National Rifle Association TV host says his request for North Korea to nuke California was a "joke"


#62

You’re being extremely unfair to your fellow mutants; many of whom perpetually give you the benefit of the doubt when you get all riled up about your own pet cause, often to the point of being inconsiderate to others.

Again, not cool bro.

Also, Sarah Silverman isn’t funny.

There’s world a difference between dark humor, and saying something fucked up that unintentionally shows what kind of person you really are.


#63

Assuming they have have a boat big enough to fire a missile big enough to reach CA from say the middle of the Pacific, no way a North Korean boat is going to be allowed that close. We literally can see everything from space like a god. They can’t even make their bomb small enough to launch like we do in submarines. All of this is literally rocket science. We can also track subs through a network of listening stations under the sea.

Finally, NK has been making literal threats of nuclear attacks against the US for years. Literally. Why is it anyone is suddenly giving them any credence? Because Trump opened his big yap?

We can agree on this. I really want to like her, and her genre of humor works for me with other people, but every time I try it doesn’t work.

Fair point. But I still can’t help but feel how one feels about this depends where their biases lie, and if the parties involved were switched one wouldn’t have the same level of being upset. Another case in point, someone just posted on my feed that NK should target South Carolina because there is a white nationalist rally.

I guess I am asking for consistency? Is such humor ever acceptable or not? I don’t have any problem with condemning this guys statements even if it was a joke. I just can’t believe some of the same people condemning it also liked the idea of nuking OK. I concede my initial comment was a little harsh, but I just really saw this as hypocrisy and that grinds my gears.

I suppose one could try to argue that nuking Oklahoma bigots or South Carolina white nationalists is more focused on “bad people”, vs a whole State (or more like one city in a whole state, as a single missile can’t nuke a whole state). But if you think about it past the initial comment, there are a lot of innocent lives besides just the bad people you wished ill on. I’ll try to keep consistent on the stance we don’t nuke anyone anywhere.

I like your quote in the image too.


#64

Then that person is in the wrong.

You can’t fight hatred with more hatred; it doesn’t fucking work and it just makes everything worse for anyone caught in the middle.

Argue for consistency all you like; human beings are an inherently inconsistent species, except maybe in our capacity for self destruction.


#65

I don’t find that it takes “mental gymnastics” to find it objectionable that the public media face of the NRA is “joking” about encouraging the destruction of California by nuclear weapons.

I would find it equally tasteless and objectionable if, say, The Daily Show joked around about North Korea sending its missles to Trump’s vacation hideaway.


#66

Thank you; so would I; even though I’m clearly no fan of 45 and Co.


#67

Boris is only funny if you like especially sick jokes.

(Yes, he IS trying to woo voters with his ‘humorous’ approach to many topics and public relations in general, I fully agree, and we should be very suspicious of his motives at all times. But the closest he has ever come to getting a laugh out of me was when Gove stabbed him in the back.)

(ETA ref the “Republicans hate America” exchange. They hate the real 21st century America. They love the mythical America they pine for or their leaders are trying to (re)make. And given a choice their leaders love big business and money more than American people.)


#68

You say that like the fucking president is just some guy on the Internet.

Yes, the actual president of the actual United States threatened to drop nukes on North Korea.

I think a certain feeling of alarm is warranted.


#70

Well the NRA does have the word Rifle in their name.


#71

I’m not saying its not unusual or contrary to what we have done the past. But these claims of “nuclear war” are a bit exaggerated. NK can’t actually reach us. They probably couldn’t reach Guam. Regardless if they could, they have been threatening to do so for years and it was never a big deal (at least here). Why would they be more likely to strike now that Trump has replied to their trolling? Why is everyone concerned NOW vs a month ago when NK was doing the same shit they are now?

Look Trump is a clown and the least diplomatic and presidential president in my memory. But we don’t have to have hysterics every time he speaks.


