Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BREAKING NEWS: North Korea claims nuclear test!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • We'd hardly even need to attack them. The country's been incapable of sustaining itself for a decade. Interdict all humanitarian aid and it'll collapse with little help. Nor do I think support is all that uniform; he wouldn't have all those reeducation camps if he did. Even assuming they kill all the prisoners, the military would still have to worry about the commoners, and I'm told starving people lose their fear of guns pretty quick.

    As for China and SK--we didn't ask anybody's permission to invade Iraq, and the DPRK has actually threatened us and has the means to act on that threat. Theoretically, assuming their missiles don't decide to attack the Pacific again. Or do you think China would actually start a war with the U.S. to prevent NK from going down?

    I'm not saying this is a pleasant option, or good. Just the best of many bad ones at this point. KJI can keep up his game of extortion indefinitely at this point if we let him, only now he can refine his country's nuke tech at the same time. I don't think China will ever assent to any kind of action against it. The situation, bad as it is, can only get worse for as long as we refuse to cut the cycle short. Or is there something I'm missing? Don't get me wrong, I'd be glad to hear it if there were.
    1011 1100
    Pyrebound--a free online serial fantasy novel

    Comment


    • Stopping aid isn't a particularly pleasant option either. It's clear that Kim doesn't care about his people, and would rather see millions of them starve to death than give up power.
      THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
      AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
      AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
      DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTF

      Comment


      • Interdict all humanitarian aid and it'll collapse with little help
        There would be much wailing and gnashing of teeth. As you say, it's not a very pleasant thing to do.

        In order to do it, you would need the full support of China, Russia and South Korea. It would be a total non-starter with all three.

        China still sees NK as a useful client state, I'm not sure Russia really cares to go out of its way to help the USA, and SK is committed to the "Sunshine Policy" (aka appeasement, IMO).

        If those countries agreed to the plan, NK would likely simply attack SK, and then you'd get the shooting war anyway. Which would be ugly, due to terrain and the amount of firepower that NK could level at Seoul.

        -Arrian
        grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

        The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

        Comment


        • I know. But here's the thing: how else can this possibly end? Can you see KJI abdicating, or an internal revolution? I don't know what would work best, but I think any fool can see there's no hope in diplomacy.
          1011 1100
          Pyrebound--a free online serial fantasy novel

          Comment


          • Hm, if we cut down all humanitarian aid to NK,
            there will probably a point when Kim will decide
            to go down in a blaze of glory and take his people with him,
            by attacking SK.

            The positive thing would be, that china will probably not object if, in this case, the international community sends troops.
            The downside is, that it will take much civilian losses in South Korea as you won´t know when Kim will attack.
            Tamsin (Lost Girl): "I am the Harbinger of Death. I arrive on winds of blessed air. Air that you no longer deserve."
            Tamsin (Lost Girl): "He has fallen in battle and I must take him to the Einherjar in Valhalla"

            Comment


            • I really and truly wish NK would just stfu. They're like a hostile panhandler. They're "owed". Yeah well **** you.

              North Korea threatens more nuclear tests

              By HANS GREIMEL, Associated Press Writer
              1 hour, 20 minutes ago

              SEOUL, South Korea -
              North Korea stoked regional tensions Wednesday, threatening more nuclear tests and saying additional sanctions imposed on it would be considered an act of war, as nervous neighbors raced to bolster defenses and punish Pyongyang.

              South Korea said it was making sure its troops were prepared for atomic warfare, and Japan imposed new economic sanctions to hit the economic lifeline of the communist nation's 1 million-member military, the world's fifth-largest.

              North Korea, in its first formal statement since Monday's claimed atomic bomb test, hailed the blast as a success and said attempts by the outside world to penalize North Korea with sanctions would be considered an act of war.

              Further pressure will be countered with physical retaliation, the North's Foreign Ministry warned in a statement carried by the official Korean Central News Agency.

              "If the U.S. keeps pestering us and increases pressure, we will regard it as a declaration of war and will take a series of physical corresponding measures," the statement, said without specifying what those measures could be.

              President Bush called for stiff sanctions on North Korea and said the United States has "no intentions of attacking" the reclusive regime. He said he remains committed to diplomacy, but also "reserves all options to defend our friends in the region."

              As Bush spoke, U.N. Secretary-General
              Kofi Annan urged Washington to hold one-on-one talks with Pyongyang, something the U.S. has refused to do.

              "I have always argued that we should talk to parties whose behavior we want to change, whose behavior we want to influence, and from that point of view I believe that ... (the) U.S. and North Korea should talk," Annan said.

              Annan also called on the communist nation not to escalate an "extremely difficult" situation.

              North Korea's No. 2 leader Kim Yong Nam threatened in an interview with a Japanese news agency that there also would be more nuclear tests if Washington continued what he called its "hostile attitude."

              Kim, second to North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, told Kyodo News agency that further nuclear testing would hinge on U.S. policy toward his communist government.

