Kim Jong Un Fires Off Another Missile.

[The Caspian Hare]

I think window for preemptive strike without unacceptable casualties closed. Don't know how many weapons he have, don't know if they can be mounted on missiles, don't know his response, too many things unknown.

In the end this is a regional problem. South Korea would be most affected by war and ought to take policy lead. South Korea can handle its own conventional defense just fine (with US support of course), and with US nuclear cover to deter WMD attack Kim is sufficiently contained. Ultimately China should step up and handle this... they are a superpower now, this is their backyard, and Kim is in some sense their responsibility, you want to be a great power then do great power stuff. 

[Lilly]

6 hours ago, third_eye said:

You don't know that, you are just making speculations based on nothing of certainty.

 

Perhaps not certainty, but there are people who have managed to get out of North Korea and their stories indicate 'Dear Leader' rules via extreme terror. Basically, Kim Jong Un is more like Stalin actually. Kim murders and oppresses as a means of keeping a tight hold over his people. Sure the cadre at the top (who have reaped benefits) may stand against change, but I don't think there would be a popular uprising were Kim to be 'done in' in some way.

[SHaYap]

Just now, Lilly said:

Perhaps not certainty, but there are people who have managed to get out of North Korea and their stories indicate 'Dear Leader' rules via extreme terror. Basically, Kim Jong Un is more like Stalin actually. Kim murders and oppresses as a means of keeping a tight hold over his people. Sure the cadre at the top (who have reaped benefits) may stand against change, but I don't think there would be a popular uprising were Kim to be 'done in' in some way.

That's another thing, I wouldn't put too much faith on those accounts as it is with the other side of the views, most if not all are grossly exaggerated and over blown. You are taking the simplistic and dangerously juvenile black and white view all based just on what you 'think'

Well let me let you know for sure and with all certainty, half if not more of Korea will die along with most of Japan, you can take that to the bank, or what's left of banking institutions by then.

~

[Lilly]

Just now, third_eye said:

... half if not more of Korea will die along with most of Japan, you can take that to the bank, or what's left of banking institutions by then.

 

Seriously? You think that if Kim is assassinated half of Korea and most of Japan will die?

I think China would simply step in and make sure that the next dictator would be more to their liking. This is probably the main reason that Kimmy had his half brother whacked last year.

[SHaYap]

1 minute ago, Lilly said:

Seriously? You think that if Kim is assassinated half of Korea and most of Japan will die?

I think China would simply step in and make sure that the next dictator would be more to their liking. This is probably the main reason that Kimmy had his half brother whacked last year.

Lilly, it is not as simple as you believe that it is, if it were so, NK would have been non existent just years after the Korean War, such as it is what the Kim Dynasty holds still props them up even after all this time and it not only works but it is the only thing that is working for them, they play big with nothing to lose because that's the the only thing on their table, if they lose whatever nothing they still have then they have nothing else to but to make sure everything else too will lose the most possible within the capacity to take along with them.

You may think them crazy and stupid, even if so, that's what keeping them relevant, and that's what they have left, stupid and crazy, if you want to risk the whole global financial and economic infrastructure torn to dust just so you want to see them gone, you go ahead and try, it will take probably 10 to 20 years to get right again, which is the most simplistic, conservative and optimistic guesstimate. That of course means nothing else unexpected pops up along the way.

So far from what we know with things having a tendency of going sideways with Afghanistan, Libya, Tunisia. Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Nigeria and Turkey, I would advise some caution on the overly optimistic.

SOme mention here perhaps of Saddam, Gaddafi, Castro, Mugabe, Idi Amin, Omar, Mansour or  Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi might be of help ...

~

 

[RoofGardener]

No.

I think containment would be catastrophic. Kim WILL use his nuclear weapons, just as soon as he has found a way to deploy them effectively.

We should strike now. Well, I say "We", I was thinking more of South Korea, assisted with US aircraft and naval fire support. (tomahawks etc).

Behind the troops should be waves of engineers, doctors, and zillions of lorries of food !

 

[Lilly]

I still think it would be better if Kimmy just keeled over dead (natural or unnatural cause). This particular 'Kim' is far more militant than his Daddy or Granddaddy ever was. I fear that RoofGardener is right and this particular Kim will eventually opt to use his nukes (probably on South Korea or even Japan).

[SHaYap]

If it were only so simple ... anyhow, those of us over here this side of the globe knows that he (and his pa and grandpa before him) enjoys making the hoohah more than they enjoys making the booms ... that goes for the rest of NK too ...

