EPTNuclear bombs are no solution, lets just not discuss them as none of us have influence on them. Not even as retaliation.
North Korea says/does surprising and alarming thing - Page…
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Yomi-no-Kuni
Germany333 Posts
Nuclear bombs are no solution, lets just not discuss them as none of us have influence on them. Not even as retaliation. | ||
|
Grettin
42400 Posts
NK NEWS @nknewsorg 27m BREAKING: South Korean military issues alert in Hwacheon, near border with North Korea NK NEWS @nknewsorg 23m The alert is a 진돗개 (jindogae) alert, issued when the North launches a provocation or sends spies to the South. NK NEWS @nknewsorg 22m That provocation, however, could either be pre-existing or predicted. edit: Military lifts alert near border after finding no sign of N.K. intrusion + Show Spoiler + EOUL, March 27 (Yonhap) -- South Korea's front-line military unit had been briefly on its highest status of alert after discovering an "unidentified object" in a border fence that separates the two Koreas, but lifted the alert as they found no signs of intrusion from the North, a military official said Wednesday. A South Korean soldier threw a grenade at the object after discovering it while guarding a military post in Hwacheon, 118 kilometers northeast of Seoul, at around 2:30 a.m. earlier in the day, the official said. South Korean troops were immediately placed on the highest "Jindogae 1" alert, which is issued to cope with a possible intrusion of armed guerrillas from North Korea, the official said. After detecting no signs of intrusion from North Korea, the alert was lifted as of 9:20 a.m., the official said. "The soldier threw a grenade after observing an unidentified object moving and the military unit issued the Jindogae 1 alert," the official said on the condition of anonymity. "After searching the area, the military found no signs of intrusion from the North's military and lifted the alert," the official said. Tensions on the Korean Peninsula remain high after North Korea angrily responded to the latest U.N. sanctions to punish the North for conducting its third nuclear test last month. Yonhap | ||
|
Blargh
United States2103 Posts
Wait, so, what WAS the object? They threw a grenade at something and it wasn't North Korea's...? Some poor tourist just got blown to bits by that grenade  | ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
On March 27 2013 10:27 Blargh wrote: @Grettin Wait, so, what WAS the object? They threw a grenade at something and it wasn't North Korea's...? Some poor tourist just got blown to bits by that grenade lol yeah. What if it was someone trying to escape from North Korea XD. Hopefully it was just a deer or something  | ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
| ||
|
Altair
243 Posts
"The soldier threw a grenade after observing an unidentified object moving and the military unit issued the Jindogae 1 alert," the official said on the condition of anonymity. So a soldier saw something moving in the distance and threw a grenade at it ? Did he use a grenade launcher or what? How could that object be unidentifiable if it is within throwing range of a grenade ? | ||
|
Dooba
Croatia588 Posts
On March 27 2013 17:22 Altair wrote: So a soldier saw something moving in the distance and threw a grenade at it ? Did he use a grenade launcher or what? How could that object be unidentifiable if it is within throwing range of a grenade ? Exactly what i thought. | ||
|
ImFromPortugal
Portugal1368 Posts
| ||
|
iMAniaC
Norway703 Posts
North Korea says it is cutting a military hotline with South Korea, amid high tension on the peninsula. The hotline is used to facilitate the travel of South Korean workers to a joint industrial complex in Kaesong. [...] North Korea has already cut both a Red Cross hotline and another used to communicate with the UN Command at Panmunjom in the Demilitarised Zone that divides the two Koreas. The military hotline is used by the two sides to communicate over travel to the Kaesong joint industrial zone, inside North Korea. "Under the situation where a war may break out any moment, there is no need to keep up North-South military communications," a senior North Korean military official was quoted by KCNA news agency as telling the South before the line was severed. An inter-Korean air-traffic hotline also exists between the two sides. Source Whenever Kaesong is mentioned in news articles, they also mention that it is one of the very few ways North Korea can get foreign money. Also, these last weeks (to the best of my knowledge), Kaesong has been held running and the hotline is used to authorise South Korean workers' entry into North Korea. Presumably, without the hotline, the South Korean workers won't be able to enter, meaning that North Korea is actually sacrificing money with this move (this is just speculation on my part, though). | ||
