Support NeoGAF

[Coriolanus]

Serious question:
Does NK have some anti missile system or something comparable?
I mean I know they could fuck up Seoul and Incheon even with artillery, but would they be able to react fast enough when Kim's house and the command center got hit early on?

they most likely wouldn't.

The immense likelihood of a dead man's switch of sorts makes the scenario irrelevant tho. Aint no one with a functional brain gon gamble thousands upon thousands of SK lives on that.

Doubly so if one bothers to ask SK for approval before striking.

 

[mlclmtckr]

Uh no, I took your post as literally saying the west would slaughter civilians for the fun of it or something. Which isn't really out of the realm of opinions on the far left.

Oh yes the 'far left' and their civilian murdering ways.

What was the real reason for the Iraq war again?

 

[Patrick Bateman]

they most likely wouldn't.

The immense likelihood of a dead man's switch of sorts makes the scenario irrelevant tho. Aint no one with a functional brain gon gamble thousands upon thousands of SK lives on that.

Doubly so if one bothers to ask SK for approval before striking.

Does SK have an official or known stance on a new military conflict with NK?
I doubt evacuation the northern cities of SK would be doable in a short enough time, right?

 

[Dude Abides]

And how the hell do you infer his getting away with these threats to his position will all of a sudden make him stop his hitherto neverending game of ham-fisted brinksmanship?

The hoops people jump through for NK is nuts.

This question is difficult to parse, but I guess you're saying that him killing his relatives means he's going to start a war or something? Why would he do that? All evidence is that the primary goal of the Kim regime is making sure it stays in power. Our saber-rattling indicates that we might try to change the regime. They want nukes so that we won't. This is how countries all over the world have acted since the beginning of the nuclear age. Why do people struggle so mightily to understand this?

 

[Tamanon]

Fuck off Graham.

War is always an option, but you don't go saying it. He's always been too much of a hawk.

 

[norm9]

This question is difficult to parse, but I guess you're saying that him killing his relatives means he's going to start a war or something? Why would he do that? All evidence is that the primary goal of the Kim regime is making sure it stays in power. Our saber-rattling indicates that we might try to change the regime. They want nukes so that we won't. This is how countries all over the world have acted since the beginning of the nuclear age. Why do people struggle so mightily to understand this?

Dropping bombs to prove the superiority of 'Murica is just too attractive a thought.

 

[The Jazz Cabbage Master]

A mean from war, not natural causes.

No

 

[Palette Swap]

What's the best possible outcome here? Getting rid of a crazy nuclear troll at the cost of a humanitarian crisis?

 

[Maiden Voyage]

I don't think going war is the right right answer. Neither is sitting around waiting to be attacked or for another country to be attacked.

 

[Randolph Freelander]

Lets agree to disagree and assume all parties are wrong.

I sure hope we've learned something about... whatever this was.

 

[SummitAve]

This question is difficult to parse, but I guess you're saying that him killing his relatives means he's going to start a war or something? Why would he do that? All evidence is that the primary goal of the Kim regime is making sure it stays in power. Our saber-rattling indicates that we might try to change the regime. They want nukes so that we won't. This is how countries all over the world have acted since the beginning of the nuclear age. Why do people struggle so mightily to understand this?

What evidence from the Kim regime indicates that? I can't think of a single country that has nuclear capabilties or ambitions that has acted in the way NK has in their open and frank discussions of their use. What are a handful of them if it's been happening all around the world since the beginning of nuclear, and how were those those situations dealt with? I didn't know this NK situation was so familiar to the rest of the world.

 

[darkstar0155]

This question is difficult to parse, but I guess you're saying that him killing his relatives means he's going to start a war or something? Why would he do that? All evidence is that the primary goal of the Kim regime is making sure it stays in power. Our saber-rattling indicates that we might try to change the regime. They want nukes so that we won't. This is how countries all over the world have acted since the beginning of the nuclear age. Why do people struggle so mightily to understand this?

Right lol. Nuclear deterance works for a reason, and NK sees this, and its working for them too. They are actually acting extremely rational when you look at it from the perspective of them wanting to maintain their power. Like, come on. They aren't just going to be like "we've worked decades to get this power and deterrence, but hey lets now shoot a missle and hit someone and guarantee our destruction!"