              "The issue of future nuclear tests is linked to U.S. policy toward our country," Kim Yong Nam was quoted as saying when asked whether Pyongyang will conduct more tests.
              Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
              "Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
              He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead

              Comment


              • In order to do it, you would need the full support of China, Russia and South Korea. It would be a total non-starter with all three.
                Which would require starting multilateral talks. The only way to get tough through negotiations would mean getting co-operation from all the close-by regional powers, which means starting multilateral talks.

                -Unlike Iraq, NK isn't largely flat.
                true

                - the military won't desert their leader that quickly. Amazing what 50 years of brainwashing can do.
                Replace "50" with "10" and you have the talking point establishment left-wingers like MOBIUS used in order to "prove" why invasion of Iraq would be a failure from US. Like Iraq in the 90's, DPRK is a police state with controlled media and almost no western influence. In reality, we have no idea how much the general population buys the official government lies until we go there. The Iraqi republican guard was supposed to be a bunch of fanatics fighting to death -- the majority gave up defending Baghdad when first rumours of tanks arrived on the scene.

                -Unlike Iraq, the NK is a garrison state with 50 years to dig into fortified positions.
                Again, replace "50" with "10" and you have Iraq ca 2003. Fortifications have been largely irrelevant in modern warfare every since Patton ripped off nazis' air-supported blitzkrieg and used it against them, US military would have no problem with them at all.

                -Unlike Iraq, the NK has numerous conventional weapons and bio/chem weapons that can strike and if not devastate, at least cripple, two of the most powerful economic drivers in Asia for a prolonged period.
                unless they do a surprise attack against RoK, the answer is no

                North Korea threatens more nuclear tests
                counterproductive penis-waving. With threat of nuke tests being used as a combination of a threat and a negotiation tool, I'm starting to suspect they won't even have a working nuke, they've just used a huge load of TNT in order to scare their neighbours off.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by VJ Like Iraq in the 90's, DPRK is a police state with controlled media and almost no western influence.
                  Iraq was authoritarian, NK is totalitarian.


                  Originally posted by VJ
                  Again, replace "50" with "10" and you have Iraq ca 2003. Fortifications have been largely irrelevant in modern warfare every since Patton ripped off nazis' air-supported blitzkrieg and used it against them, US military would have no problem with them at all.
                  NK has like the 5th largest standing army in the world. Iraq's was an obsolete pile of junk manned by troops whose regional/tribal affiliations were stronger than their love for their leader.

                  That Mobybot was proved wrong about Iraq doesn't mean much in this situation, anyway.
                  THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
                  AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
                  AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
                  DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTF

                  Comment


                  • Like Iraq in the 90's, DPRK is a police state with controlled media and almost no western influence.


                    Err... there is quite a bit of difference. Iraq, prior to the 1990-91 war was very open to the West and secular in its politics. I'm sure people in 2006 remembered all of that. I doubt you have many people who remember prior to the repressive NK regime... and before that there wasn't all that much Western influence either.
                    “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
                    - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

                    Comment


                    • NK has like the 5th largest standing army in the world.


                      Didn't Iraq have 4th or so in 1991?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by LordShiva

                        NK has like the 5th largest standing army in the world. Iraq's was an obsolete pile of junk manned by troops whose regional/tribal affiliations were stronger than their love for their leader.
                        Before Gulfwar 2 (i.e. the one following the invasion of Kuwait)
                        Iraqs Army, too, counted as one of the largest in the world.
                        (and AFAIK the largest and most modern in the mid east)

                        It was of no use against the technological superiority combined western forces.

                        I think sheer numbers of soldiers don´t matter so much,
                        it´s rather the military technology they possess and their ability to make tactical use of their surroundings and military installations.
                        If, for example, they don´t possess night vision goggles in large enough numbers and have to fight in the dark night against special forces, perhaps one of these special forces is probably worth more than 10 of the NK regular soldiers.
                        Tamsin (Lost Girl): "I am the Harbinger of Death. I arrive on winds of blessed air. Air that you no longer deserve."
                        Tamsin (Lost Girl): "He has fallen in battle and I must take him to the Einherjar in Valhalla"

                        Comment


                        • Err... there is quite a bit of difference. Iraq, prior to the 1990-91 war was very open to the West and secular in its politics. I'm sure people in 2006 remembered all of that. I doubt you have many people who remember prior to the repressive NK regime... and before that there wasn't all that much Western influence either.
                          Yeah, it's the difference of 10 years to 50. Which I already recognized in my own post.

                          Originally posted by LordShiva
                          NK has like the 5th largest standing army in the world. Iraq's was an obsolete pile of junk manned by troops whose regional/tribal affiliations were stronger than their love for their leader.
                          The only thing this writing did for me was that it revealed your ignorance on the subject. Please dig up some statistics and information with google and start comparing the two armies before trying to come up with knee-jerk arguments, since most of those which you brought up actually favour Iraq's armed forces over DPRK's one.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by VJ
                            most of those which you brought up actually favour Iraq's armed forces over DPRK's one.
                            Like the one about how Iraqi soldiers were less likely to stand and fight?

