be extremely careful and you’d seriously risk a total upheaval and worldwide outrage for massacring civilians. And, even if China went along with you – Russia certainly isn’t going to, and although you don’t need their support you need them to demur. It goes without saying that a nuclear option is almost beyond our ability to understand because the consequences would literally change the world forever. If the US really did a second preemptive nuclear attack, we’d absolutely have to have China also use their weapons, the Russians would go insane because they wouldn’t trust that our missiles were really headed for NK (many would cross or go near Russia to get to NK unless using subs or bombers), and you’d change the threshold and calculation of when a nuclear attack is acceptable.


Remember how Trump asked why no one wanted to use Nuclear considering how powerful it was? Because you can’t put that genie back in the bottle. When we used it we were the only nuclear power. Others were a way away from having their own, and those that weren’t too far away were our allies except for Russia. Now, you have India, Pakistan, Israel, China, and Russia. Once you cross the bridge of using nuclear weapons in a nuclear world, you can be ASSURED that Iran, Saudi Arabia and pretty much every other rich or technologically advanced country of the world is going to go nuclear. They will feel like they HAVE to.


There’s really no good option at this point. Bill Clinton tried and failed with sanctions at a time when something conventional probably could have worked due to China’s weaker military and not yet being an economic giant. George W. Bush was otherwise occupied with two already existing land wars in Asia. Obama was never going to do anything and everyone in the world knew it, and part of that was because Obama was dealt such a crappy hand that he’d be going all in with a pair of 2’s when AKQJ10 was showing after the river.


That’s why this is such a complex and seemingly unsolvable problem. There’s just literally no good options or solutions out there.

 

[Evan]

It's true that we can't do much else to curb their nuclear program (that I can think of) and we shouldn't underestimate them, but I'm much more concerned for our allies in the region than mainland US when it comes to nuclear strikes. We've been perfecting defense missiles for decades and now the military even has lasers (talk about cool) that can obliterate a warhead out of the sky. NK is a big problem no doubt, but there's been a lot of media fear-mongering with sensationalized headlines about icbms reaching US. They'd have to do a lot more than an ICBM or even several at once to make it here.
Keep pressure on NK, but I don't think they have anyone "by the nuts" except for their own people.

I don't share you optimism at all. THAAD has a high success rate in controlled tests, but it has never been used in combat, and it was JUST this month that it was tested against an IRBM (intermediate range ballistic missile). It was a successful test, but 1/1 doesn't leave me with a whole lot of confidence. THAAD shows a lot of promise against shorter range missiles, but NK knows that and would look to use something we have less testing/experience with. Plus, we now know they've tested two ICBMs, and our GMD system that we would use against an ICBM has only been successful 55% of the time. That's pretty atrocious odds if you are basically 50/50 on letting an ICBM with a nuclear warhead strike its target. GMD has improved a lot in the past few years, but no way in a real combat situation we'd do any better than around 50% if not much worse.

Unfortunately, what you've said about laser interception doesn't currently exist. We had the YAL-1 system -- which was only for short range missiles, and it was scrapped awhile back. The parts literally don't even exist for it anymore. We've been trying to get bids and proposals for a new laser system that would work with higher energy and be able to hit an ICBM during its boost phase. The military has been working on making laser systems smaller and more powerful, but we are easily a few years away from anything we can deploy. That's why the NK ICBM test was such a big deal. We weren't expecting them to be able to get an ICBM going for another few years. The July 28th test was very scary because NK showed that they learned a LOT from their first ICBM test. And, we also found out earlier this year that NK now has solid fuel based missiles. They don't seem to have that technology yet ironed out for an ICBM (we hope), but solid fuel sharply reduces the range we'd have to intercept a missile in boost phase requiring any laser system to be within a few hundred kilometers of the launch site. That means we'd have to have a good bit of advance notice, and we'd have to have a drone/UAV with a working high power laser to be able to hit it. We don't have either of those things yet. That's the bids/proposals I was talking about. I'd imagine there is a rush going on right now to try to accelerate our testing of laser systems and re-purpose existing drones into something somewhat workable along with new drones purpose built for a laser system. But, because the much shorter range to intercept a solid fuel ICBM -- the drone would have to be able to be undetectable or very difficult to intercept/shoot down. If NK had solid fuel ICBMs and were really going to launch them they'd have jets up, their SAM systems and AA going, and observers looking for any drones. Even assuming we got something workable in two years -- it would still be a very untested system.