~

[+and-then]

4 hours ago, third_eye said:

If it were only so simple ... anyhow, those of us over here this side of the globe knows that he (and his pa and grandpa before him) enjoys making the hoohah more than they enjoys making the booms ... that goes for the rest of NK too ...

~

I agree that this has been their pattern UNTIL THIS particular version of divine leader arose.  If he is allowed the time to perfect his systems do you think he will settle down and make nice with the global community?  Once he has 50 ICBMs in place and all are topped with megadeath potential, do you think he won't make demands of his neighbors when he "needs" donations?  I also agree that a hot war on that peninsula would be horrific in its costs, human and economic.  A war where he felt emboldened to launch a nuke at the U.S. would end FAR worse for the world, however.  This guy is China's pitbull and China bears responsibility if he breaks his chain and bites.  The whole damned world seems to have gotten a chip on its shoulder all at the same time and things don't look to improve.

[Astra.]

After this lunatic tested this underground hydrogen bomb, the first thing that jumped to mind, was what effect could it have to possibly trigger off more natural occurring earthquakes that already have major faults lines that lie beneath the earths crust. Honestly, nothing would give me more satisfaction, in knowing that someone sneaked in and assassinated this little fat turd whilst he slept.  

[RoofGardener]

18 hours ago, third_eye said:

Lilly, it is not as simple as you believe that it is, if it were so, NK would have been non existent just years after the Korean War, such as it is what the Kim Dynasty holds still props them up even after all this time and it not only works but it is the only thing that is working for them, they play big with nothing to lose because that's the the only thing on their table, if they lose whatever nothing they still have then they have nothing else to but to make sure everything else too will lose the most possible within the capacity to take along with them.

You may think them crazy and stupid, even if so, that's what keeping them relevant, and that's what they have left, stupid and crazy, if you want to risk the whole global financial and economic infrastructure torn to dust just so you want to see them gone, you go ahead and try, it will take probably 10 to 20 years to get right again, which is the most simplistic, conservative and optimistic guesstimate. That of course means nothing else unexpected pops up along the way.

So far from what we know with things having a tendency of going sideways with Afghanistan, Libya, Tunisia. Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Nigeria and Turkey, I would advise some caution on the overly optimistic.

SOme mention here perhaps of Saddam, Gaddafi, Castro, Mugabe, Idi Amin, Omar, Mansour or  Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi might be of help ...

~

 

I would suggest that the reason the Kim Dynasty was able to survive was through lavish military and financial assistance from the Soviet Union and Maoist China. Just one more example of the toxic political pollution left behind by Communism.

Kim Jong un no longer has this support. At the moment, he can't threaten anybody - not even South Korea, let alone Japan.

If he reaches the point of being able to create nuclear-tipped long-range rockets, then all of that will change. We need to stop him NOW, or explain to our children why we didn't.

 

 

 

[Sir Smoke aLot]

Without nukes and ICBM arsenal North Korea would be history by now. Keep in mind that it wasn't Kim's family who made N. Korea it was because of other parties meddling into affairs of Korean people. See, USA praise deterance capability, human rights and all but you will never hear them speak about respecting other countries soveregnity.

As far as i know North Korea's statements are always based on 'retalliation' never on aggression in terms '' we will hit you soon ''. Sure, sending rocket over Japan was bad idea, doing nuclear tests is also bad idea but constantly painting that country as an mad state which seeks destruction to it's neighbours, that is totally BS and overstatement. N.Korea has nukes for long time, there are documents from 1970s which show how some important western militaries have traded plutonium and other stuff to the region and what i can't understand is how the tide turns so fast... Did they use it? No they did not, it's only America who did, and they did so when they were winning the war so who gave USA the right to speak about it? They should first clean up their garden and show some dignity by admiting horrors which bombings of Germany and nukes over Hiroshima and Nagasaki have done but that is other side of history, side into which one can't go just like into any other historical event. It's different today, everyone has their reasons to fear something but we can't allow anyone to make decisions based simply on latest events especially when there was no harm done. 

Keep in mind that after drought in 1990s instead of helping N.Korean people the western world increased sanctions to them which simply strenghtened ruling party. History of that area must not be neglected in any political show-off today.

Trumps rhetoric is simply continuation of American policy after war on Iraq ( which was illegal attrocity that has snowballed into reshaping the region to their own likeness ).

