yeah.... 'MURICA.. Too bad they won't be nuked because of their proximity to south korea, china, japan and russia.
Click to expand


What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#1 - mutants (04/01/2013) [-]
Too bad they won't be nuked because of their proximity to south korea, china, japan and russia.
User avatar #23 to #1 - pinkiepiethecunt (04/01/2013) [-]
make a smaller nuke
#37 to #23 - anon (04/01/2013) [-]
That's like trying to make a smaller death
#51 to #37 - frysandaburger (04/02/2013) [-]
Back in the 60's we('Murica) made an atomic mortar shell and an atomic landmine... we can make that bitch as small as we want.
Back in the 60's we('Murica) made an atomic mortar shell and an atomic landmine... we can make that bitch as small as we want.
User avatar #45 to #37 - pinkiepiethecunt (04/01/2013) [-]
We should try it then and not be pussies about it
User avatar #2 to #1 - rummler (04/01/2013) [-]
we could still **** them up
User avatar #21 to #2 - nightmaren (04/01/2013) [-]
Yeah, just nuke the country, that will definitely solve the problem, and America will be the heroes of the world once again! It's not like the country has an entire population of innocent civilians who are being oppressed and starved or anything.
User avatar #43 to #21 - seniorpokeman (04/01/2013) [-]
Why are you being thumbed down? You're right.
#19 to #2 - anon (04/01/2013) [-]
i actually want them to nuke america, id give a nuclear winter just so i could see people like you get their throbbing MURICA **** YEA cock blown off and vaporized
User avatar #30 to #19 - ilovehitler (04/01/2013) [-]
I'm wondering if they even have enough nukes to kill america.
User avatar #42 to #19 - iamchicken (04/01/2013) [-]
I doubt with every waking bone in my body that North Korea would be able to do that... They might get a good hit with one nuke but after that it would all go to hell for them.
User avatar #28 to #1 - mooghens (04/01/2013) [-]
You don't need nukes these days to blow everything to kingdom come
#18 to #1 - anon (04/01/2013) [-]
because of their proximity to japan ? hahahahahah what a twist
User avatar #6 - kyoutu (04/01/2013) [-]

Retard alert
#17 - tenmillionbears (04/01/2013) [-]
Grammar isn't a verb. Learn grammar.
#4 - bagelstylechess (04/01/2013) [-]
Seconds is not possessive. Learn to grammar.
#55 to #4 - baconfattie ONLINE (04/02/2013) [-]
Seconds "are"...
#65 to #55 - bagelstylechess (04/02/2013) [-]
I was referring to the single word "seconds", therefore "is" is correct. Learn to grammar.
#66 to #65 - baconfattie ONLINE (04/03/2013) [-]
then it should be *"seconds" is not possessive*
#67 to #66 - bagelstylechess (04/03/2013) [-]
I'm sorry you're not intelligent enough to understand it the first time.
User avatar #7 to #4 - cowandchicken (04/01/2013) [-]
isnt grammar spelt GammER? but not in caps.
User avatar #8 to #7 - goodguygary ONLINE (04/01/2013) [-]
no it's spelled grammar with an "a"
User avatar #64 to #8 - cowandchicken (04/02/2013) [-]
atleast one person is good enough to not judge me.
#11 to #7 - dountcountthesheep (04/01/2013) [-]
lmao, he thinks he's people!
User avatar #12 to #7 - mylazy (04/01/2013) [-]
You know, when you are typing...if there is a red squiggly line under it, it means that you spelled it wrong. So, next time you ask a question like that check to see if grammer or grammar has the line under it.
User avatar #9 - Falkor (04/01/2013) [-]
N.Korea's gonna turn into the moon?
#40 - yodaddysofat ONLINE (04/01/2013) [-]
how we should deal with NK
how we should deal with NK
#26 - dinkcool (04/01/2013) [-]
The glorious leader will use his divine powers to destroy all western imperialist pigs!
User avatar #29 to #26 - zorororonoa (04/01/2013) [-]
But first, the cake.
User avatar #32 to #29 - dinkcool (04/01/2013) [-]
Of course, the cake is what gives the leader his powers.
User avatar #59 to #26 - zanekin (04/02/2013) [-]
But then there will be no more bacon...
#16 - itrooztrooperdown (04/01/2013) [-]
Yeh Bomb 'em all!

ho kares 'bout anythin we're so cool we can bomb everyone, bomb the nerds america **** yes !