We are in a race against the clock to get GAD and laser systems to be able to intercept and destroy a NK ICBM. Right now, NK is much closer to having a workable ICBM with a nuclear warhead than we are to a system that has 90%+ effectiveness to intercept. Plus, as NK builds more missiles and has more launch sites (including mobile launchers) we have to deal with multiple targets at one time. GAD is only designed for a small number of ICBMs.

The bottom line is that I don't have the same confidence at all. I don't see what you see as fear-mongering. I think it is very sober analysis of the fact that we don't know what we don't know about NK's missile and nuclear program. We were very caught off guard by quite a few of their recent advancements. We thought that they were further behind the curve than they actually are, and they are showing an accelerating ability to get to where they want to be rather than any clear stumbling blocks or setbacks that would give us additional time to get our own systems working better.

Besides, NK being able to reach the US mainland is only one scenario. An outright war in Asia in which numerous countries get drawn in is also a possibility. Unlikely, sure. But no one knows how China/ Russia are going to evolve on NK, and let's not forget that India and Pakistan are not far away. They aren't exactly friends or allies of NK. There's a lot of uncertainty and unknown risk that requires sober, intelligent, and well-thought out analysis and leadership. Thankfully, our President has all of those qualities...oh wait.

 

[Evan]

Evan, do you not see the irony ?

No. Enlighten me. Because if you are trying to say reported FACTS about Trump are the same thing as completely false statements about McCain then there's no logic in the world left. There are TONS of conspiracy theories and smears about Trump that I've never mentioned here nor believe. For instance, hookers in Moscow, Louis Mensch craziness about Russia (who I've actually based here on Talkweather), etc. If you believe I've smeared Trump or told lies about him then please give me a list and I will provide reputable sources for every statement I made that wasn't an opinion. We discussed this previously when I imitated the people who smeared Hillary by saying she had Parkinson's, a brain tumor, etc.

The contrast is that I can provide multiple reputable sources reporting the things I've posted about Trump, or he has confirmed those things himself. There's no such corroboration available for the smear job on McCain, and in fact just a bit of searching reveals how false many of those claims are. So, I will await a list of things I've lied about related to Trump or negative smears that I made up or that were not based on facts.

 

[Evan]

What an embarrassment all of this is. The US government is a reality show at this point. It's absolutely pathetic. It blows my mind that there are people out there who still support this garbage and can justify it/pretend everything is fine.

But he drives the Democrats crazy... that's all that matters. Remember?

 

[Evan]

I take it everyone is OK with Ivanka and Jared continuing to make decisions about federal government staff and making government policy?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/...ci-white-house.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

 

[maroonedinhsv]

I don't share you optimism at all. THAAD has a high success rate in controlled tests, but it has never been used in combat, and it was JUST this month that it was tested against an IRBM (intermediate range ballistic missile). It was a successful test, but 1/1 doesn't leave me with a whole lot of confidence. THAAD shows a lot of promise against shorter range missiles, but NK knows that and would look to use something we have less testing/experience with. Plus, we now know they've tested two ICBMs, and our GMD system that we would use against an ICBM has only been successful 55% of the time. That's pretty atrocious odds if you are basically 50/50 on letting an ICBM with a nuclear warhead strike its target. GMD has improved a lot in the past few years, but no way in a real combat situation we'd do any better than around 50% if not much worse.

Unfortunately, what you've said about laser interception doesn't currently exist. We had the YAL-1 system -- which was only for short range missiles, and it was scrapped awhile back. The parts literally don't even exist for it anymore. We've been trying to get bids and proposals for a new laser system that would work with higher energy and be able to hit an ICBM during its boost phase. The military has been working on making laser systems smaller and more powerful, but we are easily a few years away from anything we can deploy. That's why the NK ICBM test was such a big deal. We weren't expecting them to be able to get an ICBM going for another few years. The July 28th test was very scary because NK showed that they learned a LOT from their first ICBM test. And, we also found out earlier this year that NK now has solid fuel based missiles. They don't seem to have that technology yet ironed out for an ICBM (we hope), but solid fuel sharply reduces the range we'd have to intercept a missile in boost phase requiring any laser system to be within a few hundred kilometers of the launch site. That means we'd have to have a good bit of advance notice, and we'd have to have a drone/UAV with a working high power laser to be able to hit it. We don't have either of those things yet. That's the bids/proposals I was talking about. I'd imagine there is a rush going on right now to try to accelerate our testing of laser systems and re-purpose existing drones into something somewhat workable along with new drones purpose built for a laser system. But, because the much shorter range to intercept a solid fuel ICBM -- the drone would have to be able to be undetectable or very difficult to intercept/shoot down. If NK had solid fuel ICBMs and were really going to launch them they'd have jets up, their SAM systems and AA going, and observers looking for any drones. Even assuming we got something workable in two years -- it would still be a very untested system.

