• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NBC News: U.S. May Launch Strike If North Korea Reaches For Nuclear Trigger

Status
Not open for further replies.

shira

Member
c4c3d17aafe63e2ebb5e19677910f1dc.jpg


It would not be pretty. They are a fanatical military nation and would cause major damage before they fell.

They have no incoming oil and limited food.
You cut off electricity and they are pretty fucked.

A winter campaign lasting months with no re-supply and they would eating grass and snow.
 

Dehnus

Member
Only 90,000 casualties, why is anyone worried? That's only like thirty 9/11s.

They aren't worried as they know it would be ludicrious to attack with that many lives at stake. Those in this thread that show pictures of B1's and big bombs are idiots that celebrating the attack if it would happen!

It really is why some people in the world hate "Americans", these types that celebrate on the deaths of those that did not ask for it. Forgetting that bringing "freedom" in such a way never works. The mindset of the ordinary North Korean first has to change, and that you do with culture export, not with bombs.
 
They already have nukes though which puts seoul in the direct nuke area on a potential military action.

The only reason americans drum the wardrums now is because NK might be able to have ICBMs reach the west coast in the next 1-10 years.

True, I was unclear, but I meant that allowing the North to continue to develop bigger, better, and more nukes is the threat. From my limited knowledge of missle defence systems, any current nuke could be easily dealy with, but if the North can stockpile nukes and potentially fire over dozens then the systems become less successful.
 
It's not hyperbolic unless we're debating something incredibly cynical like acceptable civilian wastage.

I was quoting a guy who said the complete destruction of Seoul, that is as hyperbole as it comes when all evidence shows that will not happen.

Everyday the North continues to exist in its current state is accepting civilian wastage. I would love to see one day an eventual diplomatic solution to all of this that minimises civilian casualties and liberates the people of North Korea.
 

Xando

Member
True, I was unclear, but I meant that allowing the North to continue to develop bigger, better, and more nukes is the threat. From my limited knowledge of missle defence systems, any current nuke could be easily dealy with, but if the North can stockpile nukes and potentially fire over dozens then the systems become less successful.

I'd agree if they have 1-2 nukes but they already have 20+ nukes.

Iron Dome is supposed to have a 90% intercept rate. That would mean atleast 2 nukes would go through. Missile defense is nice and well but it's success remains to be seen.
America wouldn't be on a warpath if they could just intercept north korean ICBMs
 
I'd agree if they have 1-2 nukes but they already have 20+ nukes.

Iron Dome is supposed to have a 90% intercept rate. That would mean atleast 2 nukes would go through. Missile defense is nice and well but it's success remains to be seen.

That many now? I still thought it was single digits. :(((
 
c4c3d17aafe63e2ebb5e19677910f1dc.jpg


It would not be pretty. They are a fanatical military nation and would cause major damage before they fell.

They really wouldn't. Size means nothing in the Modern Era. A majority of their army is composed of poorly trained, poorly equipped soldiers using very outdated tech. South Korea alone would probably wreck them. A joint coalition of US, Skorea and China? They'd be surrendering by days end.
 

Dehnus

Member
Starving a nation to death, a good guy strategy for sure.

"It is totally classy folks, like so fabulous. None of our soldiers will get hurt, it's amazing. I say to Kim Jung Un, I say: "Look fatty, you could use some slimming down, no more Burgers for you.". And they are good burgers folks, good burgers you can get with presidential seal at any Trump Location around the world for only 19,99 + a 10% of voucher of Ivanka's new line of jewelry.

And well, that's how we'll solve it folks, and for those that say I'm cruel. Those North Japanese/KOrean/Chinese.. or whatever..... oh wait.. my advisor is making the cut the Mike signal, real classy guy folks.. really classy. "



People like him forget: They have been through worse starvation times in North Korea, were millions died. And they still just blamed the USA and followed the "Glorious Leader!". If people want this to change? Get the mindest to change, work together with China to get Chinese technology like cell phones and other 1st world devices into the country. Slowly but surely open the world to them.
 

Dehnus

Member
They really wouldn't. Size means nothing in the Modern Era. A majority of their army is composed of poorly trained, poorly equipped soldiers using very outdated tech. South Korea alone would probably wreck them. A joint coalition of US, Skorea and China? They'd be surrendering by days end.

Is that why Afghanistan is such a mess? Really they have very harsh winters, loads of mountain to hide in and a HUGE army of zealots. The big stuff might get wrecked yes, but all those millions of soldiers with simple guns can still kill a lot of people.

But since you like to play God anyway, maybe you can follow up Kim Jung Un after he croaches from a heart disease or two. With his weight that won't be long.
 

Dehnus

Member
But do they actually have the ability to succesfully launch one and hit a target?

Sigh, you don't need to launch. Here you are walking over the front line with your "I R SO SUPERIOR!" attitude together with all your buddies in the army. Everything is going sooo well you are so deep into territory and seem to kill so many of those North Koreans ... you are sooooo strong.

And as about 200 tanks plus troops and other crap is on the field, they just detonate the nuke they buried earlier and "set you up the bomb" as Zero Wing so aptly put.
 

Xando

Member
But do they actually have the ability to succesfully launch one and hit a target?

Yes.

They already have short and mid range missiles and even can launch them from submarines.

Estimates put them around being able to hit SK/Japan/Chinese east coast and maybe Guam.