|
Holy_AT
Austria978 Posts
On March 27 2013 08:38 Yomi-no-Kuni wrote: Eventhough it has turned into useless nuclear warfare discussion, i wanted to say that i got tons of usefull information out of this thread earlier on, and thanks to everyone who contributed so far for that. Nuclear bombs are no solution, lets just not discuss them as none of us have influence on them. Not even as retaliation. Why should they not be a valid option in this scenario ? In my opinion a nuclear first strike by the US is a valid option because NK is threatening to use their nuclear arsenal so they already brought it to the table. The situation in North Korea is spinning out of control and if not this time it will in a view years. There are no signs of relaxation or a normalization of relations between the two states. There will be war at some point and I think it is better us to land the first strike even if it is the nuclear option then them. You can discuss moral and what not later but at least you are alive to discuss it and this is my point. I think a first strike would be the best way, rendering their nuclear capabilities inert, in addition it would also cripple their conventional arsenal. I doubt that North Korea has the technologies to detect a first strike so it will be to our advantage. There will be casualties on the south Korean side in the opening attack but they will be minimal compared to a first strike scenario of the North Koreans. Following an invasion force on land from the south lead by South Korea and the US in combination with massive airstrikes, the resistance of the North Korean army will crumble in one to two weeks. But after this comes the heart part.... Rebuilding, giving them a vision, etc. etc. | ||
|
ImFromPortugal
Portugal1368 Posts
On March 27 2013 18:35 Holy_AT wrote: Why should they not be a valid option in this scenario ? In my opinion a nuclear first strike by the US is a valid option because NK is threatening to use their nuclear arsenal so they already brought it to the table. The situation in North Korea is spinning out of control and if not this time it will in a view years. There are no signs of relaxation or a normalization of relations between the two states. There will be war at some point and I think it is better us to land the first strike even if it is the nuclear option then them. You can discuss moral and what not later but at least you are alive to discuss it and this is my point. I think a first strike would be the best way, rendering their nuclear capabilities inert, in addition it would also cripple their conventional arsenal. I doubt that North Korea has the technologies to detect a first strike so it will be to our advantage. There will be casualties on the south Korean side in the opening attack but they will be minimal compared to a first strike scenario of the North Koreans. Following an invasion force on land from the south lead by South Korea and the US in combination with massive airstrikes, the resistance of the North Korean army will crumble in one to two weeks. But after this comes the heart part.... Rebuilding, giving them a vision, etc. etc. implying that north korea has the capabilities to nuke the united states... | ||
|
Cereb
Denmark3388 Posts
And then the second World War happened... | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5299 Posts
but fuck that, lets just nuke them 'cause our thought process >>>>>>>>>>>> that of those people that actually know what the fuck is going on there. i hope you ppl will never be in charge of anything. and about the numbers game, really? you'd nuke someone preemptively because they have 49 nukes and you have 50? LOL. by that logic, fuck it just preemptively nuke china. assuming (from the above random example) that they have 49 nukes and US 50, you'd still win!, right? | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11826 Posts
It is pretty dark at 2:30 AM naturally. Though it is to be assumed that they have some kind lighting on the border. | ||
|
Shival
Netherlands643 Posts
On March 27 2013 19:23 Cereb wrote: I mean, I do not take NK too seriously either but it's crucial to remember that there was once another poor country whose action no one took seriously... And then the second World War happened... What country might that be? | ||
|
Sephyr
Australia665 Posts
Probably means Germany. Don't think it's a good example though.. | ||
KwarK
United States43972 Posts