#72

NK has been putting out ridiculously over-the-top propaganda about destroying the US for many years; very few people take them seriously at all. Their missiles have little hope of actually hitting the US mainland, much less Hawaii or Guam. But I think some people are foreseeing a scenario much like this:
• Trump keeps goading and bullying North Korea until Kim Jong Un either actually launches something or goes through threatening motions that look like he’s about to
• Trump/Bannon/Mattis panics, launches an attack
• China panics, launches an attack on either NK or the US or both
• Japan panics, does something foolish
• South Korea panics, etc

North Korea has had everyone in Asia on edge for a decade or so. I’m worried Trump will do something to tip the powder keg.

Related: Trump’s precious approval rating numbers have inched up since his bellicose statements. I also worry that he’ll take that as a hint that he has to wage some serious war to regain popularity with Republicans.


#73

Much less targets that are thousands of miles closer? (Why is it harder to strike Guam or Hawaii?)


#74

Not to mention that the forum of a group which implicitly advocates violence by their constant lobbying against background checks, federal research into the epidemic of gun deaths, outlawing the sale of automatic weapons, etc.


#75

Accuracy. Continents are big targets.


#76

I disagree. North Korean control systems look very good to me. They are not shooting their missiles at random. Then are throwing a lot of mass at high velocity with good precision. My opinion is that they could hit the US west coast. The issue now is would they do such a thing?

I really hate that it comes down partly to the personalities of the leaders on both sides, Neither Trump or Kim has any background in diplomacy or military leadership.


#77

Trump aside, for something to happen you would have to have multiple countries and those leaders all “panic” for something like this to happen. I know I don’t have the strongest faith in government, but I am quite certain everyone has plans in place to react to NK accordingly. Most of them probably have new US Wildcard scenarios in place.

I guess I don’t really fear NK being goad to do anything, because Kim Jong Un isn’t completely insane and likes being alive. I think much of the media reaction is fear mongering - which is bad - because fear leads to people supporting shit they shouldn’t, as you noted with the numbers uptick.

If I were the conspiracy type, I would think he did this to weaken Asian markets, which has taken a tumble from this. But honestly, I don’t think he is some mastermind orchestrating economic chaos to profit from. He’s an idiot on twitter.

That’s baloney.

Every thing I’ve read says their rockets aren’t capable of physically getting to the main land US. ICBMs are literally rocket science and it’s a bitch to get something that big with that large of a payload up into space and back down where you want it.


#78

But they did. They flew their last rocket for 40 minutes and hit the Sea of Japan. 40 minutes is half an orbit. They can hit a target roughly 300km wide on the other side of the planet. We don’t know exactly how accurate their targeting was but it seems a fair assumption they would not have tried to land there if there was a significant risk of hitting South Korean, Russian or Japanese territory.

We don’t know the size of their payload. It might have been 100kg, or it might have been 1000kg. Their demonstrated range is 20000km, but they need half of that to get to the US mainland.

This article says the Taepodong-2 has been capable of hitting the US since 2000.


#79

You know, on second thought, you’re probably right. I’m sure they don’t give a shit whether people are violent or not, or whether 9 people in a church get blown away, or California gets nuked. They’re safe in their little lobbying bubble, making tons of money, regardless.


#80

NK missile issues:

  1. Reentry shielding. Their missiles have a tendency to melt on the way down. They’ll probably have that worked out soon.

  2. Targeting. They’re never going to manage Chinese-grade precision (the Chinese military can get direct hits on warships with ballistic missiles), but they’ll probably hit the country they’re aiming at. Inaccuracy is a mixed blessing; they may miss a target, but they might also hit something by mistake during a test launch.

  3. Miniaturisation. There are claims that they’ve recently managed to make a nuke small enough to fit on a missile, but the truth of that is unverified. There’s also no way for anyone to know if the miniaturised nuke + ICBM combo they’ve developed will work unless they conduct a live nuclear test.

The North Koreans will not launch a nuclear attack on anyone unless they feel that their survival depends on it (or as a revenge strike if they think they’re doomed).

However, if American missiles and bombs begin hitting North Korea, that is a judgement call that the Koreans will have to make under extreme time pressure with imperfect information.

Want to avoid nuclear war? Don’t attack Korea.


#81

Because they finally have functioning long-range missiles and reportedly have miniaturized the warhead enough to fit in one. I’m not entirely convinced they’re particularly close to being able to hit the US, but some people seem to think they are.


#82

I should have defined that as American conservatives.