North Korea

[Ken 119]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-20/what-can-north-korea-already-do-without-nuclear-weapons/8543532

 

All conjecture and hypotheticals really. In the advent of war it would depend on NK's strategy and how she would use her assets. An all out artillery barrage would destroy most of the city and its infastructure.

[Alex 35095]

On a lighter note, someone on Twitter has noted Trump has a neck that looks like a minge

[Ken 119]

[Rayvin 5223]

29 minutes ago, Renton said:

But sanctions and economic isolation aren't working. I doubt Kim gives a shit if half his population starves, it's clearly not affecting him. Meanwhile we know they have detonated 5 fission weapons and either have or on the verge of developing ICBMs that can reach continental America. Only a matter of time before they can miniaturise and mass produce nuclear warheads.

 

Where is this leading? Clearly a war now would be preferable to one in a decade.

 

As for Seoul, having read up on it now it appears unlikely the city would be raised to the ground in a war, although there would inevitably be mass casualties. I would expect S Korea to remain military and economic allies with the US rather than China. 

 

That's how I see it. Better now than later. If war is going to happen one way or another, it's better now. The longer we leave it, the worse that war becomes. If there was another way of solving this, then fine - but after 30 odd years of this nonsense, I'm not convinced this is ever going to get better. Soft power doesn't penetrate NK. They're really fucking good at holding power domestically, the cultural brainwashing strategy that we use elsewhere in the world isn't working.

 

I remain convinced that China doesn't want that regime there, but simply can't see an option for dealing with them without a heavy political cost to themselves. If NK goes under, they and SK get to split millions of impoverished, underskilled North Koreans. It's telling that China has mobilised its forces along the border - they've done this to resist an influx of refugees if war breaks out.

 

Plus, as a humanitarian thing, we've left the North koreans to live a life of abject poverty and misery. When the regime finally falls, the stories we'll hear about life under the Kims will be chilling.

 

The question is, can we save more people than we'd lose, by having this war now rather than later.

Edited August 9, 2017 by Rayvin

[Park Life 71]

47 minutes ago, Renton said:

But sanctions and economic isolation aren't working. I doubt Kim gives a shit if half his population starves, it's clearly not affecting him. Meanwhile we know they have detonated 5 fission weapons and either have or on the verge of developing ICBMs that can reach continental America. Only a matter of time before they can miniaturise and mass produce nuclear warheads.

 

Where is this leading? Clearly a war now would be preferable to one in a decade.

 

As for Seoul, having read up on it now it appears unlikely the city would be raised to the ground in a war, although there would inevitably be mass casualties. I would expect S Korea to remain military and economic allies with the US rather than China. 

The boat has sailed mate. If America attacks SK will be nuked and possibly Jpn. The casualties are unacceptable.

[Park Life 71]

28 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

That's how I see it. Better now than later. If war is going to happen one way or another, it's better now. The longer we leave it, the worse that war becomes. If there was another way of solving this, then fine - but after 30 odd years of this nonsense, I'm not convinced this is ever going to get better. Soft power doesn't penetrate NK. They're really fucking good at holding power domestically, the cultural brainwashing strategy that we use elsewhere in the world isn't working.

 

I remain convinced that China doesn't want that regime there, but simply can't see an option for dealing with them without a heavy political cost to themselves. If NK goes under, they and SK get to split millions of impoverished, underskilled North Koreans. It's telling that China has mobilised its forces along the border - they've done this to resist an influx of refugees if war breaks out.

 

Plus, as a humanitarian thing, we've left the North koreans to live a life of abject poverty and misery. When the regime finally falls, the stories we'll hear about life under the Kims will be chilling.

 

The question is, can we save more people than we'd lose, by having this war now rather than later.

NK is China's trump card. Good chance a nuclear exchange will wipe out much of the American bases in SK, Jpn, Guam etc...SK will never forgive America when it ceases to exist as a viable state.

 

A war isn't feasible without catastrophic casualties.  Something could have been done 10-15 years ago but not now.

 

The best thing now would be allowing a limited nuclear capability (with inspectors) and lifting some sanctions and slowly bringing NK back into the fold with a view to over throwing the regime from inside over time. It's deeply unpopular.

Edited August 9, 2017 by Park Life

[wykikitoon 20165]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-40871416

 

[Rayvin 5223]

6 minutes ago, Park Life said:

NK is China's trump card. Good chance a nuclear exchange will wipe out much of the American bases in SK, Jpn, Guam etc...SK will never forgive America when it ceases to exist as a viable state.

 

A war isn't feasible without catastrophic casualties.  Something could have been done 10-15 years ago but not now.