Note: this might be an exaggeration.
#22 - anon (04/01/2013) [-]
the millions of innocent people that are kept in the dictatorship through fear will die but there living in such poverty death will probably be a release
#61 to #22 - zanekin (04/02/2013) [-]
Yup death is the only true peace for their souls
#27 - anon (04/01/2013) [-]
america would loose all their friends if they nuked another civilian city
how many cityes have they nuked now ?
User avatar #31 to #27 - ilovehitler (04/01/2013) [-]
Two, I believe. But I get the feeling if another country launched a nuke first, and we retaliated in kind, we wouldn't be quite as hated.
In all reality, we likely wouldn't even need nukes to take out north korea.
User avatar #34 to #31 - rabaneristo (04/01/2013) [-]
Besides, I don't think Obama would order a nuke strike. If it really comes to war I think he would use troops to take out KJU. Bush would be another story though.
User avatar #35 to #34 - ilovehitler (04/01/2013) [-]
I doubt nuclear weaponry would be used. I do, however, think extremely accurate missiles from drones would be used.
#49 to #35 - atr (04/01/2013) [-]
Nope, irst would come the strikes from sea, such as the Tomahawk missiles that were used against libya, to take out any and all long range sites, then strikes against their air defense and their air power, then bombing runs with B-2s, B-52s, and F-22s.
User avatar #38 to #35 - darthblam (04/01/2013) [-]
Of course. It's all about unmanned fighting at this point and further on in military technology.
Nukes are and always will be the absolute last resort of a war.
User avatar #41 to #27 - morgothse (04/01/2013) [-]
And there is the jetstream that would carry a whole bunch of fallout material right over the Japanese.
User avatar #50 to #27 - CallMeCrisco (04/02/2013) [-]
Two, Little Boy and Fat Man onto Hiroshima and Nagasaki respectively.

Besides, nukes aren't really a go-to thing. When we dropped the first two, it was kind-of a in the field experiment. We've learned a lot. And irradiating the entire country isn't something the U.S. would want to do (oppressed civilians and all). Nukes are mostly used as a deterrent for the countries who can afford them (it's the reason why podunk countries like N.K. want to get their hands on them; if you have nuclear strike capabilities, you don't get ****** with).

We'd just drone-blast the hell out of them, invade, and try to instill democracy.
User avatar #54 to #27 - foelkera ONLINE (04/02/2013) [-]
User avatar #58 to #27 - zanekin (04/02/2013) [-]
#57 - zanekin (04/02/2013) [-]
Lets not get into anymore wars if we can help it, and hey it is a crazy idea but why not rebuild our economy for a little while?
Anyone else down for that? Please...
#53 - gramernazi (04/02/2013) [-]
**gramernazi rolled a random image posted in comment #63 at Staright to the childhood fantasy ** Too bad America actually wouldn't do anything.
#47 - bluelight (04/01/2013) [-]
Think Of All The Korean Girls
#52 to #47 - hellsjester (04/02/2013) [-]
that's why we keep south Korea at least they aren't brainwashed ... yard pooing ... plane janes
#48 to #47 - bluelight (04/01/2013) [-]
no war please
User avatar #46 - megareader (04/01/2013) [-]

#25 - bananazam (04/01/2013) [-]
its so annoying hearing people say a war with north Korea would be over as soon as it started, we don't live in a time were a country can be nuked just to stop a war, there would be to many civilian casualties. so this would have to be a land based war, are we forgetting they have the fourth largest military in the world and home field advantage for guerrilla warfare? A war with north Korea would not be over fast and in no way would be easy, even if many countries were involved.
User avatar #36 to #25 - ilovehitler (04/01/2013) [-]
Now I'm no war genius, but don't we have extremely accurate, non nuclear missiles ready for use?
User avatar #60 to #36 - zanekin (04/02/2013) [-]
Yup and those have really helped us in Iraq/Afghanistan...
Oh wait we're still dealing with them
User avatar #62 to #60 - ilovehitler (04/02/2013) [-]
Never really followed the war that much, but with those aren't we fighting Al-Qaeda or something similar, as opposed to a clear cut military?
User avatar #63 to #62 - zanekin (04/02/2013) [-]
Yeah it is a group but the fighting style would be very similar if we confronted NK
#39 to #36 - bananazam (04/01/2013) [-]
yea but their civilian population is so mixed with their military bases and such that you cant just bomb the bases and all is fine, thats why the last Korean war the USA got involved in turned into such a **** show
#20 - SILENCEnight (04/01/2013) [-]
**SILENCEnight rolled a random image posted in comment #41 at Brighten your Day **
#56 to #20 - baconfattie ONLINE (04/02/2013) [-]
"I haven't got a doorbell!"
#15 - anon (04/01/2013) [-]
I don't get it?
User avatar #33 to #15 - ilovehitler (04/01/2013) [-]
North korea is a small country that is currently threatening war, with the US as it's enemy. It is believed that they do not have an amazing nuclear weapons program.
The USA is a large country that has a large amount of explosives.

Now, this content is saying if NK attempted war, then the US would retaliate and completely and utterly destroy it.
#14 - anon (04/01/2013) [-]
#13 - solitaryweasel (04/01/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#10 - anon (04/01/2013) [-]
kim is short, so his missiles will not go far hence the reason why he just said hawaii is his target because everyone knows that is the furthest he will ever reach
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)