On March 27 2013 21:00 Sephyr wrote: Probably means Germany. Don't think it's a good example though.. Not at all a good example. Micronesia's point from earlier is still lacking a good response. Nobody here has any evidence that NK cannot strike the US while NK themselves claim that they can and that they will do so based upon provocation which has already happened. Sitting in Europe and saying "but based on my experience as a 20 year old college kid/sc2 player I reckon they're probably full of shit and won't actually do the thing that they repeatedly claim they're going to do" isn't a reasonable expectation for a US response, not when the threat is the obliteration of large US civilian populations. The US is showing extreme restraint thus far but they're long past justification for a pre-emptive strike. | ||
|
TOCHMY
Sweden1692 Posts
On March 27 2013 21:07 KwarK wrote: Not at all a good example. Micronesia's point from earlier is still lacking a good response. Nobody here has any evidence that NK cannot strike the US while NK themselves claim that they can and that they will do so based upon provocation which has already happened. Sitting in Europe and saying "but based on my experience as a 20 year old college kid/sc2 player I reckon they're probably full of shit and won't actually do the thing that they repeatedly claim they're going to do" isn't a reasonable expectation for a US response, not when the threat is the obliteration of large US civilian populations. The US is showing extreme restraint thus far but they're long past justification for a pre-emptive strike. We are just speculating, as much as micronesia is speculating (with a pinch of some justified "scared to get a nuke on my head" arguments). And none of us on this forum has any experience what so ever in this matter. | ||
|
Yomi-no-Kuni
Germany333 Posts
On March 27 2013 18:35 Holy_AT wrote: Why should they not be a valid option in this scenario ? In my opinion a nuclear first strike by the US is a valid option because NK is threatening to use their nuclear arsenal so they already brought it to the table. The situation in North Korea is spinning out of control and if not this time it will in a view years. There are no signs of relaxation or a normalization of relations between the two states. There will be war at some point and I think it is better us to land the first strike even if it is the nuclear option then them. You can discuss moral and what not later but at least you are alive to discuss it and this is my point. I think a first strike would be the best way, rendering their nuclear capabilities inert, in addition it would also cripple their conventional arsenal. I doubt that North Korea has the technologies to detect a first strike so it will be to our advantage. There will be casualties on the south Korean side in the opening attack but they will be minimal compared to a first strike scenario of the North Koreans. Following an invasion force on land from the south lead by South Korea and the US in combination with massive airstrikes, the resistance of the North Korean army will crumble in one to two weeks. But after this comes the heart part.... Rebuilding, giving them a vision, etc. etc. I actually did not want to get into this, and i'm not going to read you post, as the arguments are always the same. (damn, now i read it nonetheless, propably lost a few braincells in the process.) However, firing Nuclear weaons does not prevent the opponent from doing the same. So all you achieve from using Nuclear Missiles is: 100% certainty of the opponent doing the same, if they can, especially if its NK. If you fire them as a reaction to NK fireing theirs, you still don't protect anybody. And it is inhumane and unwise to use Nuclear Weapons, because you polute the country and propably even surrounding areas for years to come. So why not just invade the country after? Same results, propably less dead in the longterm. Considering nukes as an effective tactic is flat out stupid. edit: I'd love to have a mod stop the nuking debate... I can't believe people didn't learn anything from the cold war. I'm glad i was educated in germany, where it is impossible to forget anything about WW2 and the Cold War. Americans should start learning more about global history aswell... | ||
|
KwarK
United States43972 Posts
On March 27 2013 21:12 TOCHMY wrote: We are just speculating, as much as micronesia is speculating (with a pinch of some justified "scared to get a nuke on my head" arguments). And none of us on this forum has any experience what so ever in this matter. I don't see why NK gov spokesmen saying "we have nukes and we intend to use them to strike US civilian targets" is judged as no more valid as a source of intelligence than "yeah but I reckon they won't actually like use them, like not, you know, really". | ||
| ||