NK already has icbms that can hit the US.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/KN-08#New_KN-08_based_missile:_KN-14

I'm not sure if they have minitiarized a warhead enough or have one capable of re-entry, etc, but they already have long range missles.

They haven't actually tested their ICBMs yet so no one knows if they're capable or not.
 
I'm not defending such a strat, but there's no such thing as a good guy strategy for any war. War by definition includes the death of people.

Killing is the method but the goals are political. A lot of internet warmongers treat killing of enemies as an inherent good. The results of which are historically evident.
 

Principate

Saint Titanfall
They really wouldn't. Size means nothing in the Modern Era. A majority of their army is composed of poorly trained, poorly equipped soldiers using very outdated tech. South Korea alone would probably wreck them. A joint coalition of US, Skorea and China? They'd be surrendering by days end.

Just like Iraq? Just like Syria? That's not how war works in even slightly. The winner will be decided quickly (hell we already know who would win) but reaching a decisive victory certainly wouldn't be without decisive assassinations and betrayals.

I'm not defending such a strat, but there's no such thing as a good guy strategy for any war. War by definition includes the death of people.

True but there world-wide defined civility and laws. That's why war crimes tribunals exist. (not saying that this particularly strategy is a war crime), but there are laws.
 

legacyzero

Banned
So is everybody chill? No war this morning, so I can at least enjoy my coffee and some video games

I actually didn't know much about the DPRK until Kim Jong Il started acting up before he died. Spent WEEKS looking at documentaries. For such a terrible place, there is an air of beauty and wonder.

Would love to see the regime removed and the country given to the south. It's also odd that China seems to be ok with having a tinder box and US pesence in their back yard.
 

Vixdean

Member
Something tells me that if actual war were to break out, North Korea's military capability wouldn't live up to the hype. They haven't had the money to adequately test and train with their conventional forces for years if not decades. They have little to no actual combat experience, especially against the modern militaries of SK/USA. I think even the nuclear threat is overblown, as currently their only way of delivering one would be shoving it out the back of a cargo plane.

Yeah, they could lob some artillery at some soft targets in Seoul, but Kim knows such action would mean the end of his regime. Ultimately, neither side wants the consequences of total war, meaning the destruction of the Kim dynasty and a massive humanitarian crisis. If we were to launch a preemptive strike focused on NK's nuclear capabilities and force projection near the DMZ, I think Kim would quickly back down to preserve his own regime rather than escalate the conflict.
 

Pomerlaw

Member
As much as I hate war, I don't think NK's regime building a shit load of ICBMs with nukes on top of them is acceptable.

Damn if you do damn if you don't.
 

Kyzer

Banned
I mean, they had a former Lieutenant General on CNN and he said himself he has 100% confidence that south korea would win a war but that he can also guarantee it would be very, very, ugly and likely cause a flood of refugees unlike any weve ever seen
 

Mikey Jr.

Member
This is like a hostage situation.

At what point do the lives of the world outweigh the lives of the NK people?

Give them enough time, they'll build more nukes, and missiles with greater and greater range.

Then you are REALLY fucked at that point. NK could go down with that ship and unleash their entire payload everywhere in America.
 

vonStirlitz

Unconfirmed Member
North Korea says a "big event" is near....

Kinda reminds me of those she-male ads that say they have a "big surprise".
Watch out. Here comes Kim Ill Hung

Edit (for above poster benefit): Obviously not a slur. People like us are still allowed to joke amongst ourselves. We are not quite NK yet.
 

Xando

Member
There's not going to be a war cause NK knows they're gonna lose

That's exactly why they want ICBMs, to deter america from regime change.
You just have to looks at libya and ukraine and the assurances they got from the US when they disarmed their and where they are now.


It's pretty interesting to see this whole american propaganda which makes it sound like NK wants to nuke LA and NK ICBMs would be the worst thing ever while Russia and China have thousands of ICBMs pointed at America.
 

RPGCrazied

Member
Good morning my peeps.

What happened last night? I was enjoying the North Korea parade too much
(I had too many beers)

Trump playing golf once again and eating chocolate cake. Probably took his meds, so that is why we didn't wake up to a disaster today.
 

Pomerlaw

Member
That's exactly why they want ICBMs, to deter america from regime change.


You just have to looks at libya and ukraine and the assurances they got from the US when they disarmed their and where they are now.

Ukraine had assurances from Russia, not the US. But your point is still valid.

I'm not sure it is just that though. China offered protection, and they have not been attacked yet even if they don't have ICBMs.

They are pushing their luck.
 

Xando

Member
Ukraine had assurances from Russia, not the US. But your point is still valid.

I'm not sure it is just that though. China offered protection, and they have not been attacked yet even if they don't have ICBMs.

They are pushing their luck.

Nah the US, UK and Russia all agreed they'll protect ukraine:

The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,

Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as non-nuclear-weapon State,

Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time,

Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the Cold War, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces.

Confirm the following:

1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.

2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

3. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.

4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.

5. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm, in the case of Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State.

6. Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America will consult in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning these commitments.

— Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with Ukraine's Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Ukraine#Budapest_Memorandum


The rhetoric from NK has been the same for the last 20 years and hasn't really changed.
What has changed is the aggressive rhetoric from the US. Trump has seen war is good for his polls and the american media is just as glad to jump on it (Looking at this thread so are some americans).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom