• 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.

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
Economic anxiety.

There was no racism or stupidity involved.

And if you want to blame anyone, blame Hillary.


She did this. Because her campaign was too prissy or something.
 

Ovid

Member
Besides the main story, there are some interesting tidbits in the article:

North Korean coal, a major source of hard currency for Pyongyang

China had not imported any coal from North Korea since Beijing imposed a cutoff on Feb. 19, Mr. Huang said. That ban has been interpreted as punishment for the February killing in Malaysia of Kim Jong-nam, the estranged half brother of North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un, which Pyongyang has been accused of orchestrating.

On Wednesday, Global Times, a prominent state-run Chinese newspaper, said that if the North tested another nuclear bomb or a missile, restrictions on oil might be the next step. North Korea is almost entirely reliant on China for crude oil.

”If the North makes another provocative move this month, the Chinese society will be willing to see the United Nations Security Council adopt severe restrictive measures that have never been seen before, such as restricting oil exports to the North," the paper said in an editorial.

nytimes.com

They've had enough of Kim.
 

shira

Member
There are millions of active duty North Koreans alongside large amounts of mobile artillery units; US attacks, Seoul is going to be on fire. Hence why they won't do it.

You really don't understand the level of crap the NK army have at the ready. Unless the US, SK and Japan can coordinate synchronised sorties to bomb the entire 38th parallel WITHOUT Kim being notified, artillery will fly.

Ah well everybody gonna gonna be rattling sabers like it's a 9.0 on the richter scale.
 

ZOONAMI

Junior Member
There's a strategic advantage to a preemptive strike. If the war is going to happen anyway because we can't let them have nukes and ICBM's and they won't stop the pursuit of nukes and ICBM's, a preemptive strike benefits Seoul.

Or, you could not guarantee dooming Seoul to a retaliatory artillery barrage or even nuke strike by NK?
 

Arttemis

Member
Ultimately, something has to be done, but it should have happened a decade ago. The world can't allow a North Korean regime to secure their hold on nuclear weapons, let alone long-ranged and hydrogen bomb capabilities. Having this unpredictable US administration is volatile enough.

Allowing NK to complete their missile testing is only guaranteeing a nuclear strike down the line with targets anywhere in the world.
 
I personally think the end game with NK is war. Unless the humanitarian crisis is allowed to continue on for another decade or ten. I doubt this ever ends diplomatically. A preemptive strike makes sense when considering Seoul. That being said, I don't trust this admin with dealing with Syria. I sure as fuck don't trust this admin with this monster.

Excuse me, aside from a total nuking of the entire country, how? Going on with the status quo or even organising a disarmament treaty, like Iran, is surely better than being smacked with artillery shells.

If status quo is fine/better than let it continue. If war is inevitable, a preemptive strike makes sense
 
It's crazy to think that if something does go down it will be just a normal day like this and all of a sudden it's on the news just like with the moab. One second all is as before, next second nothing will ever be the same.
 
My fear isn't North Korea. It's Russia, Iran or Syria. Or all three.

What better time to directly challenge the US militarily then when they are engaged with North Korea?

What if Iran and al Assad decide to go after Israel around the same time the US is engaging North Korea? And what if Russia coordinates it?
 
Well shit...They had to catch up with technology eventually, no one is doing anything about NK, not China, not Russia, and they are bigger targets then we are. I mean no one over there in that region is nervous that one of these nuclear tests will go haywire and blow up over their region?

This was something that unfortunately was bound to happen sometime in our lifetime.
 
I personally think the end game with NK is war. Unless the humanitarian crisis is allowed to continue on for another decade or ten. I doubt this ever ends diplomatically. A preemptive strike makes sense when considering Seoul. That being said, I don't trust this admin with dealing with Syria. I sure as fuck don't trust this admin with this monster.

Once the technology is there to perfectly defend SK, its going to happen.
Only other possibilities are a complete NK collapse, which could still end badly.
Or NK finally does something that SK can't just overlook(like sinking ships in the past).
 

Cobra84

Member
you're in a thread about NK.

I addressed one person's comment, but I'll give you the NK comment you are asking for.

