Castanet

SurplusElect wrote:They haven't mentioned it because they are not a threat.

Think logically. DPRK launches and they loose their country/leadership and the states dances on their graves and turns North Korea into Disneyworld Korea for spite.

So Seattle might be gone, but who will know about it? It ensures a US victory.

You are kidding, right?

Bsuds wrote:So much for the claim that Canadian media has not covered this.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/

I never stated Canadian media wasn't covering the North Korean news, but that they had never mentioned the peril to Canadian soil in the middle of the trajectory to WA state. I don't see anything on that page that addresses the danger to British Columbia. Am I missing something?

DashFiveGuy wrote:That said, if such a North Korean attack ever did happen you can bet the US response would be swift and massive for sure but it would also have to be limited and it would most certainly be conventional.

Swift, massive, limited and conventional. Sounds like Operation Shock And Awe. That worked really well for everyone concerned didn't it?

Spocky wrote:Swift, massive, limited and conventional. Sounds like Operation Shock And Awe. That worked really well for everyone concerned didn't it?

Didn't work out so well for Saddam Hussein or his regime that's for sure.

BTW: "Shock and Awe" was a term used to describe the tactics used it was never the name of an operation.

DashFiveGuy wrote:
Didn't work out so well for Saddam Hussein or his regime that's for sure.

BTW: "Shock and Awe" was a term used to describe the tactics used it was never the name of an operation.

OK, but the bottom line is that whenever any superpower goes in on a "limited" basis the end result is a decade long morass. Sure Saddam is gone but nothing but a huge mess is left in Iraq. Ten minutes after the allied forces pull out of Afghanistan they'll all be back to square one. The USSR did the same thing, and same result.

However, back to the topic at hand. IMHO the N. Koreans have reason to believe that they won't be totally destroyed, not only because of their ties to China, but primarily due to their geography. Americans have no taste for a return to the Korean peninsula where they were able to obtain a draw at best 60 years ago. Most importantly, the entire N. Korean leadership is out of their #$%&ing minds so I don't put anything past them.

Spocky wrote:IMHO the N. Koreans have reason to believe that they won't be totally destroyed, not only because of their ties to China, but primarily due to their geography. Americans have no taste for a return to the Korean peninsula where they were able to obtain a draw at best 60 years ago. Most importantly, the entire N. Korean leadership is out of their #$%&ing minds so I don't put anything past them.

Agreed. Well except for the part about the Americans having no taste for a return to the Korean peninsula. In fact they have never left.

DashFiveGuy wrote:Agreed. Well except for the part about the Americans having no taste for a return to the Korean peninsula. In fact they have never left.

True, but the US forces there now couldn't possibly hope to engage in a full scale invasion of the North. That might take up to a million soldiers and I just can't see that happening.

Let's just keep hoping and praying that "The Onion's Sexiest Man Alive" http://www.npr.org/2012/12/01/166293306/the-onion-so-funny-it-makes-us-cry is only bluffing... or there's gonna be a real tragedy.

Pretty simplistic solutions you all have. I can guarantee right now there are behind the scenes negotiations going on with the Chinese and the Russians in regards to what to do about NK. Remember the US is China's largest trading partner so severing ties with the US would be devastating for China. Also why would the US have to use Nukes? They have enough conventional weapons and delivery systems to destroy anything important in NK. Also they would have plenty of warning if NK was going to launch and could very easily take out the launch system. The real problem is NK has the ability to put 500,000 artillery shells per hour onto Seoul which would be the inevitable results and the US would have to respond to that. Therefor a Tactical nuke strike to deal with that would be more realistic than a nuke landing in BC.

rookie314 wrote:Pretty simplistic solutions you all have. I can guarantee right now there are behind the scenes negotiations going on with the Chinese and the Russians in regards to what to do about NK. Remember the US is China's largest trading partner so severing ties with the US would be devastating for China. Also why would the US have to use Nukes? They have enough conventional weapons and delivery systems to destroy anything important in NK. Also they would have plenty of warning if NK was going to launch and could very easily take out the launch system. The real problem is NK has the ability to put 500,000 artillery shells per hour onto Seoul which would be the inevitable results and the US would have to respond to that. Therefor a Tactical nuke strike to deal with that would be more realistic than a nuke landing in BC.

So am I correct in understanding that you expect that N. Korea can nuke anything it wants between Juneau and Walla Walla and the Americans will just say "oh, bad boy?" I think that the US reaction would be 9/11 x 1,000. IMHO (and only IMHO) severing ties with China would be the best thing for the USA. Then they could get back to manufacturing their own goods rather than bleeding away most of their GDP to Beijing so consumers can buy $8 toasters and $4 shoes. The mess the Americans are in (IMHOooooooooooooooooooooooooo) can only be resolved through tight economic isolationism.

Silly thread. I wouldn't be losing sleep over it. Have you been watching the new Red Dawn movie?

I would worry a lot more if they had hundreds of nukes and could hit anywhere in the US. Having a few is bad but when the US has like 10,000 well. You can also use nuclear weapons with very little fallout to neighboring countries. All you have to do is airburst the weapon. Fallout is very low in air burst. Also think the US has neutron weapons that can kill people and leave the buildings intact. And also think they have smaller tactical nukes and possibly emp weapons as well.In addition of course they have a very powerful conventional arsenal,fuel air bombs, cruise missles and all sorts of very accurate weaponry.

