North Korea launches missile that passes over Japan
- Thread starter 8-Bit Sunset
- Start date
I don't suppose many countries have to deal with their neighbors holding invasion practice with a world superpower either.
You can see why NK is twitchy.
Always remember, when NK is doing shit like this, it's because they actually think that sanctions are going against them. If we do some petty shit that doesn't really affect them then they protest a bit, maybe do some short range missile tests, and then move on.
When they're really pissed off, they start to lash out like this in order to scare the international community into easing off sanctions. The fact that isn't going to happen again after we've been burned 2 or 3 times puts real, real pressure on the regime to sort its shit out.
Nope. Uchi-Freedom Guardian is a defensive drill to practice repelling a NK attack.
When they're really pissed off, they start to lash out like this in order to scare the international community into easing off sanctions. The fact that isn't going to happen again after we've been burned 2 or 3 times puts real, real pressure on the regime to sort its shit out.
Nope. Uchi-Freedom Guardian is a defensive drill to practice repelling a NK attack.
The tensions between India and Pakistan over Kashmir, and the Chinese meddling in said tensions should really make everyone twitchy too, that's 3 nuclear powers butting heads.
But I guess as it doesn't threaten the US it isn't such a big deal?
Aie, I'm sure.
Ok, at the very best then, let's call it "military exercises"
How do people think Israel would react if Palestine and Russia / China did military exercises on their doorstep?
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Is that really so? I can't imagine that their willingness to launch provocative missiles is actually tied to their aversion to sanctions. Increasing/easing sanctions seem like an after-the-fact consequence of their actions, but I don't think it drives them.
If you thought of yourself as NK does, an embattled, isolated nation with the ideological mandate to use military-first tactics to protect the historically victimized Korean peninsula..... that's all the motivation you'd need to demonstrate your ever-increasing muscle on a regular basis.
witchedwiz
Member
If showing concern is overreacting fine..
A lot of people in the thread have expressed CONCERN not a "let's retaliate" attitude..
You wake up, get news of missiles flying over//nearby and it's fine?
News flash.. people don't like weapons and get concerned when weapons are used//pass nearby...
Chaos2Frozen
Member
How do you feel about dead South Koreans? Just a number to you?
And the dead North Koreans, and the dead Japanese. Lot of dead people all around in this scenario.
If you think 4-15m civilian casualties is acceptable collateral then I question your sanity.
You should tell that to Pakistan and India who were going to nuke one another or Israel when they were going to nuke the Arab countries invading them. All 3 were going to use nukes, but were kept from it by outside pressure and influence.
No, it is because everyone who usually sides on the "kick the can down the road" isle believe NK is rational enough to not use nukes. That may be the case, but it ignores the precedent that it causes. Every country obviously knows that gaining nuclear weapons gives them a strong deterrent from consequences. What stops other countries from doing so is the consequences that arise when trying to gain the ability to nuke others and that is it. Unfortunately NK has the cover of China and Artillery batteries so ignore such consequences.
Personally I see no reason to negotiate with a country who doesn't want to stop trying to go for nukes when it can be prevented.
I don't have confidence in the human race to risk adding nuclear states. In the grand scheme of things in that viewpoint, it is not just a numbers game. You can twist it however you want though, buddy. More people died in wars for less reasons.
Do all of you not understand how close the world came to a nuclear holocaust multiple times?
Here's a good article that explains how a US military strike against North Korea could play out: http://www.businessinsider.com/us-preemptive-strike-north-korea-2017-3?op=1&r=US&IR=T
8-Bit Sunset
Banned
That article is nonsense.
It talks about bombing nuclear reactors (Welcome to Fallout Korea) without mentioning the massive consequences for China,NK,SK,Japan or Russia (depending how the wind blows).
It presumes north korean mobile missile launchers (Carrying nuclear, chemical and biological warheads) stay quiet until the US has destroyed its air defenses and special forces destroy the launchers.
He talks about moving the population of Seoul into bunkers when they have nowhere near enough space to shelter 20m people.
It claims B1 bunker busters can penetrate any bunker while other experts say theyd need nuclear bunker busters to crack through the mountains.
Read this if you want a good analysis
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/07/the-worst-problem-on-earth/528717/
The article forgets to mention one single thing. China, you don't go to war in China's backyard, the Chinese do not like America being in South Korea, having US troops in the North would be unacceptable and China will be forced to aide North Korea in such a confrontation, solely because they do not want US troops in their backyard and neither does Russia.
If anything, look at what happened in Ukraine and Georgia (the country) when the US tried to get involved. The Russians moved in quickly.
But articles like these are expected to make a case for war when you have a 4 year old in charge of currently the most powerful country in the world.
Coriolanus
Banned
it did. Back before the invasion of Iraq. Then that happened and it immediately dropped out of the NNPT.
You can also flip this logic, of course: there is no reason to negotiate with a country that will label others part of an Axis Of Eeeeevil and invade on bullshit pretenses whenever it wants.
either way, they apparently already have nukes, so we might very well be past this stage.
