North Korea wants to be an attention whore again...

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapc...ear/index.html

Once again, North Korea is saying stuff so it can be on the news again. This time they want to test nukes out, screw what everyone else, including the US, says.

I wonder what will happen this time in terms of a response if they actually test one out. The world has pretty much shown that they won't do anything beyond a strongly worded message condemning their action, but no one seems to have the guts to just go in there and wtfpwn them (which gives the NK govt. time to continue brainwashing their people, making them believe anything the world does against them is bad, and therefore they should die for their country to repel an invasion or anything else that the world throws at them).

Of course, attacking North Korea won't be anything like Iraq (fighting in a densely crowded area surrounded by mountains, forests, and rice paddies ain't the same as rolling tanks through a large, flat desert area), and since North Korea doesn't have any natural resources of value (that I know of anyway. I bet if they had oil Dubya would've went right in), of course the US doesn't want to engage them.

So instead they put about 37,000 troops there instead to get steamrolled (and they will get wtfpwnt, I remember being told by one of my sergeants that we were just a speed bump if NK attacked when I was over there. It wasn't "official" policy, just what he thought, but I believe him, when they have like 50,000 artillery guns aimed at South Korea along the DMZ) by the NK first so that it'll piss off Americans and let them agree with anything that the US does to them afterwards. This is solely the reason why NK won't attack, and why they keep whining about the US pulling out of Korea. Cause you know, killing South Koreans won't have the same impact in the US, so they probably won't give a dang (remember Pearl Harbor? I doubt people would've cared if Japan took those islands they wanted during WW2, but once they attacked and killed US service members, boy did that rile up the nation. Plus with all the South Korean student protests against the US too, I doubt many Americans would really give a damn if the South gets pwnt).

So, what do you think will happen if NK tests out a nuke? Anything beyond threats and sanctions (not that any of them will work anyway, if the past is any indication)? Or is the action going to heat up again on the Korean Penninsula (the Korean War isn't over technically, cause no peace treaty was signed)?

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Gecko3

I doubt many Americans would really give a damn if the South gets pwnt.

Gotta disagree there. Trade with South Korea is huge. Just think about all the automobiles and electronics that they export. Kia, Hyundai, and Daewoo cars, and Samsung electronics are all big business that the US would be somewhat upset about loosing.

In addition, contrary to what you've read in the NY Times, Daily Show, or wherever you get your news, the US doesn't only go to war if there are natural resources to gain. We went to war in Korea once before as a matter of ideological difference.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by MetheGelfling

Gotta disagree there. Trade with South Korea is huge. Just think about all the automobiles and electronics that they export. Kia, Hyundai, and Daewoo cars, and Samsung electronics are all big business that the US would be somewhat upset about loosing.

In addition, contrary to what you've read in the NY Times, Daily Show, or wherever you get your news, the US doesn't only go to war if there are natural resources to gain. We went to war in Korea once before as a matter of ideological difference.

I'm not saying you're wrong MetheGelfling, I know we do a lot of trade, and no doubt businesses would want the US to intervene (they've done that in the past, and some argue, in Iraq, but let's not go there), but the average joes and janes you talk to on the street probably wouldn't care as much as those business people/politicans, unless they're history/political science majors, or just like studying the situation there.

And I also know the US went to war (without formally declaring it, I think they called it a "police action", which I also believe was technically what they called Vietnam) over ideology during the first Korean War (and boy did we get whupped early on. Look up "Task Force Smith" to see what I mean), but the atmosphere back then was a lot more tense than it is today (where they were worried about a country that could send nukes our way, not to mention have poor people overthrow the government, and put brutal "poor" people in charge).

And then there was the issue of the US either actively supporting or at least giving their blessing for brutal dictators to be placed in charge of countries (the US has a lousy history of picking people to run countries, such as the Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussein, Ngo Dinh Diem, and several others I can't remember off the top of my head). Not that the majority of communist leaders were any better, but geez, pick someone who doesn't kill or jail a lot of people to stay in power.