Another fact, Myanmar is terrible place, is it that diamond industry moves people to other places so that they can excavate more or it is hate towards Muslims, i can't tell for sure but one thing pops out... In the name of human rights there is process of demonizing Duterte, Philipino president, who is killing criminals when they attack police forces but i did not hear anything about Myanmar's regime. Is it still the same puppet regime which was installed long ago?

This world is in total mess, sorry for longer post but this is enormously long subject.

[stevewinn]

Its a disaster the whole thing, there is no solution which doesn't end in the death of hundreds of thousands. Any air strike needs to be backed up with troops on the ground. N.Korea as 1 million strong land army. okay not trained to the standard of western forces but a fanatical enemy.  it'll take 350,000 US troops backed with a near equal number of (combined) allies. are US citizens prepared for casualty rates in 50,000 range. i'd be adverse to action that will result in such loses. - that leaves the Nuclear option avoids the deaths of US/allied troops but kills millions of Koreans and generations pay the price for years to come. also the fallout cloud China, Japan, South Korea, and those in the region wont like the idea of that falling over their citizens, us in the UK can remember Chernobyl, farmers in Wales had lambs being born deformed, two heads, multiple limbs. 

Other option, Leave Kim to become a nuclear power, and hope he's sane enough to comprehend Mutual Assured Destruction. we already live in a world were this works, US/Russia. India/Pakistan. - US/N.Korea?  

 

[Mr.United_Nations]

The problem is North Korea wants the whole Korea to be under Thier rule, that's there dream goal. Right now China and Russia does not want NK to have nuclear weapons and they could take the warheads away and stored safely in a neutral country.

 

[RoofGardener]

52 minutes ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

Without nukes and ICBM arsenal North Korea would be history by now.....

Ummm..... the first NK nuclear test was 2006. So what kept them 'alive' before that ?

And they STILL don't have a credible ICBM.

I'm not aware of ANYBODY having territorial ambitions over NK ??

Edited September 5, 2017 by RoofGardener

[RoofGardener]

1 hour ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

......Keep in mind that after drought in 1990s instead of helping N.Korean people the western world increased sanctions to them which simply strenghtened ruling party. History of that area must not be neglected in any political show-off today.

But, that simply isn't correct ? There was a MASSIVE international effort to provide emergency food supplies.

The Chinese kinda slowed it down at one stage, 'cos the NK's where stealing their railway freight carriages. But the aid goes on today, as NK still cannot feed it's people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_famine#International_response

Sanctions where levied against military equipment, especially in relation to Nuclear research, when NK unilaterally pulled out of the non-proliferation treaty in.. what... 2006 ? It was not connected to food aid or famines.

Edited September 5, 2017 by RoofGardener

[Sir Smoke aLot]

2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Ummm..... the first NK nuclear test was 2006. So what kept them 'alive' before that ?

And they STILL don't have a credible ICBM.

I'm not aware of ANYBODY having territorial ambitions over NK ??

First nuclear test in 2006 doesnt mean that they didn't have dirty bombs and destruction capacity to endanger large population way before that. Only in case of war with South or in case of invasion by anyone would there be such action by North Korea. It's been stated many times over the years and for me it's pretty clear - do not touch them, they won't touch you. For decades now situation is the same, obviously the approach to the ' North Korean problem' is wrong.

They surely do not have reliable long range missiles, i agree, but the threat was never neglected by their political opponents and actually, if we look on American politicians narative then North Korea does have capacity to do what they are accused of.

If things were so simple as you describe then why all the trouble? If we put common sense into equation here than something is surely not right.

[Sir Smoke aLot]

1 minute ago, RoofGardener said:

But, that simply isn't correct ? There was a MASSIVE international effort to provide emergency food supplies.

The Chinese kinda slowed it down at one stage, 'cos the NK's where stealing their railway freight carriages. But the aid goes on today, as NK still cannot feed it's people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_famine#International_response

Massive effort doesn't mean massive success.

Should i believe that North Korean government didn't allow free food for their people? Many empires in history have fallen simply because of droughts and inability to provide food for the people, i would dare to say that it's been known fact for thousands of years now so i wonder what makes you think that North Korean people and leaders are so uneducated and stupid to induce fall of the system on themselves? I just can't follow that.

[RoofGardener]

4 minutes ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

First nuclear test in 2006 doesnt mean that they didn't have dirty bombs and destruction capacity to endanger large population way before that. Only in case of war with South or in case of invasion by anyone would there be such action by North Korea. It's been stated many times over the years and for me it's pretty clear - do not touch them, they won't touch you. ..

Well then, why are they developing long-range missiles ? Nobody has ever threatened to invade them, least of all the USA.

[RoofGardener]

1 minute ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

Massive effort doesn't mean massive success.

Should i believe that North Korean government didn't allow free food for their people? Many empires in history have fallen simply because of droughts and inability to provide food for the people, i would dare to say that it's been known fact for thousands of years now so i wonder what makes you think that North Korean people and leaders are so uneducated and stupid to induce fall of the system on themselves? I just can't follow that.

Did you have a chance to read the Wiki article ?

[Sir Smoke aLot]

2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Well then, why are they developing long-range missiles ? Nobody has ever threatened to invade them, least of all the USA.

That is from one perspective man. Why does US develop mini nukes for decades now, what is the reason behind making W54 and alikes? Iran is being called out for making missiles too and its almost the same double talk when it's about Iran. Larger threat to people all around the world are those nukes which can be launched from mortars and it's old technology now. So simple question, why is it that North Korean missiles are offensive and that American missiles are defensive? How many civilians have died becasue of N.Korean missiles and how many because of American missiles? 

2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Did you have a chance to read the Wiki article ?

I really try to avoid Wiki as much as i can because those sources they show make me sick sometimes but i will go through it, even tho i explained that it is unrealistic to expect that rulling family didn't allow for the food to get into civilian hands.

[RoofGardener]

20 minutes ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

That is from one perspective man. Why does US develop mini nukes for decades now, what is the reason behind making W54 and alikes? Iran is being called out for making missiles too and its almost the same double talk when it's about Iran. Larger threat to people all around the world are those nukes which can be launched from mortars and it's old technology now. So simple question, why is it that North Korean missiles are offensive and that American missiles are defensive?

why are NK (or Iranian) missiles offensive, and the USA's are not ? Because the USA tends to honor international treaties, acts rationally, and has democratic safeguards to control use of those missiles. NK and Iran do not/have not.

When was the last time the USA used a long-range ballistic missile in anger ? How about... never ?

[Sir Smoke aLot]

Just now, RoofGardener said:

why are NK (or Iranian) missiles offensive, and the USA's are not ? Because the USA tends to honor international treaties, acts rationally, and has democratic safeguards to control use of those missiles. NK and Iran do not/have not.

When was the last time the USA used a long-range ballistic missile in anger ? How about... never ?

First thing worth to mention in respect to how '' USA honor international treaties '' is war on Iraq. USA doesn't respect international law. Syria is another example, not to mention Lybia. If USA was to act rationally they would never made this mess on ME. So there goes American honor. Not even kids in kindergarden see it as honorable anymore.

As for using those ICBM's, America doesn't need them at all they have other means available to them. Just take a look about siege of ' Deir ez Zor ' in Syria and you will realize what does powerful Airforce mean, not to mention Tomahawk missiles which are far more superior to any N.Korean advance in ICBM in near future.

Anyways, it's not even realistic to compare American military with anyother force in the world, alto American lead wars in last decades have paved the way for China and Russia to get close to their level becasue while America was spending money on proxy and direct wars - others were silently developing technology and investing in it.

There is no way that you can possibly make an argument over that, American missiles are offensive becasue America has never fought defensive war in it's foreign affairs history.

[Sir Smoke aLot]

Only thing i can agree here is that North Korea is making mistakes by doing those tests, especially missile tests which, considering mere geography of the region and the size of North Korea they can't possibly test without endangering it's neighbourhood.

But to threat with military instead of changing diplomatic approach which has surely failed for last decades, that is also wrong and simply fortifies Kim's position as defender of the nation so if anything, America is helping him to strenghten his rule bmo.

And another important point, if we will compare USA and Iran or North Korea, USA fails on every level especially in foreign affairs and especially since '' war on terror '' has started. 

[Gromdor]

19 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

why are NK (or Iranian) missiles offensive, and the USA's are not ? Because the USA tends to honor international treaties, acts rationally, and has democratic safeguards to control use of those missiles. NK and Iran do not/have not.

When was the last time the USA used a long-range ballistic missile in anger ? How about... never ?

I had to laugh this.  The Paris Accords?  Nafta?  Heck there is talk that he will walk away from the South Korea Trade agreement alienating them during the middle of this fiasco https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/02/world/asia/us-south-korea-trade.html

As for the last time we launched an ICBM out of anger?   April 2017?  https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/us-test-icbm-tensions-rise-north-korea-n788481