Dude isn't crazy, despite what people say. He's acting extremely rational, although evily.

 

[enewtabie]

Does SK have an official or known stance on a new military conflict with NK?
I doubt evacuation the northern cities of SK would be doable in a short enough time, right?

No way to evacuate that much. They can start firing at any moment if they wanted. Of course, ROK has been training counter battery forces for a long time and Osan has a lot of things to get into it right away. NK wouldn't just flatten Seoul either. It would be a lot of death on both sides. I mean there's a least 48 nukes close by right now in the water I have to imagine,so them ever launching at the US would be kinda pointless. I don't think it'll go too far,but let's hope it gets resolved. It'll be a real cluster.

 

[cpp_is_king]

You say as you claim to know he'd use the nukes.

He killed his family members because he perceived them as a threat to his position.

Throwing around words like crazy and insane is not a substitute for an actual argument. It's telling how similar the pro-war rhetoric is to the stuff people were saying before the grand Iraq adventure.

I don't claim to know whether he would use the nukes. I'm saying that it's possible for not knowing to be just as dangerous as knowing. You can model this with game theory. Put simply, if there's a 100% chance he'll send a weapon to Seoul (because he just did it, for example), but it's a small weapon with limited casualties you can assign some kind of number to how severe of a response that warrants. If there's a 20% chance he'll send a nuke and wipe out all of Seoul, a 60% chance he'll send a small weapon, and a 20% chance he'll do nothing, you can assign a number to that as well.

As for my personal feeling, I'm torn on whether or not a military conflict is warranted. But in my mind if you're not torn about it then you're not thinking hard enough. The "fuck it, just bomb them" people are ignoring the very real possibility of mass casualties in North Korea and the likely response by Pyongyang. The "fuck Trump, we're all gonna die" people are ignoring the very real risk of doing nothing and letting NK strike first.

It's all bad, and you should be torn about it. And I say this as someone who thinks the war in Iraq was one of the biggest failures of military strategy in recent history.

 

[The Real Abed]

I'm going to South Korea in about 2 weeks, so don't worry guys, I'll put an end to all this

And that was the moment Shauni truly became President of the United States.

 

[Dude Abides]

What evidence from the Kim regime indicates that? I can't think of a single country that has nuclear capabilties or ambitions that has acted in the way NK has in their open and frank discussions of their use. What are a handful of them if it's been happening all around the world since the beginning of nuclear, and how were those those situations dealt with? I didn't know this NK situation was so familiar to the rest of the world.

The evidence that they have not done anything to SK for 50 years, despite their professed goal of uniting the peninsula. The fact that they have not done anything to Japan in the same period, even though they claim Japan is a sworn enemy. Of course they speak about their nukes openly and frankly because they have enemies in their back yard, the world's largest superpower routinely makes bellicose noises about them, and they want everyone to be on notice that they will retaliate if attacked.

Right lol. Nuclear deterance works for a reason, and NK sees this, and its working for them too. They are actually acting extremely rational when you look at it from the perspective of them wanting to maintain their power. Like, come on. They aren't just going to be like "we've worked decades to get this power and deterrence, but hey lets now shoot a missle and hit someone and guarantee our destruction!"

Dude isn't crazy, despite what people say. He's acting extremely rational, although evily.

But he has funny hair and holds weird parades and talks about lakes of fire so obviously he's a loose cannon!

I don't claim to know whether he would use the nukes. I'm saying that it's possible for not knowing to be just as dangerous as knowing. You can model this with game theory. Put simply, if there's a 100% chance he'll send a weapon to Seoul (because he just did it, for example), but it's a small weapon with limited casualties you can assign some kind of number to how severe of a response that warrants. If there's a 20% chance he'll send a nuke and wipe out all of Seoul, a 60% chance he'll send a small weapon, and a 20% chance he'll do nothing, you can assign a number to that as well.

As for my personal feeling, I'm torn on whether or not a military conflict is warranted. But in my mind if you're not torn about it then you're not thinking hard enough. The "fuck it, just bomb them" people are ignoring the very real possibility of mass casualties in North Korea and the likely response by Pyongyang. The "fuck Trump, we're all gonna die" people are ignoring the very real risk of doing nothing and letting NK strike first.

It's all bad, and you should be torn about it. And I say this as someone who thinks the war in Iraq was one of the biggest failures of military strategy in recent history.

What's the "real risk" that NK is going to strike first? Is it at the same level as the "real risk" that Saddam would give Al Qaeda WMDs? Obviously it would be better if NK were not flexing their nuclear muscles but there's no good reason to think they'd do a first strike (I don't think bald assertions that "he so craaaaaaazy" is a good reason). Acting like starting a nuclear war in the hope of avoiding one is a real consideration strikes me as the opposite of hard thinking.

 

[AmayaPapaya]

North Korea is an unwinnable war. It definitely would be the worst war for America since, at least, WWII.

 

[dragonelite]

Inbe4 trump goes to war in 2 years so he can get reelected.

 

[darkstar0155]

The evidence that they have not done anything to SK for 50 years, despite their professed goal of uniting the peninsula. The fact that they have not done anything to Japan in the same period, even though they claim Japan is a sworn enemy. Of course they speak about their nukes openly and frankly because they have enemies in their back yard, the world's largest superpower routinely makes bellicose noises about them, and they want everyone to be on notice that they will retaliate if attacked.



But he has funny hair and holds weird parades and talks about lakes of fire so obviously he's a loose cannon!



What's the "real risk" that NK is going to strike first? Is it at the same level as the "real risk" that Saddam would give Al Qaeda WMDs? Obviously it would be better if NK were not flexing their nuclear muscles but there's no good reason to think they'd do a first strike (I don't think bald assertions that "he so craaaaaaazy" is a good reason). Acting like starting a nuclear war in the hope of avoiding one is a real consideration strikes me as the opposite of hard thinking.

Western media has just half brainwashed people into thinking the dude is a madman and doesn't care about preserving his own power. Hes a ruthless dictator for sure, he says some very bombastic stuff for sure, but nothing shows that he is legit crazy and doesn't care about preserving his power and dynasty.

I mean, the western world says all kinds of bombastic shit about NK too, calling them an axis of evil with iran and Iraq, calling him crazy, etc etc.

The west is going to have to live with a nuclear NK and just deal with it just like we dealt with Russia having one, or China, or Iran. And life will go on. Cause the costs of making sure it doesn't happen are too great.

 

[reckless]

Well NK has been a problem for decades that everyone just keeps passing onto their successors while NK slowly gets closer and closer to nuclear capable ICBMs.

I think the people that are scared of NK using them as a first strike out of no where makes no sense. But ICBMS given NK so much more leverage when they threaten others for their demands which is a scary thought.

In the past they've shelled SK islands, sunk their ships, kidnap people etc what happens when they have a nuclear deterrant, is everyone just going to give into their demands? If not then we are going to almost certaily fight them eventually and it would make more sense to do it sooner than later.

 

[Oriel]

All this chickenhawk bullshit is getting out of hand. North Korea is NOT going to attack the US with a nuke for fucks sake! Kim and his regime are cunts but there's no good reason for attacking the country. All military options lead to the collapse of the NK state, potentially hundreds of thousands dead and millions of refugees fleeing across the Yalu.

 

[Angry Grimace]

All this chickenhawk bullshit is getting out of hand. North Korea is NOT going to attack the US with a nuke for fucks sake! Kim and his regime are cunts but there's no good reason for attacking the country. All military options lead to the collapse of the NK state, potentially hundreds of thousands dead and millions of refugees fleeing across the Yalu.

Even if they did, I would consider it far more likely they aim at Japan or South Korea before they go for broke and try and hit the western seaboard of the US. Not that this provides any comfort whatsoever to the people in those countries.

 

[wandering]

Its happened, They have ICMBs, they have nukes.

At least 2 countries have ICMBs pointed at the US right now on high alert.

They have ICMBs.

If we go to war to prevent the ICMB threat we can do that by leaving the region.

It's ICBM

 

[Nekofrog]

If anything were to happen our bases would immediately start pulling out family members at osan and kunsan. They wouldnt tell anyone why but it would happen before anything commenced



Unless Trump didn't give a shit about the accompanied tours going on in sk

 

[ChryZ]

Bomb starving NK with cheeseburgers, the taste of freedom will stimulate their appetite for revolution.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

Sure, let's aid in the death of a couple million people. Sounds smart.