We are in a race against the clock to get GAD and laser systems to be able to intercept and destroy a NK ICBM. Right now, NK is much closer to having a workable ICBM with a nuclear warhead than we are to a system that has 90%+ effectiveness to intercept. Plus, as NK builds more missiles and has more launch sites (including mobile launchers) we have to deal with multiple targets at one time. GAD is only designed for a small number of ICBMs.

The bottom line is that I don't have the same confidence at all. I don't see what you see as fear-mongering. I think it is very sober analysis of the fact that we don't know what we don't know about NK's missile and nuclear program. We were very caught off guard by quite a few of their recent advancements. We thought that they were further behind the curve than they actually are, and they are showing an accelerating ability to get to where they want to be rather than any clear stumbling blocks or setbacks that would give us additional time to get our own systems working better.

Besides, NK being able to reach the US mainland is only one scenario. An outright war in Asia in which numerous countries get drawn in is also a possibility. Unlikely, sure. But no one knows how China/ Russia are going to evolve on NK, and let's not forget that India and Pakistan are not far away. They aren't exactly friends or allies of NK. There's a lot of uncertainty and unknown risk that requires sober, intelligent, and well-thought out analysis and leadership. Thankfully, our President has all of those qualities...oh wait.

I'm not going to say too much , but I will say this: you're odds for GMD are far too pessimistic. From a mathematical perspective, you can gain some insight here https://mostlymissiledefense.com/20...d-system-interceptors-per-target-may-23-2012/
(I'm neither confirming nor denying the correctness of the assumptions in that article)

 

[Matt]

No. Enlighten me. Because if you are trying to say reported FACTS about Trump are the same thing as completely false statements about McCain then there's no logic in the world left. There are TONS of conspiracy theories and smears about Trump that I've never mentioned here nor believe. For instance, hookers in Moscow, Louis Mensch craziness about Russia (who I've actually based here on Talkweather), etc. If you believe I've smeared Trump or told lies about him then please give me a list and I will provide reputable sources for every statement I made that wasn't an opinion. We discussed this previously when I imitated the people who smeared Hillary by saying she had Parkinson's, a brain tumor, etc.

The contrast is that I can provide multiple reputable sources reporting the things I've posted about Trump, or he has confirmed those things himself. There's no such corroboration available for the smear job on McCain, and in fact just a bit of searching reveals how false many of those claims are. So, I will await a list of things I've lied about related to Trump or negative smears that I made up or that were not based on facts.

Since McCain ran his latest campaign mostly on repeal and replace and openly lied to his constituents, I find it totally acceptable to post lies about McCain.

 

[gangstonc]

Since McCain ran his latest campaign mostly on repeal and replace and openly lied to his constituents, I find it totally acceptable to post lies about McCain.

McCain is for repealing and replacing Obamacare, he just wants to do it in the proper manner.

 

[ghost]

Potty mouth Moochi is out as Comm Director after only 11 days. Ive never seen a White House admin and staff in such disarray and chaos

 

[maroonedinhsv]

Potty mouth Moochi is out as Comm Director after only 11 days. Ive never seen a White House admin and staff in such disarray and chaos

Who knew when Trump said he'd drain the swamp, he meant he'd keep firing/running off his own people?

 

[gangstonc]

Potty mouth Moochi is out as Comm Director after only 11 days. Ive never seen a White House admin and staff in such disarray and chaos

I actually think he is doing this on purpose.

 

[Evan]

I'm not going to say too much , but I will say this: you're odds for GMD are far too pessimistic. From a mathematical perspective, you can gain some insight here https://mostlymissiledefense.com/20...d-system-interceptors-per-target-may-23-2012/
(I'm neither confirming nor denying the correctness of the assumptions in that article)

Understood. No need to say anything you don't believe you should. Perhaps I'm too pessimistic, but as you know I can only go off of what's publicly available.

Those probabilities make sense if the underlying effectiveness rate and ability to get 2-4 independent attempts per ICBM are being extrapolated correctly by the author of that blog. From a mathematical perspective it is entirely logical.

