North Korea says/does surprising and alarming thing - Page…

On September 15 2017 08:24 TheFish7 wrote:
It's perhaps worth mentioning that Truman fired MacArthur over precisely this disagreement in 1950.

On September 15 2017 08:34 Mohdoo wrote:
I think Truman would reconsider if he could see what the situation looked like in 2017. The situation is too tragic for people to think straight. The idea of Seoul being reduced to ash is so unthinkably awful that no one considers it a real possibility.

On September 15 2017 08:35 KwarK wrote:

?
The thing you're describing as unthinkably awful is a smaller scale version of what you're advocating for.

On September 15 2017 07:41 KwarK wrote:

You're posting the way a fool would post.

NK is firing missiles at the sea. The options are
1) Diplomatic response
2) Limited military response
3) Overwhelming military response

2 is escalation to the detriment of everyone. That runs the real risk of a nuclear warhead tipped missile being fired at Tokyo, Seoul being obliterated etc. There is absolutely no advantage to be won by a limited military response to NK. 3 is literal nuclear genocide, you attempt to first strike NK out of existence by killing millions of people and disabling any possible second strike. That has its own disadvantages.

That leaves 1.

On September 15 2017 11:31 Devolved wrote:

NK is firing missiles at the sea for the purpose of developing a delivery system for their nukes, which are now estimated to be around 17 times the power of the Hiroshima nuke.

I think 3 is the only response, but it won't work without China. They're the only ones that have the man-power to be able to immediately occupy NK and secure the nuclear launch sites. It would have to be a cooordinated strike with the U.S. and allies striking with precision from air and sea while China invades with an overwhelming ground force. If China just sits on the sidelines the devastation to SK and Japan would be exponentially worse.

The problem is that I think China will want to carry on with endless failing diplomacy until it's too late. Hopefully the latest nuclear test from NK scared some sense into China and they will help out militarily.

Another option a U.S. Navy Seal proposed was to drop millions of smart phones into NK while positioning a satellite above them for complete internet access. It could enlighten a bunch of North Koreans, but I don't see them having a revolution due to how completely and utterly oppressed they are. They have no means to go about it, and in the end would most likely be killed or imprisoned by the regime for using the devices.

On September 15 2017 11:31 Devolved wrote:

NK is firing missiles at the sea for the purpose of developing a delivery system for their nukes, which are now estimated to be around 17 times the power of the Hiroshima nuke.

I think 3 is the only response, but it won't work without China. They're the only ones that have the man-power to be able to immediately occupy NK and secure the nuclear launch sites. It would have to be a cooordinated strike with the U.S. and allies striking with precision from air and sea while China invades with an overwhelming ground force. If China just sits on the sidelines the devastation to SK and Japan would be exponentially worse.

The problem is that I think China will want to carry on with endless failing diplomacy until it's too late. Hopefully the latest nuclear test from NK scared some sense into China and they will help out militarily.

Another option a U.S. Navy Seal proposed was to drop millions of smart phones into NK while positioning a satellite above them for complete internet access. It could enlighten a bunch of North Koreans, but I don't see them having a revolution due to how completely and utterly oppressed they are. They have no means to go about it, and in the end would most likely be killed or imprisoned by the regime for using the devices.

On September 15 2017 12:59 LegalLord wrote:
So, what do people think about the rumor(/US intel analysis) that it was the Ukraine that provided NK with rocket technology that helped accelerate ICBM building?

On September 15 2017 16:40 LegalLord wrote:
Sounds very much like wishful thinking, really. The facts basically come together in such a way as to say "technically we can't say it isn't Russia." Sources are neither Russian nor Russia-sympathetic.

On September 16 2017 02:30 r.Evo wrote:

With that info I'd be more worried about the difference in ranges between what they're currently testing and what that engine was capable of in the 70s. The R-36 missle had an operational range from 10200km all the way up to 16000km for later models (~6300miles-9940miles).

The US west coast is roughly 9000km away from NK with Washington DC being 10800km away. There's still the issue that such a flight path would go over Russia and China but that's another story.

The thing is that if they can produce missiles with that engine that get a similar range as what the Russians powered with that design in the 70s then these aren't just random minor tests that could reach e.g. Japan, they're tests for an actual ICBM that can reach pretty much around the globe.

Well, it’s kind of interesting to look at the record. The claim is "Well, we’ve tried everything. Nothing works. Therefore, we have to use force." Is it true that nothing’s worked? I mean, there is a record, after all. And if you look at the record, it’s interesting.

1994, Clinton made—established what was called the Framework Agreement with North Korea. North Korea would terminate its efforts to develop nuclear weapons. The U.S. would reduce hostile acts. It more or less worked, and neither side lived up to it totally, but, by 2000, North Korea had not proceeded with its nuclear weapons programs. George W. Bush came in and immediately launched an assault on North Korea—you know, "axis of evil," sanctions and so on. North Korea turned to producing nuclear weapons.

In 2005, there was an agreement between North Korea and the United States, a pretty sensible agreement. North Korea agreed to terminate its development of nuclear weapons. In return, it called for a nonaggression pact. So, stop making hostile threats, relief from harsh sanctions, and provision of a system to provide North Korea with low-enriched uranium for medical and other purposes—that was the proposal. George Bush instantly tore it to shreds. Within days, the U.S. was imposing—trying to disrupt North Korean financial transactions with other countries through Macau and elsewhere. North Korea backed off, started building nuclear weapons again. I mean, maybe you can say it’s the worst regime in history, whatever you like, but they have been following a pretty rational tit-for-tat policy.

...

And they have a proposal, actually. There’s a proposal on the table. China and North Korea proposed that North Korea should terminate its further development of nuclear weapons. In return, the United States should stop carrying out threatening military maneuvers with South Korea right on its border. And the U.S. instantly rejected it. And you can’t blame that on Trump. Obama did the same thing a couple of years ago. Same offer was presented. I think it was 2015. The Obama administration instantly rejected it.

Now, maybe Americans don’t remember very well, but North Koreans have a memory of not too long ago, when North Korea was absolutely flattened, literally, by American bombing. There was—there was literally no targets left. And I really urge people who haven’t done it to read the official American military histories, the Air Quarterly Review, the military histories describing this. They describe it very vividly and accurately. They say, "There just weren’t any targets left. So what could we do?" Well, we decided to attack the dams, the huge dams. That’s a major war crime. People were hanged for it at Nuremberg...

So when nuclear-capable B-52s are flying on their border, along with other threatening military maneuvers, they’re kind of upset about it. Strange people. And they continue to develop what they see as a potential deterrent that might protect the regime from—and the country, in fact—from destruction. This has nothing at all to do with what you think about the government. So maybe it’s the worst government in human history. OK. But these are still the facts that exist.