That will ensure a victory in 2020!

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I don't think going war is the right right answer. Neither is sitting around waiting to be attacked or for another country to be attacked.

What country is going to be attacked by NK?

It's ICBM

lol I think I fucked up my autocorrect some how

 

[hydragonwarrior]

Again, war is the worst case scenario and it's either triggered by NK or the US. The better move is to wait for them to attack and we have ALL the reason in the world and the backing of nearly everyone.

On top of that, why the hell would you rush into the worst case scenario?? You attack first, and you do not know how NK would respond.

There's fear that their first move (if NK chooses to attack first) could decimate the U.S. but it's unlikely that such an attack would go unnoticed by any U.S. ally and get shot down prior.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

The evidence that they have not done anything to SK for 50 years, despite their professed goal of uniting the peninsula. The fact that they have not done anything to Japan in the same period, even though they claim Japan is a sworn enemy. Of course they speak about their nukes openly and frankly because they have enemies in their back yard, the world's largest superpower routinely makes bellicose noises about them, and they want everyone to be on notice that they will retaliate if attacked.



But he has funny hair and holds weird parades and talks about lakes of fire so obviously he's a loose cannon!



What's the "real risk" that NK is going to strike first? Is it at the same level as the "real risk" that Saddam would give Al Qaeda WMDs? Obviously it would be better if NK were not flexing their nuclear muscles but there's no good reason to think they'd do a first strike (I don't think bald assertions that "he so craaaaaaazy" is a good reason). Acting like starting a nuclear war in the hope of avoiding one is a real consideration strikes me as the opposite of hard thinking.

I agree completely

My biggest worry is some small issue gets perceived by Kim to be an assault on the regime.

In that case his best option is to use his whole arsenal because otherwise its gone. North Korea isn't really MAD in the same way it was and is with Russia.

But this issue is solved with diplomacy, not saber rattling which increases the chances he incorrectly perceives a US action as aggression

 

[boiled goose]

I really don't know how I feel about a war with North Korea.

It's frightening, absolutely. But I don't know if it'd be wrong, given the shit they're pulling. Something's gonna eventually have to be done.

Either way, I certainly don't want Trump to be the one to decide what to do.

You don't understand the costs and consequences of war.

Their government doing military tests and threats gives us the right to murder hundreds of thousands of innocent people because they're not listening to us?

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

The evidence that they have not done anything to SK for 50 years, despite their professed goal of uniting the peninsula. The fact that they have not done anything to Japan in the same period, even though they claim Japan is a sworn enemy. Of course they speak about their nukes openly and frankly because they have enemies in their back yard, the world's largest superpower routinely makes bellicose noises about them, and they want everyone to be on notice that they will retaliate if attacked.

They haven't done anything because they know they cannot win that fight. Having the US as a deterrent keeps NK from actually building their military. Their forces are largely on paper and they would lack the ability to mobilize and supply in a conflict. They do however maintain the artillery lines along the DMZ as a deterrent to SK from pushing them.

If they do get the delivery of nuclear tipped weapons down, then the issue is they can start to actually build up a military capable fighting the South because the can back the US off with nuclear threats.

 

[Iolo]

If anything were to happen our bases would immediately start pulling out family members at osan and kunsan. They wouldnt tell anyone why but it would happen before anything commenced

Unless Trump didn't give a shit about the accompanied tours going on in sk

I guess it's nice to evacuate military family members (hope you don't tip off North Korean spies!) but what happens to the other 200,000 American civilians?

http://m.koreatimes.co.kr/phone/news/view.jsp?req_newsidx=228090

 

[mjontrix]

USA have to first strike soon - because once NK masters miniturization and starts selling to terrorists (read - dictactors) things go to hell in the Asia region very quickly. The media would always be able to say Trump let the terrorists get Nuclear weapons - so naturally he's going to act soon (this year or next) lest that happens.

SK will suffer major damage but the loss of life won't be as high as people imagine - although in the tens of thousands. China basically is screwed because if they kill the refugees fron NK they'll be sanctioned like there's no tomorrow and burn any goodwill they have. The USA will be recording everything via sattelite and drones. If they don't kill them but setup refugee camps they'll be accused of mistreating refugees - sanctioned.