I've actually seen that site once or twice before:

https://mostlymissiledefense.com

The main page has some recent updates on what's been publicly claimed about effectiveness as well as an updated testing schedule.

My skepticism, which I believe is fairly rational, is that mathematical probabilities of success and actual success are obviously two very different things. As I have absolutely no expertise in this area or access to the underlying data and assumptions (not that I'd then be able to do my own calculations because if I could I'd probably be working in a different industry...) I will say I don't have any reason to doubt that those mathematical probabilities are true or flawed.

But, and here's my caveat, tests are conducted for a reason, and I'm sure you are aware the results of tests don't always match up to mathematical predictions -- especially in such complex systems where there are thousands if notbeven millions of independent and dependent variables. Fair to assume that some are somewhat static, but NK's sudden progression to ICBM and solid-fuel usage in shorter range missiles is concerning as the mathematical probabilities are obviously having to assume quite a few things about what the threat would look like and speed, fuel type, launch system, prior warning, complexity of technology, etc (we could probably make a list pages long). And, a combat deployment being a very different thing from modeling or even controlled testing... even when making assumptions or calculations to control for variability and performance issues still makes me pessimistic about 100% success. Even 99.9% sounds great and is much better than 0% without any system at all, but the only 100% way to know we are protected is if NK doesn't have the missiles and warheads needed to conduct an attack.

I don't find it likely that NK is going to suddenly approach the sophistication of a Russian or even Chinese/Indian ICBM, or be able to produce the numbers of ICBMs let alone warheads as to make a large strike versus the very limited strike that the data probabilities we are discussing assumes, but the recent progress they've made is concerning. Because since our options are so limited now, and the testing schedule is somewhat slow, we are in a race to either get our system to the highest level possible first or NK gets what they need to truly be a threat.

Obviously they can't strike today. Probably not next year or the next either. But after that? Isn't that the ultimate point of sanctions and the covert action we've launched against NK? And our goal of getting China to withold aid and economically cripple them? To slow them down and make it harder for them to get to where they need to be, right? What if 5 years go by and we haven't managed to do anything about NK, and GMD has issues or has failed tests?

As a member of the public I don't know what I don't know. I defer to your knowledge or expertise and others that have a fuller understanding, but I'm a natural skeptic, and our national history with weapons systems is such that we've had a lot more underperformance than overperformance or goals being met.

Please understand I'm not arguing that 55% is completely accurate nor am I disputing what you linked to. I know enough to know what I don't know, and I obviously don't know or have the expertise to do anything more than ask questions or express concerns and point to what is public.

Trust me, I'm not expecting a North Korean ICBM attack -- or even their ability to launch such an attack -- to exist or happen anytime soon. But, I don't want us to rest on hope that one system performs as expected. I would assume that's the reason why we are re-developing a framework for building and testing laser systems, and why the only 100% sure method to protect the USA and our allies remains preventing NK from getting or developing what they need to be a true threat.

 

[maroonedinhsv]

Understood. No need to say anything you don't believe you should. Perhaps I'm too pessimistic, but as you know I can only go off of what's publicly available.

Those probabilities make sense if the underlying effectiveness rate and ability to get 2-4 independent attempts per ICBM are being extrapolated correctly by the author of that blog. From a mathematical perspective it is entirely logical.

I've actually seen that site once or twice before:

https://mostlymissiledefense.com

The main page has some recent updates on what's been publicly claimed about effectiveness as well as an updated testing schedule.

My skepticism, which I believe is fairly rational, is that mathematical probabilities of success and actual success are obviously two very different things. As I have absolutely no expertise in this area or access to the underlying data and assumptions (not that I'd then be able to do my own calculations because if I could I'd probably be working in a different industry...) I will say I don't have any reason to doubt that those mathematical probabilities are true or flawed.

But, and here's my caveat, tests are conducted for a reason, and I'm sure you are aware the results of tests don't always match up to mathematical predictions -- especially in such complex systems where there are thousands if notbeven millions of independent and dependent variables. Fair to assume that some are somewhat static, but NK's sudden progression to ICBM and solid-fuel usage in shorter range missiles is concerning as the mathematical probabilities are obviously having to assume quite a few things about what the threat would look like and speed, fuel type, launch system, prior warning, complexity of technology, etc (we could probably make a list pages long). And, a combat deployment being a very different thing from modeling or even controlled testing... even when making assumptions or calculations to control for variability and performance issues still makes me pessimistic about 100% success. Even 99.9% sounds great and is much better than 0% without any system at all, but the only 100% way to know we are protected is if NK doesn't have the missiles and warheads needed to conduct an attack.