 

I dunno, I did a lot of reading on Chinese academic literature on North Korea and while there's an element of opportunity there, the Chinese government is constantly annoyed that NK acts as a destabilising force on their  border. I think they'd prefer the question settled (obviously as favourably to China as possible).

 

I think a non-nuclear covert strike might do it. It's hard to imagine that they have the military infrastructure to survive if the head was cut off the snake - but you never know I suppose.

 

Agree that 10-15 years ago would have been better. But we are where we are, and do you think there's a non-military solution in the offing if we wait longer?

Edited August 9, 2017 by Rayvin

[Rayvin 5223]

1 minute ago, wykikitoon said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-40871416

 

 

No chance they're seriously considering that. Although this may be enough for Trump...

[wykikitoon 20165]

It's a tad worrying like!

[Renton 21627]

7 minutes ago, Park Life said:

The boat has sailed mate. If America attacks SK will be nuked and possibly Jpn. The casualties are unacceptable.

 

Am not sure. I've read articles that strongly counter the ABC one Ken posted pointing out artillery barrages are nowhere near that effective in practice. Historical evidence bears this out. And NK forces are relatively antiquated. It's unclear if they have any missile mounted fission weapons. Even if they do, they would most likely be taken out by anti-missiles. Any planes wouldn't make it past the border. A land army would, like Hussein's, be obliterated I think.

 

But one thing is certain, left to his own devices, Kim will develop more deadly nuclear weapons and delivery systems. 

[Park Life 71]

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

 

I dunno, I did a lot of reading on Chinese academic literature on North Korea and while there's an element of opportunity there, the Chinese government is constantly annoyed that NK acts as a destabilising force on their main border. I think they're prefer the question settled (obviously as favourably to China as possible).

 

I think a non-nuclear covert strike might do it. It's hard to imagine that they have the military infrastructure to survive if the head was cut off the snake - but you never know I suppose.

 

Agree that 10-15 years ago would have been better. But we are where we are, and do you think there's a non-military solution in the offing if we wait longer?

NK only want sanctions lifted and greater opp to enter trade and the financial architecture they are frozen out of. There are a million ways to shit to unseat the regime without a nuclear exchange and most of that will be carrot and not stick. China would relish the degradation of the American bases in the region without lifting a finger.

[Park Life 71]

2 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Am not sure. I've read articles that strongly counter the ABC one Ken posted pointing out artillery barrages are nowhere near that effective in practice. Historical evidence bears this out. And NK forces are relatively antiquated. It's unclear if they have any missile mounted fission weapons. Even if they do, they would most likely be taken out by anti-missiles. Any planes wouldn't make it past the border. A land army would, like Hussein's, be obliterated I think.

 

But one thing is certain, left to his own devices, Kim will develop more deadly nuclear weapons and delivery systems. 

They've got a big nuke buried under the border. Fail safe.

 

It's come to this because we ignored it for so long. I still don't believe NK would ever attack anyone without provocation because that would be the end of the regime.

Edited August 9, 2017 by Park Life

[Ken 119]

27 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

That's how I see it. Better now than later. If war is going to happen one way or another, it's better now. The longer we leave it, the worse that war becomes. If there was another way of solving this, then fine - but after 30 odd years of this nonsense, I'm not convinced this is ever going to get better. Soft power doesn't penetrate NK. They're really fucking good at holding power domestically, the cultural brainwashing strategy that we use elsewhere in the world isn't working.

 

I remain convinced that China doesn't want that regime there, but simply can't see an option for dealing with them without a heavy political cost to themselves. If NK goes under, they and SK get to split millions of impoverished, underskilled North Koreans. It's telling that China has mobilised its forces along the border - they've done this to resist an influx of refugees if war breaks out.

 

Plus, as a humanitarian thing, we've left the North koreans to live a life of abject poverty and misery. When the regime finally falls, the stories we'll hear about life under the Kims will be chilling.

 

The question is, can we save more people than we'd lose, by having this war now rather than later.

Of course it will not get better, but better never than now tbh, it is too late for any military intervention now. This isn't the Middle East, the adversaries and potential adversaries are much more dangerous. If America attacked NK China will not have any of it. Not only a refugee problem for them but China's sphere of influence would be compromised. China are already seething about SK's decision to use America's THAAD system which China says encroaches on its sovereignty. China will act similarly to what Russia has acted with Ukraine. The difference being China is building its military to match and eventually surpass Americas in time.