The main danger in the world today is China and Russia . Russia still has thousands of nukes and China has quite a few also not sure if a thousand but likely in the hundreds. Nuclear war changes a lot of things .Massing of your men becomes not a good idea, even massing together of your fleets also not good idea. There are so many misconceptions about nuclear war and weapons its not funny. Fallout from nuclear weapons generally only lasts a few weeks. Nothing like reactor accidents.They were going back into HIroshima and Nagasaki pretty quickly. Nuclear winter is another big unproven theory.
Nuclear war is very survivable if you are in sufficient shelter. Anyone underground in a mine or decent shelter would be fine in a nuclear war.If the war ended they could come out in a few weeks no on the beach type crap thats all BS.

But off the subject a bit. Wil north korea attack the US with nukes. Dont think in the immediate future. They could start a conventional war wtih the south though and they could use nukes if they were losing or if their backs were against the wall. As a first strike dont' think so. But as the years go by if they did accumulate 50 or 100 or more nukes and could put them anywhere in the US they wanted to then that would be a lot more worrying.

So am I correct in understanding that you expect that N. Korea can nuke anything it wants between Juneau and Walla Walla and the Americans will just say "oh, bad boy?" I think that the US reaction would be 9/11 x 1,000. IMHO (and only IMHO) severing ties with China would be the best thing for the USA. Then they could get back to manufacturing their own goods rather than bleeding away most of their GDP to Beijing so consumers can buy $8 toasters and $4 shoes. The mess the Americans are in (IMHOooooooooooooooooooooooooo) can only be resolved through tight economic isolationism.[/quote]

No. What I m saying is the US has the capability and the connections to make sure it doesn't happen without resorting to nuking NK. If you want to see how we'll economic sanctions work in Asia I would suggest you read a little history of the area from between 1937 and Dec 1941.

[SARCASM] Yeah, brounal, I can certainly understand that it's important to defuse the possibility of a nuke in the Okanagan as it would make it very difficult to support your ongoing thesis of ever-rising local real estate pricing! [END SARCASM]

The North Koreans spent millions of dollars which they have taken away from feeding their population (where millions are starving and eating hay in a futile effort to survive) to develop a 6,000 mile striking range to hit the mainland USA. That's their stated goal. If they're going to use it or not is only in the domain of crystal balls.

They're just tooting their horns because they want more free aid, which I'm sure just goes straight to the starving military rather than the starving civilian population.

bottleman wrote:They're just tooting their horns because they want more free aid, which I'm sure just goes straight to the starving military rather than the starving civilian population.

There may be something afoot there. The recent visit by the Google Prez raised more questions than it answered.

google is gonna nuke the super powers of the world and take over instating Glooble government.

bottleman wrote:google is gonna nuke the super powers of the world and take over instating Glooble government.

Yup, did you know Sergei Brin is an ex-KGB agent planted by the former USSR to destroy the West?

Meanwhile North Koreans are resorting to Soylent Green while their government works out ways to lob nukes across the Pacific:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/north-korean-cannibalism-fears-amid-claims-starving-people-forced-to-desperate-measures-8468781.html

The North Koreans have every right to Nuclear Weapons as a means to deter aggression from their perceived enemies whom all have nukes themselves.
We have no need to worry about North Koreas’ nukes – first they only have a handful and we sit on top of the only nation to actually use nukes on people and also have the most nukes and also loves to tell other people they can’t have any. Second, we have the entire pacific ocean between us, and look at that, we also sit on top of a nation that has thousands of warships, military bases, airbase and missile defense bases in that very ocean, - now, unless North Korea somehow leap jumped pass the US in missile technology, I think we have a greater chance of being hit by a mutant flying panda from Mars then getting hit by a Nuke from Korea.
Also, South Korea just lunched a satellite into space too, but I don’t see anyone flipping out on them.
What has North Korea even ever done for this kind of ridicule? Wait, I’m about to tell you below 
Now, concerning their economical plight; that is the cause of us and the rest of the western world committing this ongoing 'shadow' war on them, sanctions and whatnot preventing them from establishing a global economy – coca cola doesn’t even do business there, and they do business in hell (trust me, I have vouchers) Their army employs most of their people, and thus is one of their main economic wheels. And national security is priority of every nation in the world, so this idea of 'Oh, they shouldn't have an army and give that money instead to the people' is both naive and redundant for the reasons stated above.

If anyone really cared to ease the tension in Korea, all we need to do is abandon this American 'Shadow' War and reestablish civil relations and trade with them - Boosting their economy, and allowing more people to work elsewhere then the military: Shrinking the size of the army (and thus reducing the ‘threat’)
If Korea is no longer threatened, the army would no longer be glorified so much, the nuke program would be placed on the back burner and then we can all stop freaking on them for having a defensive plan and putting stuff in space (like the rest of the world)
As relations grow, more and more people in Korea would lean away from aggressive diplomacy, effectively crushing any ‘threat’ from North Korea.

However, ever since America divided the country and established their 'state' of South Korea, in an effort to curtail Soviet Influence, we have waged with the Americans a war of containment against the North.

The funny part is the general public is so drowned in America's propaganda that what I just said seems crazy at best and a threat to our state at worse.

What to do you guys think?