No matter what - the USA physically obtains closer proximity to China via land from NK. So I'm amazed China hasn't sorted NK out themselves unless there's no diplomatic option available - which I'd wager is the case but they definitely can't admit that publicly.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

USA have to first strike soon - because once NK masters miniturization and starts selling to terrorists (read - dictactors) things go to hell in the Asia region very quickly. The media would always be able to say Trump let the terrorists get Nuclear weapons - so naturally he's going to act soon (this year or next) lest that happens.

SK will suffer major damage but the loss of life won't be as high as people imagine - although in the tens of thousands. China basically is screwed because if they kill the refugees fron NK they'll be sanctioned like there's no tomorrow and burn any goodwill they have. The USA will be recording everything via sattelite and drones. If they don't kill them but setup refugee camps they'll be accused of mistreating refugees - sanctioned.

No matter what - the USA physically obtains closer proximity to China via land from NK. So I'm amazed China hasn't sorted NK out themselves unless there's no diplomatic option available - which I'd wager is the case but they definitely can't admit that publicly.

besides the great fan fiction, what is this?

 

[mjontrix]

besides the great fan fiction, what is this?

Read. Its my theory on what could happen.

I'm thinking from each perspective. Trump is hard because... Trump.

 

[Guy.brush]

When was the last time the US engaged in a war where there was no outlook to benefit from the target country's resources or gain power projection when it is all done?

The reason China is so close means the US will never do a Desert Storm there, no way.

 

[SlickShoesRUCrazy]

trump going to pull the republican war card.

Let's see if it works.

/s as to the last part obviously.

 

[Wet Bloodfart]

There is no strategic benefit for North Korea to nuke the states at this moment. America should be weary of North Korea but not so worried about a city getting nuked "just cuz."

 

[Clefargle]

I do not want another US war. If it happens it should happen through the UN.

 

[pixelation]

Easily reach the west coast?... WELP!!!

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

North Korea is an unwinnable war. It definitely would be the worst war for America since, at least, WWII.

I don't know, there was that one called Vietnam...wasn't there another one that we have been fighting for 16 years?

There is no strategic benefit for North Korea to nuke the states at this moment. America should be weary of North Korea but not so worried about a city getting nuked "just cuz."

I really don't think NK would ever directly nuke the U.S., it would be suicide.

 

[Omadahl]

I do not want another US war. If it happens it should happen through the UN.

I believe we have the UN on record here...

All I know is my gut says maybe

 

[Nydius]

But this issue is solved with diplomacy, not saber rattling which increases the chances he incorrectly perceives a US action as aggression

Not that I want war but: Is this issue truly going to be solved with diplomacy? Because from where I sit, it doesn't look like that's going to be the case. North Korea has been a major diplomatic focus since the end of the Cold War and very little has changed. Clinton's carrot-on-a-stick diplomacy had no effect when it was the Kim Jong Il regime (they'd say one thing while doing another), Bush's cowboy diplomacy reignited tensions, and Obama's return to Clinton-era diplomatic standards had even less effect than when Clinton tried them 15 years prior (largely due to Kim Jong Un's ascension to power). Now we have a buffoon in power who doesn't even understand the word diplomacy and who makes Bush's "axis of evil" diplomacy look measured and intelligent by comparison.

China is the only country with any real leverage against North Korea and they're not doing much to diffuse the situation because they don't want to provoke Kim Jong Un into going completely rogue in the region AND they're too dependent on North Korea's coal and land area as a buffer between themselves and a US ally. In addition, China also sees the United States' influence as a world power waning as their own influence rises so they have less incentive to aid the United States in maintaining old world spheres of influence.

Three-plus decades of UN sanctions, US sanctions, and all manner of diplomacy and here we sit with North Korea testing ICBMs no one thought they would have for years and a nuclear program they openly admit to having.

E:

I do not want another US war. If it happens it should happen through the UN.

China and Russia as permanent members of the UN Security Council means the UN will never approve a military action, no matter how ridiculous Kim Jong Un becomes.

 

[NullPointer]

This is always implied in the line "all options are on the table".

 

[Sulik2]

they most likely wouldn't.

The immense likelihood of a dead man's switch of sorts makes the scenario irrelevant tho. Aint no one with a functional brain gon gamble thousands upon thousands of SK lives on that.

