Looming north korean threat

[spat]

A few of my friends were talking about this a few nights ago. Obviously Trump or any other nation does not want to harm innocent people by dropping bombs on North Korea. NK has a huge military because the military members are treated better than the average citizen over there so they are forced into it for a better life. I would guess with the possibility of becoming a free country if the little Fat Boy is gone, some high ranking NK military members would be more than happy with a little financial donation in American currency to lead a squad of US snipers within reach of the target. That could be one possible scenario that may work.

You misunderstand how a country like N Korea works. The military is large because kim wants it large. People don't choose the military because it is a better life, the military chooses people it wants. There really is no such thing as a civilian in N Korea. People can't even decide how they want their hair cut for gods sakes, and you think they get to pick a career ? They have to choose one of a couple of gov approved styles.

 

[masterswimmer]

You misunderstand how a country like N Korea works. The military is large because kim wants it large. People don't choose the military because it is a better life, the military chooses people it wants. There really is no such thing as a civilian in N Korea. People can't even decide how they want their hair cut for gods sakes, and you think they get to pick a career ? They have to choose one of a couple of gov approved styles.

Spot on mate!

 

[Snappo]

You misunderstand how a country like N Korea works. The military is large because kim wants it large. People don't choose the military because it is a better life, the military chooses people it wants. There really is no such thing as a civilian in N Korea. People can't even decide how they want their hair cut for gods sakes, and you think they get to pick a career ? They have to choose one of a couple of gov approved styles.

And heaven forbid you swipe a $2 poster on a hotel room wall. For some bizarre reason, Trump is as afraid of North Korea as Obama was. Even Hitlery Clintard would have bombed their asses for killing our students over a stupid poster. If nothing else, the Clintons sure do enjoy killing people. I wonder if Chelsea has killed anyone yet? Maybe Bubba and Hitlery should have Chelsea help Susan and Jim McDougal have an accidental death. That's a good way to break her in to being a Clinton.

 

[Arjuna]

This will not end well

http://nypost.com/2017/06/29/white-house-weighs-military-option-against-north-korea/

 

[GOPerfect]

I could not be more serious with my ideas....

Send the Dear Leader a letter, a letter that after being read, it destroys itself.

In the letter, explain in very simple words that if our demands are not met, all of them, he and all members of his inner circle will die.

Our demands would be very simple:

1. His Military begins to downsize.
2. All Nuke technology, info and weaponry is to be destroyed.
3. He uses the aid sent in for his people for his people and not himself.
4. The contents of the letter are never to be shared with the world.
5. All missile tests stop right away!

Seriously, if ALL of these demands are not met within 7 days, all around him will be put down, after all of his people are dead, he will find his grave as well!

 

[ArmedCorgi]

I could not be more serious with my ideas....

Send the Dear Leader a letter, a letter that after being read, it destroys itself.

In the letter, explain in very simple words that if our demands are not met, all of them, he and all members of his inner circle will die.

Our demands would be very simple:

1. His Military begins to downsize.
2. All Nuke technology, info and weaponry is to be destroyed.
3. He uses the aid sent in for his people for his people and not himself.
4. The contents of the letter are never to be shared with the world.
5. All missile tests stop right away!

Seriously, if ALL of these demands are not met within 7 days, all around him will be put down, after all of his people are dead, he will find his grave as well!

Can we actually back all that up though? It took how long to get Saddam and Bin Laden?

 

[GOPerfect]

Can we actually back all that up though? It took how long to get Saddam and Bin Laden?

Both of them could have been killed years before they actually died. During Desert Storm, our military could have killed him multiple times. Bin laden? Could have been put to rest back in 93. We did not have the balls back then.

Trump and many in his cabinet have what it takes. Kill that fat bast ardent now. That will bring peace to the region quickly. Unify all of Korea. Feed the poor bast Ardsley in the north and free all ofor the slaves that are in prison.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

Kill that fat bast ardent now. That will bring peace to the region quickly. Unify all of Korea. Feed the poor bast Ardsley in the north and free all ofor the slaves that are in prison.

If only it were that simple. Remember they have endured decades of indoctrination. You can't just upend their whole view of the world and expect them to embrace a system they were ingrained to hate.