Unless Americans get killed (and preferably service members it seems), most Americans won't raise an eyebrow at what's going on. Look at the recent conflict in Lebanon. Yes, the news stations were covering it everyday, but the general attitude I was seeing in most people was "eh, whatever".

I'm just trying to figure out what the general attitude will be. Again, I don't think too many people will care about the situation (unless the "test" happens to land in Japan or S. Korea, and it'd be interesting to see what China would say about it if they accidentally got hit). But I doubt most people will care, just passing it off as another thing N. Korea is doing to get attention and stay in the media.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

North Korea obtaining nuclear weapons would not instantly make it more dangerous than it is right now. The main reason North Korea is the pain in the ass it is today is because they have Seoul within range of their artillery, and perhaps to a lesser extent, they have Japan within range of their ballistic missiles. What they can actually do to the South Korean capital if war errupt is somewhat debatable. The complete annihilation scenario which is often mentioned is improbable, if not impossible, but that doesn't mean they couldn't inflict quite a bit of damage and substantial civilian casualties. It really depends on whether or not the South Koreans and their allies can find and strike at their artillery position fast enough; before the North Koreans retreat in their mountain tunnels. This is the main reason North Korea is that dangerous.

Their army isn't the biggest threat, even with a million men. If North Korea was invaded, then they could certainly be quite deadly seeing as North Korea is mostly mountains, and because the North Koreans have been fed propaganda about how the US eats babies is about to invade for the last 50 years. But if North Korea is invading, then things aren't the same. For one, logistics would be a challenge. There are but a few roads through the DMZ through which convoys could pass. And since North Korea has absolutely no chance in hell of ever having anything close to air superiority, any convoys crossing the DMZ would likely be turned into burning wreckage by US and South Korean planes. Those roads would literally be blocked by wreckage. Logistics aside, North Korean propaganda keeps telling Koreans they have the highest standards of living on the planet. Chances are that should the North Koreans reach downtown Seoul, it wouldn't be long for a lot of their soldiers to figure out it ain't exactly true. That is assuming that their army even has enough morale to even get there without breaking apart at the first encounter with other troops.

Now, what would North Korea getting nukes accomplish? First, it depends on what their scientists and engineers have been able to piece together. If they successfully built a warhead small enough to fit on their ballistic missiles, then, and only then will North Korea be more dangerous than it was, especially for Japan. But that's more difficult than simply building a nuclear bomb of any size, even if NK has to use an implosion device to begin with (they only have access to plutonium, thus ruling out the simpler gun-type bomb). I don't think it's impossible, in fact it's likely they've geared their program toward production of "compact" nuclear weapons since its inception. But let's be realistic here, using nuclear weapons would be suicide for North Korea. They could reach either South Korea or Japan (the US is still out of range as we've seen during their last missile test), but in either case that means the end of Kim's regime.

If all they have is a bomb too large to use as warhead on their missiles, then in North Korea's hands, it's a large paperweight. Any bomber coming from North Korea and entering either South Korean or Japanese airspace will be shot down without asking questions. The worst scenario would be them selling a few bombs on the open market to the highest bidder. While they've exported a lot of SCUDs and other similar weapons in the past, they'll probably be much more reluctant to sell something they can't manufacture as easily as short-range missiles.

Long story short, North Korea wouldn't become much more dangerous offensively.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Gecko3

...but the atmosphere back then was a lot more tense than it is today (where they were worried about a country that could send nukes our way...

I'm not sure I follow here. I'd say that the atmosphere today is a bit more tense. Back then, they weren't worried about NK's nuclear capabilities. They were worried about the further spread of communism throughout Asia. If anything, they're a greater threat now given that they potentially have nuclear capabilities.

If NK pops one off over Japan, or SK, or anywhere that's not their own property, I doubt it will be too difficult to gather support to put a stop to their potential tyranny.