NK has no real economy so sanctions won't do anything. Cutting aid just starves brainwashed citizen. Long range missiles and nukes would make them militarily untouchable. What do you do when they get more aggressive with their new power? Sitting around for 65 years has made a mess for even the Chinese puppetmasters.
 

ahoyhoy

Unconfirmed Member
China / USA joint operation to insert, eliminate and extract, then prop up a puppet who won't go fucking insane with nukes. DO IT

Likely the best option. Doesn't look like starving NK out will break their cult of personality quickly. Gonna need to wipe out the cult leaders to "break the spell" easily.
 
Ffs the way some of you talk, its a little miracle that pakistan hasn't been reduced to cinders by now.
Ultimately, something has to be done, but it should have happened a decade ago. The world can't allow a North Korean regime to secure their hold on nuclear weapons, let alone long-ranged and hydrogen bomb capabilities. Having this unpredictable US administration is volatile enough.

Allowing NK to complete their missile testing is only guaranteeing a nuclear strike down the line with targets anywhere in the world.

And your reason to believe that they'd stop being a rational actor is...?

I addressed one person's comment, but I'll give you the NK comment you are asking for.

NK has no real economy so sanctions won't do anything. Cutting aid just starves brainwashed citizen. Long range missiles and nukes would make them militarily untouchable. What do you do when they get more aggressive with their new power?

They have been de facto untouchable for decades, thanks to Seoul's proximity. In order for one to assume that they would get more aggressive with their new power, one has to assume that they'd stop being rational actors, for MAD entails. Why would one assume that they'd stop being rational actors?
 

Ovid

Member
My fear isn't North Korea. It's Russia, Iran or Syria. Or all three.

What better time to directly challenge the US militarily then when they are engaged with North Korea?

What if Iran and al Assad decide to go after Israel around the same time the US is engaging North Korea? And what if Russia coordinates it?

Isn't Russia pro-Israel? Why would they do that?
 
If status quo is fine/better than let it continue. If war is inevitable, a preemptive strike makes sense

Explain how war is inevitable. Would the regime spend a year of taking people out of work and forcing them into construction of an entirely new street, if they wanted to go to direct war with SK or the US?
 

III-V

Member
It's crazy to think that if something does go down it will be just a normal day like this and all of a sudden it's on the news just like with the moab. One second all is as before, next second nothing will ever be the same.

well, turns out: no one asks what we think before making decisions.
 

Ac30

Member
And your reason to believe that they'd stop being a rational actor is...?

They've done some irrational stuff in the past too. Attacking Yeonpyeong was a rather odd thing to do.

A nuclear strike is far-fetched simply because North Korea knows it would get blown to bits. That's how MAD works.

Also why is everyone so hung up about the MOAB thing. It's a big, conventional bomb. It's not VX or a suitcase nuke.
 
Likely the best option. Doesn't look like starving NK out will break their cult of personality quickly. Gonna need to wipe out the cult leaders to "break the spell" easily.

Everything sounds easy when you run it through your own head real quick, a head which cannot process the trillions of variables in reality that go completely and horribly wrong.
 

Xyrmellon

Member
Trump is doing exactly what Putin wants by going after NK. This is exactly how the US brought down the USSR – overspend and overextend militarily and domestically and inevitably you'll collapse. Fighting another war in Asia while also getting involved in Syria will do exactly that.

Just like they're fighting wars in Ukraine and Syria with a much weaker economy?

The U.S. has had the ability of fighting two simultaneous ground wars for some time, even post cold war.
 

Ovid

Member
China / USA joint operation to insert, eliminate and extract, then prop up a puppet who won't go fucking insane with nukes. DO IT

Sounds like we should have done this instead of the Iraq War. Maybe the N. Koreans would have been the ones to welcome us with open arms.

China and S. Korea wouldn't have allowed it back then though.
 

dpunk3

Member
Your kids one day will ask you "Where were you when WW3 started?"

Assuming there's enough people on this thread for someone to live through it.
 
They've done some irrational stuff in the past too. Attacking Yeonpyeong was a rather odd thing to do.

A nuclear strike is far-fetched simply because North Korea knows it would get blown to bits. That's how MAD works.

Not really.


SEOUL, South Korea — The South Korean military went to “crisis status” on Tuesday and threatened military strikes after the North fired dozens of shells at a South Korean island, killing two of the South’s soldiers and setting off an exchange of fire in one of the most serious clashes between the two sides in decades.