 

[GOPerfect]

If only it were that simple. Remember they have endured decades of indoctrination. You can't just upend their whole view of the world and expect them to embrace a system they were ingrained to hate.

I was just taking to a couple of friends about this; I would imagine that something of a plan is already in the making.

I know, nothing is as easy as it seems. Playing back and forth with these people for so many years is doing nothing. Something real needs to be done and soon.

 

[Blimey]

You misunderstand how a country like N Korea works. The military is large because kim wants it large. People don't choose the military because it is a better life, the military chooses people it wants. There really is no such thing as a civilian in N Korea. People can't even decide how they want their hair cut for gods sakes, and you think they get to pick a career ? They have to choose one of a couple of gov approved styles.

The way your write this makes it sounds like a negative experience for the people there, like they are forced into it. Best Korea is protected by its glorious warden, Kim Jong Un. He guides and caretakes and ensures that the people have a bounty of wealth and security and happiness. NK has the best kelp on the planet, and the tallest mountains. The smartest horses of any country also, thanks to the selfless generosity of Kim's guiding hand in breeding techniques!

 

[ArmedCorgi]

I was just taking to a couple of friends about this; I would imagine that something of a plan is already in the making.

I know, nothing is as easy as it seems. Playing back and forth with these people for so many years is doing nothing. Something real needs to be done and soon.

I agree. I'd like to think we could do what you are suggesting. Nothing would be grander than to snuff this stupid fuck out and show the world the kind of power we wield. I'm not saying we can't, but there will always be unforeseen difficulties and unintended consequences. The many players in this ordeal constitute unpredictable variables which could lead to wider conflict.

 

[Blimey]

As for the Koreans there I think that if the regime collapsed they would walk around in a zombie haze but be capable of meshing with the south. Their government is so thoroughly centralized that surely cutting its head of will kill the body soon after. If Kim was killed their morale would be crushed.

We need to decide if we are serious about him not having nukes. It is beyond dispute that he is going for them. If we decide oh well; then we let it go. If we decide no, we need to sort it out now. Massive attack on all of his missile bases combined with a message that they just suffered phase one and if Kim is not removed phase two will be endless bombing campaign until the regime is effectively removed.

I think the regime poses little threat to us but on a moral ground it is so evil to its own people that they may ultimately benefit from a benefactor removing the regime. Yes even though the success rate of that in recent years is exactly 0% in the Middle East.

 

[FrankenCub]

A few of my friends were talking about this a few nights ago. Obviously Trump or any other nation does not want to harm innocent people by dropping bombs on North Korea. NK has a huge military because the military members are treated better than the average citizen over there so they are forced into it for a better life. I would guess with the possibility of becoming a free country if the little Fat Boy is gone, some high ranking NK military members would be more than happy with a little financial donation in American currency to lead a squad of US snipers within reach of the target. That could be one possible scenario that may work.

Although I believe Spat is correct, the NK citizens have little choice in anything, I do like the highlighted comment. We've sent snipers into damn near every other part of the world, why not NK? I'm sure corruption in NK is as bad as NY so in which case some $$$ go a long way.

 

[holdover]

You cant scare the North Koreans. and they would rather die than lose face. I believe that Trump has given the Chinese the option to go in first by a set time, and is waiting to see if they will . The North Koreans see us as bullies and as a paper tiger I don't see them backing down to us .

The other thing to consider is that it will be the first real nuclear war. The US will use nuclear weapons in a first strike . They are not going to wait until the Commies retaliate . It will be assumed they will use nukes in their own defense and proceed from there.

when the world sees what he have done , they will depise us forever.

 

[masterswimmer]

As much as the Chinese want to reign in NK, don't think for one moment they'll endorse the US going nuke on their border. Any support the Chinese might have offered would immediately be off the table.

Could we put together an air and/or ground attack while keeping the Chinese as allies? I think so. Nukes changes the picture dramatically IMO.

 

[holdover]

What choices do the Chinese have? they can stop it by doing it themselves , keeping NK communist, and NATO troops off their border and preventing a holocaust on NK or they can sit by and watch, I don't even think they would dream of crossing swords with the US when its fling nukes around.