I do agree with you though that recent media has seemed to desensitize us from the effects of war. The war in Iraq is constantly in the news, and nobody seems to care one way or the other anymore. Most Americans find themselves reacting like this: "Let's see what else is on." Also, I think that Americans as a whole are a lot more tolerant of communist ideology than they were back in the late 40's and early 50's. However, if your average Joe or Jane on the street suddenly finds that they can't get parts for their constantly breaking Hyundai Tiburon, or order a sweet ass Samsung monitor or tv, they'll be upset. SK's economy is nothing to scoff at. They export 288 billion worth of goods a year, primarily to China, Japan, and the US. They also import 256bil in goods from the same folks. If the US suddenly looses nearly 30bil in business from exports because of NK, I'm fairly certain that we'd be ready to do something about it.

Come to think of it, your average joe/jane thinks NK's crazy anyway, as their only frame of reference concerning troubles there is from Team America World Police. :biggrin:

I was speaking idiomatically.

What you've got to understand about North Korea is that its particular brand of communism is almost completely unique. Making compatibility with the world "free-market" almost impossible, Kim knows this, even China has a rather competitive capitalist infrastructure which is why it has become such a huge economic player. Uniting the Korean Peninsula is also sort of a big thing, too. It's a huge portion of Korean history (Romance of the Three Kingdoms, anyone?), and Kim believes his family has a right to rule a united Korea unmitigated.

Although, it should be noted that North Korea's build-up of weapons is due to a political maneuvering strategy. Related to Agreed Framework, which Clinton-Era congress and Bush dropped the ball on. That's when North Korea decided to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The deal was South Korea would build two light water reactors for the DPRK in support of the goals for reliable energy infrastructure and we were to ship oil to North Korea. It was a deal cut in response to a suspicion that North Korea might be enriching plutonium, because at the time they were using plutonium/graphite reactors-- which you'll notice a lot of countries with fledgling nuclear programs use, because it does not require the enrichment or advanced techniques employed with newer reactor technologies.

I think North Korea at one point was much more willing to work with the U.S. and the other Western powers, but due to mismanagement and an unwilligness to resume one-on-one talks things have taken a darker turn.

Would North Korea win an extended engagement against Coalition forces? No. Would they inflict heavy casualties upon us and our allies? Yes. Are we willing to accept those casualties? That's the question that remains unanswered. Personally, I wouldn't, especially since this really is a situation that can be solved through diplomatic means.

Why do I say it can be "solved" through diplomatic means? Because, ultimately it boils down to money and resources. Kim wants a prosperous North Korea, that won't happen if he continues his father's doctrine of self-reliance. He has even been quoted, on one of his diplomatic visits to China, praising the Chinese economic advancements-- due to their adaptation of a market-economy in the 80's. Sure, it's not going to happen overnight, but I'd say a revisitation of something similar to Agreed Framework would most likely accomplish our immediate goal of disarmament along the DPRK/ROK border and provide the DPRK with a valuable resource.

Quite honestly, something similar would probably work with Iran. However, that situation is a lot more complicated than dealing with North Korea. It's pretty easy to discern what the DPRK's objectives are.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Quote:

It's a huge portion of Korean history (Romance of the Three Kingdoms, anyone?)

Where the hell'd Korea come into question in RoTK?

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Duo Maxwell

Kim wants a prosperous North Korea, that won't happen if he continues his father's doctrine of self-reliance. He has even been quoted, on one of his diplomatic visits to China, praising the Chinese economic advancements-- due to their adaptation of a market-economy in the 80's. Sure, it's not going to happen overnight, but I'd say a revisitation of something similar to Agreed Framework would most likely accomplish our immediate goal of disarmament along the DPRK/ROK border and provide the DPRK with a valuable resource.

