North Korea vs USA

[purplenose]

Fair enough. I just find it slightly strange that a member of a forum in England, especially one who has previously indicated knowledge of military matters, thinks it's a good idea to risk ten million lives to get rid of a fat rag with a ridiculous barnet who already knows that he would get squashed within five minutes of launching a serious attack on anyone.

The problem being he is a very nutty rag who I fear by his actions at some point will be quite happy to send one of his missiles with warhead to land on one of his neighbours, quite possibly Japan. Infact as sanctions bite he may do so without warning.

If the yanks took out his nuclear facilities he may well attack Seoul, which would prove that he is nuts and prepared to go down fighting. It would be horrendous no question of that. On the other hand much like neighbours of Israel he may not, and may choose his own survival.

Far from an easy one to call, but in my opinion he is firmly entrenched sanctions and negotiations seem not to be a realistic option. Simply brushing it under the carpet may well at worst lead him to actually use his nukes once they are further developed and indeed he has more of them, at best lead to more countries going down the nuclear route...Japan have already stated their intention to explore having these weapons if North Korea is not disarmed.

 

[TonyM]

He was outed as a rag this week.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...d-state-tv-to-show-their-matches-9695951.html

Fuck him and his shit hair cut.

I should have known.

 

[west didsblue]

The problem being he is a very nutty rag who I fear by his actions at some point will be quite happy to send one of his missiles with warhead to land on one of his neighbours, quite possibly Japan. Infact as sanctions bite he may do so without warning.

If the yanks took out his nuclear facilities he may well attack Seoul, which would prove that he is nuts and prepared to go down fighting. It would be horrendous no question of that. On the other hand much like neighbours of Israel he may not, and may choose his own survival.

Far from an easy one to call, but in my opinion he is firmly entrenched sanctions and negotiations seem not to be a realistic option. Simply brushing it under the carpet may well at worst lead him to actually use his nukes once they are further developed and indeed he has more of them, at best lead to more countries going down the nuclear route...Japan have already stated their intention to explore having these weapons if North Korea is not disarmed.

I very much doubt he's as nutty as you think. For him, it's all about survival so by having strong armed forces and nuclear weapons, he probably thinks, with some justification, that the cost of removing his regime in terms of lives lost would make it unthinkable. I'm afraid we're just going to have to sit this one out. Everybody knows it and it will take some mature leadership from the rest of the world to tone down the rhetoric which would reduce the chance of an accidental war starting if one of Kim's missiles goes astray during a test.

 

[purplenose]

I very much doubt he's as nutty as you think. For him, it's all about survival so by having strong armed forces and nuclear weapons, he probably thinks, with some justification, that the cost of removing his regime in terms of lives lost would make it unthinkable. I'm afraid we're just going to have to sit this one out. Everybody knows it and it will take some mature leadership from the rest of the world to tone down the rhetoric which would reduce the chance of an accidental war starting if one of Kim's missiles goes astray during a test.

I respect your opinion on this problem, and a big problem it is. We in this country of course are out of range for his missiles and I do wonder what the general view would be if we were not and he and his regime had made threats against us like those made to Japan, or maybe fired one over the top of us into the atlantic or Irish sea?

Sitting it out in my view will only result in him having a considerable nuclear arsenal in a decades time. I do agree I dont think he is nuts enough to want to be killed or removed from power. I am sure he knows he cannot hope to take on America and like Iraq and Syria in the past would do little other than hurl rhetoric were the nuclear installations taken out.

Imagine a nuclear armed North Korea that had maybe 500 ICBMs with nuclear warheads...thats what will happen if he isnt stopped.

 

[BobKowalski]

I very much doubt he's as nutty as you think. For him, it's all about survival so by having strong armed forces and nuclear weapons, he probably thinks, with some justification, that the cost of removing his regime in terms of lives lost would make it unthinkable. I'm afraid we're just going to have to sit this one out. Everybody knows it and it will take some mature leadership from the rest of the world to tone down the rhetoric which would reduce the chance of an accidental war starting if one of Kim's missiles goes astray during a test.