 

[spat]

You cant scare the North Koreans. and they would rather die than lose face. I believe that Trump has given the Chinese the option to go in first by a set time, and is waiting to see if they will . The North Koreans see us as bullies and as a paper tiger I don't see them backing down to us .

The other thing to consider is that it will be the first real nuclear war. The US will use nuclear weapons in a first strike . They are not going to wait until the Commies retaliate . It will be assumed they will use nukes in their own defense and proceed from there.

when the world sees what he have done , they will depise us forever.

We won't use nukes in a first strike. I have doubts we would even use them in a retaliatory strike against N Korea if they nuked first. We simply do not need them, we can obliterate N Korea in short order with conventional weapons alone, and the political baggage would not be worth the cost.

 

[spat]

Although I believe Spat is correct, the NK citizens have little choice in anything, I do like the highlighted comment. We've sent snipers into damn near every other part of the world, why not NK? I'm sure corruption in NK is as bad as NY so in which case some $$$ go a long way.

$$$ just doesn't mean anything to a North Korean. They don't have anything to spend it on, and no idea what they even *could* spend it on in the west.

You could give a North Korean $1,000,000 and their life would still suck compared to a welfare queen in the Bronx. Most of them can't even conceive of what you could do with that money, they would be like "a million dollars, does that mean I can have as much rice as I want ?".

 

[holdover]

US nuclear doctrine says otherwise:

The United States has refused to adopt a no-first-use policy, saying that it "reserves the right to use" nuclear weapons first in the case of conflict. The U.S. doctrine for the use of nuclear weapons was revised most recently in the Nuclear Posture Review, released April 6, 2010.The 2010 Nuclear Posture review reduces the role of U.S. nuclear weapons, stating that, "The fundamental role of U.S. nuclear weapons, which will continue as long as nuclear weapons exist, is to deter nuclear attack on the United States, our allies, and partners." The U.S. doctrine also includes the following assurance to other states: "The United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations."No first use - Wikipedia

A tactical nuke strike on any launch site and large airfields make sense to stop any possible retaliatory launch against US troops ships and to protect SK and japan . A conventional strike cannot assure that the ability to launch was destroyed.

and if you go that far you may as well hit large conventional forces as well.

The fact that we haven't mobilized large armor divisions leads to two conclusions, we arnt going to war or we intend on using tactical nukes and air and naval power alone supported by SK ground troops and NATO troops in theater.

Then you have to consider that U.S. forces are already overcommitted and exhausted by fifteen years of war.

The odds are very high in favor of a first use . Allowing the NK the option of a first strike is madness. They are going to protect themselves at all costs as would we, there should be no question about it.

 

[Drinkthekoolaid]

This isn't going to continue forever, it can't.

We are quickly approaching the moment of decision.

Either action needs to be taken in the very near future, or we must accept North Korea being a real and genuine nuclear power.

The time for a decision is running out.

 

[spat]

US nuclear doctrine says otherwise:

The United States has refused to adopt a no-first-use policy, saying that it "reserves the right to use" nuclear weapons first in the case of conflict. The U.S. doctrine for the use of nuclear weapons was revised most recently in the Nuclear Posture Review, released April 6, 2010.The 2010 Nuclear Posture review reduces the role of U.S. nuclear weapons, stating that, "The fundamental role of U.S. nuclear weapons, which will continue as long as nuclear weapons exist, is to deter nuclear attack on the United States, our allies, and partners." The U.S. doctrine also includes the following assurance to other states: "The United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations."No first use - Wikipedia

A tactical nuke strike on any launch site and large airfields make sense to stop any possible retaliatory launch against US troops ships and to protect SK and japan . A conventional strike cannot assure that the ability to launch was destroyed.

and if you go that far you may as well hit large conventional forces as well.

The fact that we haven't mobilized large armor divisions leads to two conclusions, we arnt going to war or we intend on using tactical nukes and air and naval power alone supported by SK ground troops and NATO troops in theater.

Then you have to consider that U.S. forces are already overcommitted and exhausted by fifteen years of war.

The odds are very high in favor of a first use . Allowing the NK the option of a first strike is madness. They are going to protect themselves at all costs as would we, there should be no question about it.