I really have doubts about that. Kim is pretty much one of the most secretive leader there is and it's fairly difficult to see what he really wants. I think that first and foremost, he wants to keep his grip on power. Seeing how he's been essentially sacrificing millions of his own people through starvation or concentration camps (easily on par with that of Nazi Germany, minus the systematic mass murder and with more forced labor), without any apparent attempt to even rebuild the agricultural capacity of his country which would be fairly essential for any kind of economic growth, I'd say he doesn't care much about a prosperous North Korea. It might be somewhere on his list of priorities, mind you, but it's fairly low compared to staying in power and preventing any outside interference, which essentially involves spending insane amounts of resources on his military.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Quote:

Where the hell'd Korea come into question in RoTK?

My understanding is that Romance of the Three Kingdoms is a chinese retelling of the relationship between the three Kingdoms on the Korean Peninsula: Silla, Goguryeo and Baekje.

At that time, Koreans primarily used Hanja (chinese characters) for written record. So, considering that all of this took place several hundred years before (concluding c. 935) RoTK was written (in the 1300s), is it not probable? And, I'm unsure, but I thought I read somewhere that some of the names might be transliterations of Hanja into Chinese.

I could be entirely mistaken, as I might've taken the story completely out of context. China had also experienced a period of seperation after the fall of the Han Dynasty (c. 200?). Albeit lasting less than 80 years.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...393599,00.html

It seems China has its own issues with the North Koreans wanting some nukes too. And it really does seem like what YeOldeButchere just said is probably what the real situation there. Not many people, when given power, willingly give it up (that's not to say there have never been cases of that happening. George Washington did that, he gave up his leadership over the army after the Revolutionary war, and didn't even want to do a 2nd term as President, but people liked him so much they begged him to do it again. Of course, history shows that people who get into power often want to stay in it, especially if the government system is corrupt or weak).

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Kim wouldn't have to relinquish his seat of power, though. When did I suggest in my scenario that Kim would be stepping down?

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Seems North Korea claims to have tested their nuclear weapon a short time ago.

(Source)

Quote:

...North Korea's official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reported Monday the country has performed a successful nuclear test...

I say we park five Trident Nuclear Missile Submarines off their coast permanently now. More than likely, this will cause Japan to go nuclear for defensive purposes. It'll throw that entire region into their own 'cold war'.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Erm, a single US missile sub (and I bet there's already at least one in the area), has more than enough in term of warheads to lay waste to everything that's worth blowing up with nuclear weapons in North Korea. Partly because there isn't much to blow up, partly because a single Ohio class SSBN carries 24 fucking Trident II missiles, each of which can carry up to 8 W88 warheads, for a grand total of roughly 90 megatons of sweet, sweet thermonuclear doom.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by YeOldeButchere

Erm, a single US missile sub (and I bet there's already at least one in the area), has more than enough in term of warheads to lay waste to everything that's worth blowing up with nuclear weapons in North Korea. Partly because there isn't much to blow up, partly because a single Ohio class SSBN carries 24 fucking Trident II missiles, each of which can carry up to 8 W88 warheads, for a grand total of roughly 90 megatons of sweet, sweet thermonuclear doom.

But true to American nature, we always overdo it. We burn their land, and burn it some more. Then we come back the next day & do it all over again. Besides, parking five instead of one... strength in numbers. North Korea does have a tiny little navy. Maybe a submarine or two.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Here's supposed geological proof of the test, along with another report on it. We should know more about what happened in a few hours. Some folks are saying the Pentagon's alarmed about this, but it may just be another one of NK's attention getting tactics.

Quote:

South Korean intelligence officials said a seismic wave of magnitude-3.58 had been detected in North Hamkyung province, according to Yonhap. It said the test was conducted at 10:36 a.m. (9:36 p.m. EDT Sunday) in Hwaderi near Kilju city on the northeast coast, citing defense officials.

Source (for the quote)

How ya doing, buddy?

The only logical solution now is to wipe out North Korea's military capability with a crippling first strike.