I don't find it likely that NK is going to suddenly approach the sophistication of a Russian or even Chinese/Indian ICBM, or be able to produce the numbers of ICBMs let alone warheads as to make a large strike versus the very limited strike that the data probabilities we are discussing assumes, but the recent progress they've made is concerning. Because since our options are so limited now, and the testing schedule is somewhat slow, we are in a race to either get our system to the highest level possible first or NK gets what they need to truly be a threat.

Obviously they can't strike today. Probably not next year or the next either. But after that? Isn't that the ultimate point of sanctions and the covert action we've launched against NK? And our goal of getting China to withold aid and economically cripple them? To slow them down and make it harder for them to get to where they need to be, right? What if 5 years go by and we haven't managed to do anything about NK, and GMD has issues or has failed tests?

As a member of the public I don't know what I don't know. I defer to your knowledge or expertise and others that have a fuller understanding, but I'm a natural skeptic, and our national history with weapons systems is such that we've had a lot more underperformance than overperformance or goals being met.

Please understand I'm not arguing that 55% is completely accurate nor am I disputing what you linked to. I know enough to know what I don't know, and I obviously don't know or have the expertise to do anything more than ask questions or express concerns and point to what is public.

Trust me, I'm not expecting a North Korean ICBM attack -- or even their ability to launch such an attack -- to exist or happen anytime soon. But, I don't want us to rest on hope that one system performs as expected. I would assume that's the reason why we are re-developing a framework for building and testing laser systems, and why the only 100% sure method to protect the USA and our allies remains preventing NK from getting or developing what they need to be a true threat.

Oh, there's no doubt that it's less than 100%. As the old saying goes, there are very few guarantees in life. I just wanted to point out that GMD stands a better chance of being successful than your estimate indicates. I believe there is a much greater likelihood of an NK ICBM failure than there is of a GMD failure in the event of an NK successful launch. I don't disagree with your stance, no nukes would definitely be the preferred solution.

 

[Matt]

McCain is for repealing and replacing Obamacare, he just wants to do it in the proper manner.

BS. McCain only wants to stick a finger in trumps eye. He never was serious about repeal and replace. It was a campaign issue only. McCain is a rotten to the core person. He was a mediocre officer and naval aviator. He needs to retire.

 

[gangstonc]

BS. McCain only wants to stick a finger in trumps eye. He never was serious about repeal and replace. It was a campaign issue only. McCain is a rotten to the core person. He was a mediocre officer and naval aviator. He needs to retire.

He will probably die while in office and get the hero's funeral he deserves.

 

[ghost]

BS. McCain only wants to stick a finger in trumps eye. He never was serious about repeal and replace. It was a campaign issue only. McCain is a rotten to the core person. He was a mediocre officer and naval aviator. He needs to retire.

Dang Matt... that's a lot of hate in your heart. You think McCain is rotten to the core and a POS. Why don't you feel the same about Trump with his character and hypocrisy issues?

 

[Evan]

BS. McCain only wants to stick a finger in trumps eye. He never was serious about repeal and replace. It was a campaign issue only. McCain is a rotten to the core person. He was a mediocre officer and naval aviator. He needs to retire.

By all means keep attacking an 80 year old war hero that has brain cancer. What's wrong with you lately? You know this isn't right.

 

[Evan]

Seth Rich story was fabricated by Fox -- highly likely that the WH was involved.



Yesterday, the WaPo broke a story that Trump personally crafted his son's highly-misleading initial statement on the meeting with Russian nationals.

Why is Trump so eager to protect Russia and hide his dealings with them as well as his financial records? Last time I checked the President is a public office that serves the American people. He's not above the law or entitled to the privacy protections afforded a private citizen. The White House is not Trump Incorporated.

 

[Matt]

By all means keep attacking an 80 year old war hero that has brain cancer. What's wrong with you lately? You know this isn't right.

That 80 year old war hero is trying to screw his party and constituents and the country. McCain has hidden behind his "hero" and "POW" labels without retribution long enough. What am I trying to do ? Drain the swamp ! Do you not agree that D.C. is broken and needs a major shake up ? 80 year old war heroes that spend forty years in government is not what the Founding fathers had in mind.