MemoryHumanity
Member
Comparing this to Ukraine and Georgia is incorrect especially since Ukraine would of happened anyways because they wanted to move to the West including the EU not just U.S.
Also U.S have no real interest in protecting either of those countries exception of dealing with Russian influence and that is it.
NK is a different story, with them being a hostile nation seeking the ability to reach U.S with a nuke.
Not even Saddam used chemical weapons against the coalition. Not saying NK wouldn't and it wouldn't shock me, but it would do them no good to employ it on mass. It is a good way of ensuring an execution when the war is over.
tl;dr - poorly
Lonewulfeus
Member
If China enjoys the status quo of buffer state North Korea then they'd better reign un in or replace him with someone malleable to Chinese demands or dum dum trump is gonna start a war to distract from something to do with Russia.
China going in and fucking uns shit up is about the best solution for the world at large and also the most unlikely.
Chaos2Frozen
Member
And with that, you have all but out right say that the Korean people are expandable for the greater good.
Posts like this isn't thought highly of.
If that is how you want to read it as I said before.
Makoto-Yuki
Banned
This stuff is scary as hell. I can't imagine what the japanese were thinking.
I hope NK is dealt with properly and with nobody harmed.
I hope NK is dealt with properly and with nobody harmed.
Thank you, I just read it. Yes, the Business Insider article is overly optimistic as far as fallout and the ability to prevent nuclear counterattacks is concerned.
I am still not convinced that "acceptance" is the best option. As the article states:
"But acceptance, while the right choice, is yet another bad one. With such missiles, Kim might feel emboldened to move on South Korea." I think that's a very likely scenario. Who would stop him, and how?
Coriolanus
Banned
That is precisely why the current Kim had all the other possible alternatives killed.
the US bases right on the border. Fwiw in a regular engagement the NK military is no match whatsoever to the SK military. SK simply doesn't roflstomp them because Seoul. Once that's in play tho, might as well.
Kim's only use for the nuke is deterrence.
From what I remember last time North Korea was causing problems, their air defences are basically useless as they date from the 60s/70s. The US has planes that can fly high enough that the air defences wouldn't be able to do anything.
If the US made a big pre-emptive strike I'd be surprised if they couldn't use stealth bombers to take out all of the immediate threats from the air before North Korea even knew it was happening.
If the US made a big pre-emptive strike I'd be surprised if they couldn't use stealth bombers to take out all of the immediate threats from the air before North Korea even knew it was happening.
Including deterring third parties from attacking once he invades South Korea, at which point he will have the capacity to hit US targets with nuclear missiles.
entremet
Member
China is a global player now. They're not the peasant filled nation of 40 years ago anymore. It's in their best interest to control this situation, but it seems like the old guard is still exerting a lot of influence here.
So yeah, it's not as simple as China enjoying the status quo. That may have worked 20 years ago. It won't work going forward as it undermines their business interests.
If a war breaks out kim and his whole elite are gonna get executed anyway. Their only shot is to either deter or make war so costly for the americans that theyre willing to sign a
armistice to avoid more damage.
Well what stops russia from invading poland? A nuclear umbrella.
Just like with NATO in europe if the US makes clear that an attack on SK or Japan is an attack on the US and means nuclear armageddon and NK has basically no option to counter this.
Theyre not gonna start a war where they gonna get nuked.
Americans need to accept that NK deterred them from military action. Now its they need to deter Nk from starting anything.
Nah, despite what the rhetoric may be, I doubt that China would step in. However, that Business Insider article is stupid in all sorts of other ways. The first is to exclude the South Koreans from the decision process. The reality is that any attack on North Korea is going to be primarily their decision because it can't really be pulled off without their help.
The other is failing to note that North Korea doesn't have any military flexibility. Their only option is to launch an all-out attack to destroy as much of South Korea as possible in the event that they get attacked. Nobody wants to go out like Gadaffi or Saddam Hussein, so Kim Jong-Un is going to try to avoid that as much as possible.
North Korea absolutely would use chemical weapons and everything else they have in their arsenal. Any attack on them is a "use it or lose it" scenario, so there's no reason to do otherwise.
That's still not a description of what you think that they should do.
Coriolanus
Banned
SK, by itself, can deter an NK invasion with ease, as the link i pasted in the previous post shows it.
I do hope you can understand why NK wouldnt be able to nuke SK to facilitate an invasion.
Same can be said for Saddam forces during the Gulf War, how were they suppose to know the coalition would stop before toppling him? I am of the belief they would, but like I said it would only ascertain their execution, nothing more.
Except that Saddam Hussein wasn't in a "use it or lose it" situation during the Gulf War. The Coalition didn't have removing him as one of the war aims and he still could hold out hope of a peace settlement. Using NBC weapons ruins that possibility so there's plenty of incentive to withhold them. Also, remember that Iraq was an American ally up until the invasion of Kuwait.
North Korea has never been an American ally, and they have the lessons of Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein to learn from. The lack of options on the side of North Korea is precisely what makes it so hard to deal with them.
True, though if I was a dictator, I would not hold hope of not being thrown out of power when an invading force managed to completely destroy my army.