                            Or did you mean about them having inferior numbers?

                            North Korea: 1.1million army personnel.
                            Batteries of long-range artillery, rockets, and tactical missiles, mainly improved scud missiles
                            A 100,000-man commando force, the world's largest
                            Er, a navy

                            Iraq had less than 100,000 effective troops and an inoperative air force.
                            Only 40% of its antiquated tanks and guns were operational.
                            Its armed forces couldn't move, fight or communicate effectively due to already imposed no-fly zone by US-led air force.
                            THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
                            AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
                            AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
                            DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTF

                            Comment


                            • Bruce Berkowitz of the Hoover Institution in 2003:

                              If the US had to resort to military action, how would it compare to the technological war waged in Iraq? At first, the two situations seem similar: totalitarian regimes hot to develop weapons of mass destruction and long-range missile programs - and equipped with deeply buried shelters in which to hide weapons and protect leaders.

                              But looks can be deceiving. Pyongyang is at least five years ahead of where Baghdad was in 2002. It's hardly a secret that Chairman Kim Jong Il is suspected of having nuclear weapons right now, plus missiles that can hit all of South Korea and Japan - and parts of the western US. Add in one of the world's largest armies amassed within 30 miles of Seoul, and you soon see why formulating a plan for dealing with North Korea is so much harder.

                              The first thing to understand is that the threat North Korea most resembles is not Iraq - it's the old Soviet Union. Like the North Koreans, the Soviets had a huge conventional army across the border from a US ally on hair-trigger alert.
                              THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
                              AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
                              AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
                              DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTF

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by VJ
                                Replace "50" with "10" and you have the talking point establishment left-wingers like MOBIUS used in order to "prove" why invasion of Iraq would be a failure from US. Like Iraq in the 90's, DPRK is a police state with controlled media and almost no western influence. In reality, we have no idea how much the general population buys the official government lies until we go there. The Iraqi republican guard was supposed to be a bunch of fanatics fighting to death -- the majority gave up defending Baghdad when first rumours of tanks arrived on the scene.
                                Are we equating NKorea to Iraq here? Why is that okay, but it's not okay to equate Iraq to Vietnam?
                                Imran already pointed out one flaw with this argument, that of time and Western influence.

                                Furthermore, unlike Iraq, there's a lot less chatter, and a lot more totalitarian control. TVs are wired to receive one channel, and one channel only. All information is transmitted from one source. They are trained to all but worship their Dear Leader, a father figure that is standing between them and the terrors of foreign tyranny; though they may go through hardship, it's all for the greater good of the Choson people.

                                While it's entirely possible that the NK Army may fall apart and let the attackers straight through, every intelligence report (limited as they are--NKorea is far more repressive with a more powerful security apparatus than Iraq) suggests otherwise.

                                It makes sense to expect the worst, rather than hope for the best.

                                Besides, SKoreans don't like foreigners by and large all that much, and they're open and used to them. NKoreans, haven't had that experience, and they've been taught to even distrust their southern bretheren. It's unthinkable that anybody would welcome invaders (since, after all, Korea's the Poland of Asia, and has a long history of hating all invaders and aggressors...) with open arms.

                                Again, replace "50" with "10" and you have Iraq ca 2003. Fortifications have been largely irrelevant in modern warfare every since Patton ripped off nazis' air-supported blitzkrieg and used it against them, US military would have no problem with them at all.
                                Sure, with bunker-busters, it's not that big a problem. The trick is that you'll have to find them--and over the period of 50 years, in mountainous terrain with abundant foliage, much of it done secretly...

                                In addition to that, "garrison state" doesn't mean they're all fortified. It means that their society is built around the martial ideal. Their entire goal, their entire raison d'etre, has been to be supremely defensible and a strong, self-reliant military power. (Whether this has succeeded is a matter of debate.)

                                You'll find guerilla warfare, you'll find tank traps, you'll find defensive positions throughout every single thoroughfare.

                                unless they do a surprise attack against RoK, the answer is no
                                I'm happy that you're optimistic about the ability of the US to eliminate all of these threats in mere minutes.

                                On the other hand, I can't see such a rosy picture. Sure, most of those artillery positions and many of those weapons will be eliminated within the first few weeks of the war.

                                That doesn't mean they can't still do an inordinate amount of damage during their brief use. A full 1/4 of Korea's population lives in Seoul, within 50km of the border; imagine New York, Chicago, LA, Washington, and heck, another large city, all wrapped up into one. The majority of SKorean financial concerns, business concerns, industrial affairs, and the like, are within striking distance.

                                War would not only distrupt and destroy a significant fraction of that infrastructure, but the ripple effect of crippling one of Asia's largest economies, and one of the world's most largest... would be felt far and wide.

                                Military options are pretty much off the table, and it's not a numbers game, with troop strengths and the like.

                                It's the risk versus reward game, and the risk is far too great to gamble it like that.
                                B♭3

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X