If Trumps brings us to war with NK, how does our nation react?

[Inmate Trump]

Would his poll numbers decline or rise? Would that be temporary?

And how would the nation react if his actions really do lead us to WWIII?

[SoLongAtlas]

The nation has a rally bump but not as strong as Bush after 9/11. A NK conflict is avoidable but closely reaching the point of no return. America would be horrified by the bloodiest combat since Korea/WW2, 20000 casualties of SKs a day, and then some. Trump will get the support of the GOP base and the "bomb the hell out of him" independents but this would not be quick and it would drag him down into the twenties in approval for sure.

[°Leprechaun]

Big Bully ROCKET MAN (DJT) vs little angry scared rocket man. We should be reacting now
and the spineless D&R Congress should demand that DJT resign immediately and let MP take over.
THIS IS GENOCIDE. If all the people in both Koreas die, I would call that genocide. It's DJT's fault of course, and I understand why NK has said that the USA has "declared war".

TO ANSWER THE QUESTION: If WWIII happens we could all die and if we all die we won't react.
If the northern half of earth is destroyed along with all life there, perhaps a small number in the southern half could survive.

But then again, maybe there's a small chance that the KW won't start up again and we can all sleep at night.

[Sir Mohamed]

I know how ¿Jeb? would react

[°Leprechaun]

N Koreans have all been brainwashed to hate the people of the USA and apparently
it goes both ways. How commiting genocide could make the GOP "base" like DJT more is bizarre to say the least and does make these people look very good, for sure.

[°Leprechaun]

I know how ¿Jeb? would react

  "Bring it ON!" which is basically what DJT is saying as well.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

If President Moron is the one who really starts the war and it is percieved in the US to have gone badly, then I think he drops to about 30% approval and stays there. Really badly might drop him even below that. But if it is seen to go well, even if only in the short term, then I think he climbs into the mid-forties. Even higher if he can keep his mouth shut.

In this context good means under a thousand non-North Korean civilian casualties, no nukes going off, and the Kim regime deposed. You'll hear 'only Trump could have pulled it off' and red, white, and blue pro-intervention stuff from all the propaganada channels.

Badly would be about as expected. Tens of thousands of casualties outside North Korea, including in our military. A humanitarian crisis of huge proportions. Possibly a nuke is used in combat. World economy goes into recession. Media says things like "President Trump killed more civilians and American soldiers in a week than Bush did in a year, and we still haven't defeated North Korea

Very badly would stop short of WWIII but still be terrible. possibly multiple nukes used, including on cities. High American casualties or prominent American military failures. civilian casualties in South Korean or Japan approach a million. A North Korean government hostile to the United States remains in power, possibly due to Chinese (or Russian) threats of intervention.

Worse than that and he probably gets impeached.

[TheSaint250]

It depends. If NK attacked first, they would support him. If he reveals that there was credible info of NK planning an attack that would happen (really credible, like backed up by everyone in govt), they support him. If he does it for no apparent reason, they hate him.

[Deblano]

It depends. If NK attacked first, they would support him. If he reveals that there was credible info of NK planning an attack that would happen (really credible, like backed up by everyone in govt), they support him. If he does it for no apparent reason, they hate him.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

It depends. If NK attacked first, they would support him. If he reveals that there was credible info of NK planning an attack that would happen (really credible, like backed up by everyone in govt), they support him. If he does it for no apparent reason, they hate him.

I think that if he launches a preemptive strike over that sort of intelligence, people will support him in the short-term, but the general public will become divided quickly enough if it turns into a longer drawn-out war just as how Bush's bases solidly supported him until the 2004 elections and liberals were solidly against it.

[TheSaint250]

It depends. If NK attacked first, they would support him. If he reveals that there was credible info of NK planning an attack that would happen (really credible, like backed up by everyone in govt), they support him. If he does it for no apparent reason, they hate him.

I think that if he launches a preemptive strike over that sort of intelligence, people will support him in the short-term, but the general public will become divided quickly enough if it turns into a longer drawn-out war just as how Bush's bases solidly supported him until the 2004 elections and liberals were solidly against it.

Yeah this could be possible.

[Beet]

Trump is now trying to goad them into attacking first, which he would love.

If he attacks first, it would be mass murder on his part. The sickest thing about it, is that he will say "I didn't want it, but I had no choice. I was forced," when that's baloney. He's wanted war from the moment Obama whispered into his ear that it was a big problem. Back in February -- before any of the missile launches or provocations -- North Korea tried to send a diplomatic delegation to New York to feel out the new administration, and they weren't even granted visas. Trump has never made any effort to seek out a diplomatic solution, instead from day one he concluded that since the AF collapsed, it was "25 years of diplomatic failure" despite all the evidence showing the opposite. The North Koreans have been very consistent about what they want - recognition of the reality that they are a nuclear power - which is not unreasonable given the threats being leveled daily now, and an end to the "hostile policy" towards them, which entails a peace treaty ending the Korean War. They have repeatedly implied that if the U.S. withdraws their hostile policy, their raison d'etre for having nuclear weapons will then go away. But Trump is more like an 8-year old boy with an inordinate hatred for East Asians (he came of age when it was the Japan-taking-over-everything in the '70s and '80s) and a joy for big toys that make things go bang bang that he wants to play with. But instead of toys, he has the real most destructive arsenal in the world. And all the so-called "responsible" adults in the world are just letting him sit there and play with it.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I love how Beet went from "we must do something even if it makes the destruction of Seoul" type under Obama to "omg the end is near, diplomacy is the only way out" under Trump.

[Cactus Jack]

As Saint put it, it depends on the context. If Kim attacks first, Trump would have fairly unanimous support, and with admittedly fairly good reason; I'm no hawk, but I don't stand for acting like international pushovers either. But if Trump makes the first move, it's angel, angel, down we go.

[Beet]

I love how Beet went from "we must do something even if it makes the destruction of Seoul" type under Obama to "omg the end is near, diplomacy is the only way out" under Trump.

Uh, I've been arguing for diplomacy for 90% of my post history, if you really want to go digging, including under Obama. I mean, Benj was saying that North Korea would overarm "to the point of collapse". That's laughable to think about now.

[HisGrace]

If NK attacks SK he will get a rally around the flag bump.

If he attacks NK it will draw China into the war and become an endless bloody stalemate that will eventually destroy his approval ratings.

[Inmate Trump]

Trump is now trying to goad them into attacking first, which he would love.

This.

He wants a war.  He wants to be a wartime president, and he wants his approval rating to go up.  He also wants to shift focus from the now daily scandals as well as all of the moronic stuff he tweets, says, and does on a daily basis.

People's lives do not factor into his thinking; he's the ultimate narcissist, and all he wants right now is to improve his image and his standing in history (which will be pretty terrible at this point).

[Ban my account ffs!]

I love how Beet went from "we must do something even if it makes the destruction of Seoul" type under Obama to "omg the end is near, diplomacy is the only way out" under Trump.

He's literally the smartest man on the forum!

[Anti-Bothsidesism]

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Would his poll numbers decline or rise? Would that be temporary?

And how would the nation react if his actions really do lead us to WWIII?

In that case, I suspect Trumpolini will end up being an extremely appropriate nickname for him.