I disagree. Official doctrine reserves the right to a first strike, but that doesn't mean we will decide it is in our best interest in this case.

I predict a massive series of surgical strikes aimed and eliminating their ability to conduct offensive nuclear operations, assuming we do anything at all.

NK has rudimentary nuclear facilities, and rudimentary ballistic missile capability, nothing even approaching the level of survivability that would warrant a nuclear strike.

If you were planning this attack, what would you target nukes at, that we couldn't destroy just as quickly with conventional weapons ?

 

[Drinkthekoolaid]

Another thought.... Whatever you allow NK to get and develop you are also allowing Iran access to the same technology and development. Anything NK has they would share with Iran.

 

[holdover]

I disagree. Official doctrine reserves the right to a first strike, but that doesn't mean we will decide it is in our best interest in this case.

it makes the most sense , (not saying its 100% going to happen )

I predict a massive series of surgical strikes aimed and eliminating their ability to conduct offensive nuclear operations, assuming we do anything at all.

That would be a very logical assumption based on past events , I am assuming that any nukes, if any are being held in heavily fortified bunkers which conventional arms may not be able ensure destruction of.

NK has rudimentary nuclear facilities, and rudimentary ballistic missile capability, nothing even approaching the level of survivability that would warrant a nuclear strike.

that we know of , it leaves a question mark as to the success of a conventional strike, are you going to bet the lives of your men or your carriers that they don't? if your wrong, the penalty would be catastrophic

If you were planning this attack, what would you target nukes at, that we couldn't destroy just as quickly with conventional weapons ?

potential missile sites, air defenses ,large groups of armor or aircraft, We just may not have 2000 plus cruise missiles or be able to guarantee destruction of sites with confidence.

Th 25,000 artillery pieces across the border from Seol

 

[holdover]

Another thought.... Whatever you allow NK to get and develop you are also allowing Iran access to the same technology and development. Anything NK has they would share with Iran.

Iran is well ahead of NK .

 

[spat]

potential missile sites, air defenses ,large groups of armor or aircraft, We just may not have 2000 plus cruise missiles or be able to guarantee destruction of sites with confidence.

They only have a couple of missile sites with anything more than short range capability, we could certainly target them with enough surplus firepower to give a high degree of assurance that they are out of operation.

Massed conventional forces don't need 100% destruction in a first strike, just destroying their command and control facilities, and a strong shock to the forces in the field would be sufficient to paralyze them.

Remember the reaction of the Iraqi forces in 1st gulf war ? Those were actual battle hardened troops that had been fighting Iran for a decade. The only combat the N Korean troops know about are tales their grandparents told them, the only weapons they have experience with are N Korean antiques, what do you think they will do the first time they see the results of a carpet bombing mission from some heavy bombers ?

You can also be sure that *nobody* in North Korea takes any initiative for *anything* without direct orders, if you cut Kim and a couple generals off from issuing orders, the entire army will sit there guarding the DMZ like they have for the last 50 years.

 

[Drinkthekoolaid]

NK does have a considerable amount of road mobile intermediate range ballastic missiles.

I think they are the KN08 and KN14

These would have to be a high priority to track and destroy.

 

[holdover]

It a perfect world , its a logical way to think. 3 things are different though, we are dealing with a nuclear threat in the theater and if your wrong, a lot of people are going to die because of it,#2 We failed at scud hunting in the gulf war . #3 you don't really know if any surviving forces have a doomsday orders to launch at predetermined targets if Kim is killed by US strikes. Your risking a lot of lives on a guess.

I will assume that at the first knowledge of an attack he will launch , its use em or lose em . If there is any failure by conventional arms the US forces in the South are going to pay heavy price for it.

I would say its an unnecessary risk .

 

[masterswimmer]

Again, do you really think China is going to be supportive of a nuke strike on their border?

Do not underestimate the Chinese military.

 

[Drinkthekoolaid]

Donald Trump says 'we have many options' on North Korea after saying threat must be 'dealt with rapidly'


Trump wants to deal with it sooner than later

 

[holdover]

Many options will be seen as a weakness. A failure to commit. Any verbal threat means nothing to Nk