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

On March 29 2013 09:02 xDaunt wrote:

I know that it is generally presumed that sovereign states act rationally, but holy shit. Kim Jung Un may be legitimately crazy.

On March 29 2013 09:20 unkkz wrote:
Nothing will come of it in the end as usual and i don´t think we should give them a cent in aid just because they are flexing some muscles. If NK does anything they will be annihilated from the face of the earth. Im sure this has been said before in the thread but, it´s just logic. Like someone mentioned earlier, you have to draw a line somewhere.

On March 29 2013 09:45 TheSwedishFan wrote:
I really hope that this will lead to something good. Cant someone just kill that crazy bastard? Just send in a hitman and take him out. Free the NK people. This have been going on for far too long. I just cant see this young lunatic ruling the NK empire for very much longer if he keeps taunting and threatening the US for much longer. His father at least seemed to be reasonable compared to his weirdo son.
How the hell would he ever get any troops near the US mainland? He must be retarded for real if he thinks that's even possible...

On March 29 2013 09:02 xDaunt wrote:

I know that it is generally presumed that sovereign states act rationally, but holy shit. Kim Jung Un may be legitimately crazy.

On March 29 2013 09:58 Marti wrote:



Hey at least he's got some serious swag ! That counts as an improvement over the previous leader doesn't it ?
+ Show Spoiler +
I don't really see what all the fuss is about, all in all, not that much has actually happened, and by that i mean there hasn't been any sinking / shelling, and they haven't fired any of their rockets. I guess the cyber attacks could count as something, but wasn't that traced back to china ? Still doesn't rank as high as torpedoeing a ship imo.

On March 29 2013 09:02 xDaunt wrote:

I know that it is generally presumed that sovereign states act rationally, but holy shit. Kim Jung Un may be legitimately crazy.

On March 29 2013 10:51 Taekwon wrote:


He's not crazy. He's smart. A maaaaaajor problem with a lot of cosmopolitan citizens: they lack the perspicacity to look through things from a bigger framework. War isn't about fighting anymore - in fact, winning or hegemony isn't about war anymore.

Trust me, it's not lost on anyone outside of North Korea that they'd get obliterated if they so much as engage in any form of military engagement with the United States. The question is one of proliferation and of regional tensions. The nuclear test just conducted is North Korea's first uranium bomb (though not highly enriched). In other words, they have both capacities to produce Plutonium and Uranium technologies. Progress is now mostly a matter of whether or not they develop cruise and ballistic missiles capable of carrying these weapons (or progressing in making better bombs which is unlikely).

The reason US/EU policy makers are worried about North Korea/Iran getting their hands on nukes isn't because they fear that they'd inanely try and shoot their nukes at New York. They're worried about selling the technology. Dr. AQ did the honors for Pakistan, and USSR gave North Korea hot cells to do plutonium separation. These are easily usable and regimentable technologies. The concern for genuine nuclear terror is also false. However, in what scenario would it be possibly good to have more and more states propagating nuclear weapons left and right? Kim Jong Un, young though as he may be, has all the cards he needs to pretend brinkmanship for a few more years.Unless you're part of the Kenneth Waltz school of nuclear optimism, any test is gawd awful news.

North Korea, while incapable of espousing a nuke to an ICBM, they can easily marry a nuke to a centi-mile missile. In other words, South Korea and Japan are in danger. So what would they think? It becomes a question of US credibility and their nuclear umbrella - something that we clearly will not use. Does that mean we're going to use our tripwire troops in Fukashima and South Korea? Heck no. Thus, South Korea and Japan will push for belligerent policies, relations grow truculent and missile defense becomes questioned policy again. So? China freaks out. And that's never good news for reasons I certainly do NOT need to elaborate on. This scenario is all the more likely especially considering how the Senkaku islands dispute is going. Furthermore, Abe Shinjo is now the new PM of the Japanese diet and he is pretty much as war hawk as you get in Japan. He's pushing for the eradication of Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution. He really isn't helping considering citizens in Japan that support getting rid of A9 is close to 50% now.

On March 29 2013 10:51 Taekwon wrote:


He's not crazy. He's smart. A maaaaaajor problem with a lot of cosmopolitan citizens: they lack the perspicacity to look through things from a bigger framework. War isn't about fighting anymore - in fact, winning or hegemony isn't about war anymore.

Trust me, it's not lost on anyone outside of North Korea that they'd get obliterated if they so much as engage in any form of military engagement with the United States.....

On March 29 2013 13:56 SheepleArePeopleToo wrote:
Thousands of North Koreans have turned out for a mass rally at the main square in Pyongyang in support of their leader's call to arms. - AP

http://live.reuters.com/Event/North_Korea

On March 29 2013 14:59 calgar wrote:
You drop a lot of facts and seem well-informed but I have to disagree with a lot/almost all of what you've said.

He's smart? Really? By maneuvering his country closer and closer to MAD? In what world is this a smart plan? He's gambling with the lives of his citizens. Why would a smart leader ever willingly gamble with the lives of his citizens? What happens if an artillery shell aimed at Seoul goes off accidentally or orders are misinterpreted? Willingly putting the country in a very real and credible danger is reckless if you ask me. Many North Koreans will die if he acts on his threats or continues his course of action. I would say he's short-sighted for letting the pressure of expectation and preceding reputation dictate his actions too heavily.

What is his exit strategy here from brinkmanship? 5 years down the road he's like "lol jk let's talk peace, sup dennis rodman" and the world shovels aid at him in relief? In what way does he gain any advantage by making threats for the next few years and then backing down rather than backing down now? Surely there is some chance he actually means to achieve long-range nuclear capabilities.

And war isn't about fighting anymore? Maybe not between 1st world countries, but other than that your statement is fallacious (I posit Syria, Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan as evidence). How is Syria not about war? Or Libya? Tell that to Iraq, which was invaded for no reason and didn't even have WMD like NK, or another quagmire of a situation like Afghanistan. NK is not 1st world, or a respected sovereignty, which lumps it into the aforementioned countries. As in the rest of the world won't care enough to do much of anything, like what has happened in the recent past.

This whole debacle reminds me of the Straight of Hormuz blowup months ago. Iran starts bluffing about closing it down, and then the John Stennis carrier group moves in after being warned to not return (analagous to the B-2s hopefully) and quells that instantly. Roosevelt's speak softly and carry a big stick ideology seems to ring true more and more so of late.

You seem to argue that they are clearly rational and playing this brinkmanship thing out in an extremely clever manner. The more bullshit they spew, the harder that is to believe for me. History has shown that military leaders (in the not that distant past) do not always act rationally. Please explain to me what NK stands to gain specifically from future brinkmanship that they cannot gain immediately?