I mean, isn't that what "You can either have a nuke or a future" means?

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by Night Phoenix

The only logical solution now is to wipe out North Korea's military capability with a crippling first strike.

I mean, isn't that what "You can either have a nuke or a future" means?

In all likelihood, nothing much is going to happen. China's probably furious, the UN's going to go nuts over this, but that's about it. Oh, and the hawks in Japan will get more support for amending their constitution and allowing themselves to create a military (even though since 2005, it's been called a military force by the government themselves after the Defense agency became a ministry).

Well, we'll see how this goes as time goes on. No doubt some sort of mobilization is going on with our military.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Night Phoenix

The only logical solution now is to wipe out North Korea's military capability with a crippling first strike.

I mean, isn't that what "You can either have a nuke or a future" means?

No, see, that's diplomatic talk for "Please don't do that or we'll be angry". I really doubt much will happen unless North Korea suddently decides they want to start firing artillery shells at Seoul or something equally stupid. I mean, detonating a bomb like that, assuming it really did work and didn't fizzle, is stupid, but only borderline suicidal. It'll probably take more for any military operation against North Korea to take place.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Oh, I know no military operation will happen. I'm just saying, you don't say that kinda shit unless you're ready to BUST A NIGGA'S HEAD.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Quote:

The only logical solution now is to wipe out North Korea's military capability with a crippling first strike.

I mean, isn't that what "You can either have a nuke or a future" means?

The one time military action would probably be justified, the US is simply too weak to undertake it effectively after being tied down elsewhere. It's relatively obvious Kim feels pretty easy going considering that the US doesn't have many options against him without the RoK government and possibly Japan being behind him.

Yes, I'll agree with NP on this. You can't talk publicly like that without being willing to back it up. Otherwise, threats lose their credibility.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

We don't have to invade North Korea, just bomb it to hell - a task for which we're very capable of doing.

And when I say first strike, I mean a nuclear first strike using our Ohio missile submarine.

Most amazing jew boots

Reading up on another site, I found this link:

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums...ad.php?t=82755

Although I've only viewed the first page, all I have to say is, wow. This is definitely going to be something historians, sociologists, and psychology people will want to study someday.

Propaganda at its finest. Notice the huge cubes of stone right next to the roads, ready to be dropped down to stop tanks, not to mention the electric fences by the water, and the ghetto looking buildings next to the hotel stuff the tourist guy was taking pictures of (and being told he's not supposed to take pictures of it. Luckily they never confiscated his camera).

Sure, North Korea looks great and all, but I wonder what would happen if they saw how the South Koreans and many other people around the world were living. As you can probably tell, communism sure did fix people's problems didn't they?

Double Post:
Here's another side of North Korea you normally don't get to see.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TNM5DpKyms&NR

Most amazing jew boots

Awww, they did not even talk about the concentration camp where they test chemical and biological weapons on prisoners, usually whole families. Or how the prisoners are sometime tied to the back of a jeep or truck and dragged around the camps until they're dead. I'm disappointed.

Seriously, Kim is as bad as Stalin or Hitler, the main difference being that the latter mainly killed jews, and the former probably wasn't as brutal as that when it comes to what took place in his gulags.

FELIPE NO

Ummm... wow.... looking at the photos made me realize they are still stuck in 1953, when the war ended.... Could you imagine the surprise of the people when things finally change there? They will all have to receive history books on the last 60 to 70 years just to catch up.

Imagine seeing cell phones, and laptops, and spaceships, and all sorts of stuff, and learning what has happened in the world in the past decades. Such as, how America is playing the world police... (Somethings never change... just kidding)...

Remember how you always wish you could take someone from the past and bring them to the future to show what has happened? This could work with North Korea. In the end, I just feel upset by the fact that its still so backwards especially in Human Rights.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

South Korea and Japan are about to be nuclear powers - and we should make it so.

Jam it back in, in the dark.