[Rayvin 5223]

Just now, Ken said:

Of course it will not get better, but better never than now tbh, it is too late for any military intervention now. This isn't the Middle East, the adversaries and potential adversaries are much more dangerous. If America attacked NK China will not have any of it. Not only a refugee problem for them but China's sphere of influence would be compromised. China are already seething about SK's decision to use America's THAAD system which China says encroaches on its sovereignty. China will act similarly to what Russia has acted with Ukraine. The difference being China is building its military to match and eventually surpass Americas in time.

 

I think you're overconcerned about Chinese threat potential tbh but I can't say for certain that you're wrong - I think a lot depends on how informed the US is keeping China in all of this - despite the bluster, there are significant backchannels in place between the two. China isn't nearly as hostile to the US as they claim to be for their domestic audience. But I could be wrong.

 

I don't think they're a significant military threat mind you... they've only just launched their first aircraft carrier and its a refurb. Decades away from matching the US and Europe.

[Park Life 71]

NK nuclear programe came directly from China who also helped Pakistan and some say Iran.

Edited August 9, 2017 by Park Life

[Renton 21627]

3 minutes ago, Park Life said:

They've got a big nuke buried under the border. Fail safe.

 

It's come to this because we ignored it for so long. I still don't believe NK would ever attack anyone without provocation because that would be the end of the regime.

First point is ludicrous. What good would an underground fission weapon do? It's be like a fart under 10 duvet covers.

 

Second point, you're underestimating the mentality of the NK regime imo. There's no real evidence Kim is interested in self preservation. He's off his tits 

[Rayvin 5223]

9 minutes ago, Park Life said:

They've got a big nuke buried under the border. Fail safe.

 

It's come to this because we ignored it for so long. I still don't believe NK would ever attack anyone without provocation because that would be the end of the regime.

 

But it's different now that they have the potential to cause significant destructive damage. It's not just the US who will be concerned about that, it's literally everyone in the surrounding region except China. If we do nothing, in 5-10 years Japan will have nuked up too. They've been talking about it for some time, and it's because of NK. Regional tensions will escalate and I'm not sure that the arena is big enough for that many power players.

 

Having said that - if we did go carrot rather than stick, maybe we could encourage them into a greater state of global openness through trade... but I'm just not convinced it'll ever happen.

Edited August 9, 2017 by Rayvin

[Renton 21627]

4 minutes ago, Park Life said:

NK nuclear programe came directly from China who also helped Pakistan and some say Iran.

You've made that up, haven't you?

[Park Life 71]

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

 

But it's different now that they have the potential to cause significant destructive damage. It's not just the US who will be concerned about that, it's literally everyone in the surrounding region except China. If we do nothing, in 5-10 years Japan will have re-nuked. They've been talking about it for some time, and it's because of NK. Regional tensions will escalate and I'm not sure that the arena is big enough for that many power players.

 

Having said that - if we did go carrot rather than stick, maybe we could encourage them into a greater state of global openness through trade... but I'm just not convinced it'll ever happen.

It has to be trade and lifting of sanctions now and a slow creeping deconstruction of the regime. Something which the West are very good at. Once the NK get a taste of the good life they won't want to go back.

[Park Life 71]

2 minutes ago, Renton said:

You've made that up, haven't you?

True mate. NK is a Chinese pawn always has been. The missile tech is all Chinese.

Edited August 9, 2017 by Park Life

[Rayvin 5223]

1 minute ago, Park Life said:

It has to be trade and lifting of sanctions now and a slow creeping deconstruction of the regime. Something which the West are very good at. Once the NK get a taste of the good life they won't want to go back.

 

I agree, that's been the American Imperialist weapon for the second half of the last century, but NK appear to be absolutely impervious to it so far.

[Park Life 71]

2 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

I agree, that's been the American Imperialist weapon for the second half of the last century, but NK appear to be absolutely impervious to it so far.

It was Bush who fucked up. There was a chance back in the day.

[Renton 21627]

2 minutes ago, Park Life said:

It has to be trade and lifting of sanctions now and a slow creeping deconstruction of the regime. Something which the West are very good at. Once the NK get a taste of the good life they won't want to go back.

Parky, I know you avoid the MSM along with comrade Layvin, but have you missed the fact that the latest tensions are because sanctions have been upped?

 

This is NK, Kim is impervious to domestic overthrow. This us where the West's hopes and assumptions have been shown wrong. 

[Meenzer 15538]

A North Korean marathon runner pulled out of the race right next to us on Sunday and went and sat in this doorway for about a quarter of an hour before any marshals or medics noticed her. Refused to make any eye contact with members of the public trying to help her and offer water in the meantime, but then I suppose she wouldn't have spoken a word of English and they presumably get told not to interact with the locals if at all possible. I did wonder if she was trying to defect though, it'd have been the perfect place to try.