An international propaganda win? It’s a sign!

That’s what’s weird here – a big chunk of money supposedly offered for something that would rate basically zero news coverage, and that is of zero substantive use.

it’d be wanting to get a result to the US’s benefit

How? A sign from the DPRK has zero value beyond “oh that’s kind of neat.” Coups and terrorism have meaningful end goals, not “look at this weird sign I have.”

Why would anyone pay $10k (and a car) for a sign?

What are the odds one of the few people willing to pay $10k for a sign would also just happen to have a kid who has a friend who’s going to the DPRK?

Why would I believe a far-fetched story that (if you watch the video) is carefully rehearsed (along with the answers to follow up questions)?

I have no idea what actually happened here, but this does not remotely pass the sniff test.

The CIA is an evil organization that has done all sorts of wild shit, but that doesn’t mean every weird accusation directed at them is true.

It’s possible, it just sounds incredibly far fetched. And with the press conference being obviously rehearsed… there’s no reason to believe this story.

A lot of this is really hard to believe:

Back in September, I had dinner at my friend Stephen Webb’s house with his mother, Sharon Webb, who is a deaconess at the Friendship United Methodist Church. She mentioned that communist nations value propaganda slogans and suggested that I take one from the country to display in her church as a trophy. She then continued, knowing that I was desperate to get a car for transportation between home and university every day. She offered me a used car and $10,000 if I succeeded. She also said that if I were detained and unable to return, her church would pay my mother $200,000 as a generous contribution, which I intended to use for my siblings’ college tuition—though this would still be $200,000 short of the total $400,000 needed.

A car and $10k for a sign? Even if you buy that the church encouraged this and had money to burn, that’s a lot for something that amounts to “huh, that’s neat.”

“Capitalists care about money above all else” is not a novel observation.

The point is that they are dramatically underestimating the damage 500 nuclear bombs would cause, and using that to argue for something that would make the world less safe (a new nuclear arms race).

So what if the USA loses 20%? All it does it change the calculus for US capitalists a little bit.

You’re on another planet lol

the loss of 10% of the US population

400 nukes would do far more damage. Just the 100 most populous U.S. cities have about 67 million people, or 20% of the U.S. population. And that itself dramatically understates the immediate effects of nuclear strikes on those cities, because a bunch of the next most populous U.S. cities are right by where the nukes would land (Frisco, TX, #101 on that list, would have a real bad time if nukes landed on Dallas, Ft. Worth, and Plano, all in the top 100).

And that still leaves 300 nukes to strike military bases, carrier groups, and smaller population centers (again, baking in the overgenerous assumption that the U.S. could shoot down 1 in 5 nukes). And there would be worldwide fallout and environmental destruction. And killing well probably closer to a third or half the U.S. population, in addition to losing every major economic hub, would likely end the country’s ability to function anything like it does now.

In short, you aren’t remotely close to the reality of a nuclear exchange. It just might be possible that the PRC’s strategists have a better handle on effective deterrence than someone on the internet who thinks 500 nukes would be basically a bump in the road.

China’s 500 warheads simply cannot kill more than 10% of the USA with its entire arsenal on a good day

Lmao what are you talking about

Say the U.S. could destroy 20% of Chinese nukes in a war (it can’t). The remaining 400 nukes could do more than enough damage to the U.S. to make thr cost of starting a nuclear war too high – that’s deterrence, that’s all you need. Hell, the DPRK’s situation (a few nukes that can strike U.S. bases or take out a carrier group) is probably sufficient.

On a related note, Russia and China really need to assist Iran to get nukes

Reasonable

China also needs to increase its nuclear stockpile to more than the USA

Unnecessary, useless brinksmanship

If China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea (CRINK) combine their nuclear forces and ICBM defense, they can wipe out the West while taking out a good number of US nukes

Batshit, world-ending insanity that should permanently disqualify the speaker from holding any political office