Doubly so if one bothers to ask SK for approval before striking.

The question gets really interesting if the intelligence community were to have solid evidence NK intends to use nuclear weapons on Seoul or the US West Coast if sanctions continue to tighten. At that point its let NK blackmail you with nukes and let 10s of millions of north koreans forever live under a brutal dictator and hope when they finally rise up there are no accidents involving nuclear or chemical weapons. And hope NK does doesn't continue to increase blackmail demands to not nuke anyone. Or do you just do the math and say he is going to wipe out ours or allied cities at some point regardless so we might as well attack now before their nuclear capabilities get even more severe.

I'm honestly surprised we have not seen the US doing some targeted assassinations to try and topple the regime to break the nuclear stalemate and avoid a a brutal short nuclear war.

The root issue was letting the North Korea situation fester until they got nukes and now ICBM capability. Not using military action to get the dictator out of power as soon as it became reasonable to expect NK to develop nuclear weapons is one the biggest miscalculations the USA has made in the last 50 years. Nukes are the ultimate deterrent and increase geopolitical stresses a hundred fold. While putting 10s of millions of lives at risk.

 

[hydragonwarrior]

While putting 10s of millions of lives at risk.

I'm going to be pretty damned sad when we actually have to enact "Needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few" which is essentially dooming South Korea to oblivion. If they get invaded, then they'll try their hardest to take their neighbour with them once their attacks on the US fail tremendously.

 

[andymcc]

My SO's little sister is going to Seoul to teach next year and, media fervor or not, I'm anxious for her safety.

 

[Widdle Puppy]

Lindsey Graham never misses an opportunity to call for war

Didn't this clown also call for thousands of troops on the ground like in 2015? (Fight Isis)

 

[Coriolanus]

The question gets really interesting if the intelligence community were to have solid evidence NK intends to use nuclear weapons on Seoul or the US West Coast if sanctions continue to tighten. At that point its let NK blackmail you with nukes and let 10s of millions of north koreans forever live under a brutal dictator and hope when they finally rise up there are no accidents involving nuclear or chemical weapons. And hope NK does doesn't continue to increase blackmail demands to not nuke anyone. Or do you just do the math and say he is going to wipe out ours or allied cities at some point regardless so we might as well attack now before their nuclear capabilities get even more severe.

I'm honestly surprised we have not seen the US doing some targeted assassinations to try and topple the regime to break the nuclear stalemate and avoid a a brutal short nuclear war.

The root issue was letting the North Korea situation fester until they got nukes and now ICBM capability. Not using military action to get the dictator out of power as soon as it became reasonable to expect NK to develop nuclear weapons is one the biggest miscalculations the USA has made in the last 50 years. Nukes are the ultimate deterrent and increase geopolitical stresses a hundred fold. While putting 10s of millions of lives at risk.

The world has not forgotten Iraq. If the US is the country that comes up with the intel, only *very* few bootlickers would ever deign to pretend that it wasn't completely made up. This situation *might* change with a UN report, but it is far more likely that it'd go in the opposite direction of whatever intel the US presents, much like the Blix report did. Goes quadruple if The Orange Turd's still in charge whenever that comes up. This is why the situation most likely won't change much from that angle.

Also the US never miscalculated shit: it always did the math and chose the best course of action: the status quo. Simply because decades ago China would prevent any further action in NK, and later down the line Seoul grew to the point where it became a deterrent in and of itself. Going to war would've been, and continues to be, the miscalculation. As for targeted assassinations, the atlantic article on the best course of action details why: NK is too goddamn fucking good at secrecy.

Tens of millions of lives have been at risk for decades. The only thing that changed in that regard is that some of those might now be american lives.

Fwiw i'm pretty chillaxed about the whole thing since NK leaders have been many things, but suicidal was never one of them.

 

[Man Called Aerodynamics]

Trump is an ass, by this would be the case for any president in that seat while North Korea fires missles that could hit US coast. It's the reality when you got an instigator like North Korea that everyone has tried to ignore.

Yeah, I'm actually inclined to not blame this situation on Trump. North Korea is being baldly provocative. They are itching to start a fight and that would be true no matter who the US President was.

That said, I'm confident that out of the many ways conflict with NK might be handled, Trump will find the absolute worst.