Yep. The US do not invade countries that have the potential to do them harm. Pretending you can means you end up like Iraq. Believing the US that you will be okay if you give up nuclear weapon research means you could end up like Libya. Kim isn't stupid. The nukes are bargaining chips. Their only leverage is the threat of using them. Once he uses them he has no leverage.

China also doesn't want the regime to collapse nor will it tolerate military action by the US. For starters China doesn't want a few million Korean refugees pouring over its borders in the case of collapse through military action or whatever. It does want the regime to shut up and stop being annoying but beyond that China is okayish with things as they are.

The US under Bush screwed up with NK. If it kept paying them off not to develop nukes we probably wouldn't be where we are today. The next thing the US will screw up is Iran and God knows how that will end unless the Europeans tell the US to do one which with this President is quite possible.

 

[idahoblues]

Yep. The US do not invade countries that have the potential to do them harm. Pretending you can means you end up like Iraq. Believing the US that you will be okay if you give up nuclear weapon research means you could end up like Libya. Kim isn't stupid. The nukes are bargaining chips. Their only leverage is the threat of using them. Once he uses them he has no leverage.

China also doesn't want the regime to collapse nor will it tolerate military action by the US. For starters China doesn't want a few million Korean refugees pouring over its borders in the case of collapse through military action or whatever. It does want the regime to shut up and stop being annoying but beyond that China is okayish with things as they are.

The US under Bush screwed up with NK. If it kept paying them off not to develop nukes we probably wouldn't be where we are today. The next thing the US will screw up is Iran and God knows how that will end unless the Europeans tell the US to do one which with this President is quite possible.

Brilliant analysis

 

[SWP's back]

Believing the US that you will be okay if you give up nuclear weapon research means you could end up like Libya. Kim isn't stupid.

US did not and have not invaded Libya.

 

[BobKowalski]

US did not and have not invaded Libya.

NATO forces predominantly American enforced the UN resolution on the no fly zone and protecting civilians 'by all means necessary'. This included sorties by B2 stealth bombers. The actions taken by NATO did not include boots on the ground as far as I recall so yes they did not invade but did bomb the crap out of Gaddafi's forces and assisted in his overthrow in the civil war that was raging at the time.

The point still stands. US/NATO carried out military action against the regime who were powerless to retaliate. That is the lesson NK take from Libya. I also suspect that someone as paranoid as Kim will equally worry about civil unrest and internal threats as he does about external threats so the Libyan scenario is valid in my opinion.

 

[halfcenturyup]

NATO forces predominantly American enforced the UN resolution on the no fly zone and protecting civilians 'by all means necessary'. This included sorties by B2 stealth bombers. The actions taken by NATO did not include boots on the ground as far as I recall so yes they did not invade but did bomb the crap out of Gaddafi's forces and assisted in his overthrow in the civil war that was raging at the time.

The point still stands. US/NATO carried out military action against the regime who were powerless to retaliate. That is the lesson NK take from Libya. I also suspect that someone as paranoid as Kim will equally worry about civil unrest and internal threats as he does about external threats so the Libyan scenario is valid in my opinion.

And I would imagine the US are actively trying to undermine him internally, which would be why he does some of the things for which we class him as crazy. If you were his family, or in his inner circle, what would you choose? A comparatively easy life (by NK standard) or having your genitals covered in jam and being fed to rabid squirrels (or whatever it was that happened to his uncle, was it?)? What we see as crazy behaviour is probably just a NK-style deterrant to any insiders thinking about cozying up to the US.

 

[Magicpole]

Slightly off topic but it gives an idea of the North Koreans' attempts at mind control and manipulating the truth. During the 2010 World Cup the first ever live game shown in North Korea was v Portugal when they lost 7-0. Following that the games v Ivory Coast (lost 0-3) and Brazil (lost 1-2) weren't shown live. However, brief highlights of the Brazil game, including only Norh Korea's goal, were shown regularly on their TV which claimed that they beat Brazil 1-0.

We should try that here in Scotland. I would love that. It's the way forward for us, as its been 20 years since we qualified never mind won a fucking game, the people would rejoice in the streets.

I can just see it now. Magic.