President Lee Myung-bak met with security-related ministers and senior aides in the underground situation room at the Blue House, the presidential office and residence, and promised “a strenuous retaliation” if there was any further provocation, said the chief presidential spokesman, Hong Sang-pyo.

The North blamed the South for starting the exchange; the South acknowledged firing test shots in the area but denied that any had fallen in the North’s territory. It was in the same area that a South Korean naval vessel, the Cheonan, was sunk in March, killing 46 sailors. Seoul blamed a North Korean torpedo attack; the North has denied any role.

bilateral dick-waving, that was.
 

ahoyhoy

Unconfirmed Member
Everything sounds easy when you run it through your own head real quick, a head which cannot process the trillions of variables in reality that go completely and horribly wrong.

True, but none of us have all the facts so that seems the best idea from what I know.
 
Explain how war is inevitable. Would the regime spend a year of taking people out of work and forcing them into construction of an entirely new street, if they wanted to go to direct war with SK or the US?

We deem the humanitarian crisis can't go on any longer or we consider their military advancement has gone too far. At some point in time, one of these will happen if they don't collapse in on themselves first.
 
Economic anxiety.

There was no racism or stupidity involved.

And if you want to blame anyone, blame Hillary.


She did this. Because her campaign was too prissy or something.

If only she had promised progress. Oh shit she did. I guess some progress wasn't enough. So here we are. Yay civilization. Posturing or not, we are at the doorstep of war. Smh
 
Economic anxiety.

There was no racism or stupidity involved.

And if you want to blame anyone, blame Hillary.


She did this. Because her campaign was too prissy or something.

Wow that's really relevant and insightful.

My fear isn't North Korea. It's Russia, Iran or Syria. Or all three.

What better time to directly challenge the US militarily then when they are engaged with North Korea?

What if Iran and al Assad decide to go after Israel around the same time the US is engaging North Korea? And what if Russia coordinates it?

This is almost certainly exactly what is occurring. Putin seems especially motivated by revenge for bringing down the Soviet Union. It would be spectacular (to him) if he could bring the United States to its knees by effectively doing to us what we did to him.
 

Obscura

Member
I was just watching a Frank Zappa interview today in which he said no country would ever launch nukes simply because it would be bad for business. And yet a reality tv star businessman might be the guy that makes it happen. Thank fuck he didn't live to witness this madness.
 
Been lurking to see if anything actually is happening but all this armchair analysis, hyperbole, and anxiety-inducing fear mongering, well...someone just edit the OP or make a new thread if something (or nothing) happens.
 

ZOONAMI

Junior Member
Any official state has no motivation to use nukes because of MAD, unless you preemptively attack a somewhat unpredictable nuclear state.

The only people who will use a nuke unprovoked would be terrorists not officially associated with a nation state.

If you want NK to use a nuke, you preemptively attack them. It won't happen otherwise. If that happens US takes as much or more of the blame as NK does internationally.

Status quo IS better than a preemptive strike. You're a war monger of you think otherwise.
 
I've never been so nervous about seeing CNN news alerts on my phone as I have been the past week or so.

I keep waiting for "Breaking News: World War III has begun" to pop up.
 

Ac30

Member
The 8 years of a democrat president were nice, guys

Did we already forget Libya? Not that I think letting Qaddafi massacre his own people was any better.

Any official state has no motivation to use nukes because of MAD, unless you preemptively attack a somewhat unpredictable nuclear state.

The only people who will use a nuke unprovoked would be terrorists not officially associated with a nation state.

If you want NK to use a nuke, your preemptively attack them. It won't happen otherwise. If that happens US takes as much or more of the blame as NK does internationally.

Status quo IS better than a preemptive strike. You're a war monger of you think otherwise.

I'm still trying to figure out how the hell the US thinks it can get the go ahead from the SK government to preemptively strike the North. It would destroy them.
 
There are millions of active duty North Koreans alongside large amounts of mobile artillery units; US attacks, Seoul is going to be on fire. Hence why they won't do it.

I also dont doubt for a second NK has terror cells ready to wreck havoc all over SK at a moments notice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom