View Full Version : Hewo. N Korea has nukes now
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/02/10/nkorea.talks/index.html
Fat lot of good diplomacy did.
Raptorman
02-10-05, 08:02 AM
Wonderful. Although I've thought they've had nukes for a long time. Now that they have admitted to having nuclear weapons we can invade.
Speaking of N. Korea, did anyone ever see that documentary on HBO about N.Korea (most of it was a hidden camera to keep it from the commies)? It shows how bad off N. Korea really is. Ofcourse we know that Kim Jong Il could care less about his people. If N. Korea keeps screwing around like this I expect military action to take place before long. If not by us, the S. Koreans will do something. Then, we'll be drug into it.
N Korea has had a nuclear program for a long time. That they openly admit it means that they now have several weapons ready to use. I think we should give the south koreans a small handful of nukes to act as a counter-balance.
Raptorman
02-10-05, 08:15 AM
N Korea has had a nuclear program for a long time. That they openly admit it means that they now have several weapons ready to use. I think we should give the south koreans a small handful of nukes to act as a counter-balance.
An increase of American forces in the area may also take effect if N. Korea refuses to come back to disarmament talks (which we know they won't come back to talks). I feel that there is a fire starting to brew on the Korean peninsula again. Though I doubt they would have the significant Chinese support if there was an outbreak of military operations. As the Chinese don't even want the N. Koreans having nuclear weapons. We all know Kim Jong Il is a nut and will not hesitate to use them when he thinks he has an advantage.
Riptide
02-10-05, 08:34 AM
Do the NK have a long range and accurate delivery system?
NK = worlds biggest bluffer
Raptorman
02-10-05, 09:31 AM
Do the NK have a long range and accurate delivery system?
Old Soviet era stuff. But who needs accuracy with a nuclear warhead?
Do the NK have a long range and accurate delivery system?
Their missiles can travel maybe couple thousands kilometers by now. They have been slowly improving the range of their missiles; it seems to take approximately 5 years for them to introduce a new missile model. Some time ago they launched a missile over Japan and into the Pacific.
Direct attack against NK is not feasible, because they have too much artillery about 40 miles from Seoul. There is no way to take out all the artillery with airstrikes fast enough to save Seoul from complete flattening. When this threat is combined with the fact that NK is well capable of launching nukes to Japan, there's no way in hell that attacking NK would be viable without eliminating these threats.
So, Mr. Bush's best bet is to continue the trade block against NK and try to get the NK government to collapse under it's own weight, much in the same way that the Soviet Union collapsed. And hope that this collapse occurs before they develop a missile that can reach the West Coast.
sytaylor
02-10-05, 10:35 AM
China has discovered the huge benefit the free market brings, and you can't have a free market and good world trade without being someway friendly with the USA. Where there is money, there's the USA. They now have a major major incentive to not allow N Korea to do anything stupid. The major thing with N Korea is they all buy into their own isolationist paranoia about the world outside their borders.
vampireuk
02-10-05, 10:38 AM
Direct attack against NK is not feasible, because they have too much artillery about 40 miles from Seoul. There is no way to take out all the artillery with airstrikes fast enough to save Seoul from complete flattening. When this threat is combined with the fact that NK is well capable of launching nukes to Japan, there's no way in hell that attacking NK would be viable without eliminating these threats.
Actually it is extremely feasible, while seoul will be destroyed by the artillery continuous airstrikes will anhiliate the ground forces. North Korea has no means to continue supplying itself with weapons that have been destroyed and will have little means to keep its troops supplied with enough food.
saturnotaku
02-10-05, 10:41 AM
It would be nice if China could give them a good, hard smacking - shell a few places, maybe a small ground assault just to keep them in line. Probably not gonna happen, but still.
sytaylor
02-10-05, 10:45 AM
I see no reason China couldn't do the diplomatic equivalent...
Riptide
02-10-05, 11:03 AM
Those artillery sites as well as their nuclear missile sites might be something well suited for a B2/F117 strike(s). The thing is we would have to be the initiator of hostilities - and I don't see that happening.
I tend to agree that it might just be best to let them collapse under their own weight. Cease all aid of any sort. Completely wall them off from the rest of the world entirely. Sooner or later they'll go away. I know there is some danger inherent in doing that sort of thing - but it might be best to do it NOW instead of waiting for them to get more nukes.
oldsk00l
02-10-05, 11:27 AM
I highly suspect China is going to play hardball w/them. Economically China is intertwining with the USA at a fast pace.
If diplomacy w/China broke down, it'd just benefit the USA and screw China up badly.
Do the NK have a long range and accurate delivery system?they probably can hit Japan, SK, or American troops stationed in the area.
oldsk00l
02-10-05, 02:05 PM
they probably can hit Japan, SK, or American troops stationed in the area.
If NK unleashed nukes at all though, say bye bye to NK. I don't think China would hesitate for a MINUTE to send a massive ground invasion on NK if they did.
If NK unleashed nukes at all though, say bye bye to NK. I don't think China would hesitate for a MINUTE to send a massive ground invasion on NK if they did.and if their "Dear Leader" Kim Jong-il (who's trully insane) believes that he is threatened, he may unleash a nuclear attack out of spite. or it may all be bluster, and he'll slink away in a whimper.
Yonkers
02-10-05, 02:24 PM
I am sick and tired of this nation. Really, I am. No more treaties. No more negotiations. Seal them off and if they so much as break wind, we put them down like a rabid dog.
Let me ask this. If we go in there after they announced they have nukes and when it is all said and done, we find out they didn't have them... would it be wrong? Saddam did the same thing and now we find out he was full of crap and all of a sudden the war was wrong.
oldsk00l
02-10-05, 02:34 PM
I am sick and tired of this nation. Really, I am. No more treaties. No more negotiations. Seal them off and if they so much as break wind, we put them down like a rabid dog.
Let me ask this. If we go in there after they announced they have nukes and when it is all said and done, we find out they didn't have them... would it be wrong? Saddam did the same thing and now we find out he was full of crap and all of a sudden the war was wrong.
I concur, Bush has got to be so frustrated with this sort of thing too. I remember during one of his debates, and I chuckled at it...wrt Saddam
"Ok, so we go through the 19th resolution or whatever for him to say he's disarming, and waste even MORE time.......*SIGH*..."
Yonkers
02-10-05, 02:52 PM
"Ok, so we go through the 19th resolution or whatever for him to say he's disarming, and waste even MORE time.......*SIGH*..."
Exactly! Nothing solves a conflict better than kicking your enemy's ass.
BTW I keep thinking of BKNBLK every time I read my new sig. :D
DiscipleDOC
02-10-05, 03:20 PM
Exactly! Nothing solves a conflict better than kicking your enemy's ass.
BTW I keep thinking of BKNBLK every time I read my new sig. :D
You can read? :wtf:
Yonkers
02-10-05, 03:59 PM
You can read? :wtf:
Well.... OK I can't but I can dream can't I?
DiscipleDOC
02-10-05, 04:12 PM
You can dream? :wtf:
I am sick and tired of this nation. Really, I am. No more treaties. No more negotiations. Seal them off and if they so much as break wind, we put them down like a rabid dog.
Let me ask this. If we go in there after they announced they have nukes and when it is all said and done, we find out they didn't have them... would it be wrong? Saddam did the same thing and now we find out he was full of crap and all of a sudden the war was wrong.they'll hold Seoul for ransom, which is around 40 or so KM from the DMZ. NK has a million-man army with enough artillery to level Seoul (their weaponry may be antiquated, but bombs still blow up and cause damage, regardless of when the technology was developed).
re Saddam. he didn't have the army and weaponry of NK. still, the only way NK will prove to the world that they have nukes is if they can successfully test one. until then, it's all bluster.
Do the NK have a long range and accurate delivery system?
yes... they have a long range delivery system... unlikely to hit mainland US but perhaps hawaii and certainly south korea/japan...
accuracy is circumspect but japan presents a large/heavily populated target...
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.