Angry North Korea threatens retaliation, nuclear test expected

Apr 19, 2012 3:42 PM

Offline

Jul 2011

847

Bork said:

TheOmegaScorpion said:

I think that makes a load more sense, but I'm not so sure NK would see it that way. I also Think that despite the fact people wouldn't want to live under them, doesn't make much difference since most of NK don't want that either. If NK manage somehow to cripple the SK army with a nuke then takeover and occupy, they could blockade the aid other countries would want to send, They could also easily police that with an army that's at full force, the way they do already in NK.

I would mean direct intervention from others, china wouldn't allow a U.S force near there. They would veto immediately. So it would be up to china to do anything of any real value and though they might I doubt they would.

I don't think a veto in the UN by China would do anything, NK would already be in the wrong by violating resolutions. Plus, the U.S. already has military there in SK and in bases on nearby islands. And I don't think China is very pleased with NK, they probably wouldn't allow the U.S. to invade NK in retaliation, but I don't think they'd have any desire to stop countries from defending SK.

Agreed, the US does not always listen to the UN anyhow. The government acts in a way they think suits their best national interests, in this case I think there is clear benefit to stopping North Korea should they pursue nuclear action against South Korea, although I see this as a very unlikely scenario. Not to mention there's also the "vengeance" factor, the US currently has somewhere upwards of 25,000 military members stationed in South Korea, should 25000 soldiers die from an "unwarranted" attack, I have little doubt public opinion will favor war.

Apr 19, 2012 5:55 PM

#52

Leaf2321

Offline

Apr 2012

31

I have to hand it to NK, they're always reaching for the next level of irrationality.

Apr 19, 2012 7:05 PM

#53

ShinRhe

Offline

Sep 2011

87

Kaiserpingvin said:

ALICE-in-chains said:
So what were looking at here is the very real possibility that NK might bomb SK with a nuke, to install their rule over the entire country.We're looking at the possibility of another Hiroshima and Nagasaki where people do nothing after the event except just stare speechless and cry. Then NK would take control of SK and 'unite' the country, while the governments of the world fumble about wondering what to do and begging for sanctions and aid support for the affected area.

That's to say the least unlikely.

It requires that the US does not support SK - vanishingly small a risk. It requires that this does not scare Japan into making their own nukes and possibly preemptively strike at NK - slightly more far-fetched, but not that much. It requires that China does not throttle NK to death for upsetting the stability of their near area - that chance is nearly zero. And it requires the Kim clan and their generals to consider all of these risks so small as to not be any problem, which they never will.

The SK-NK border is volatile and will lead to disaster, but it won't erupt until there are more significant upheavals in the world.

pitilesscnsr said:

Scud said:
I don't think you fully appreciate the relationship between Pakistan and India.

If by 'appreciate' you mean that I am not fully aware of the magnitude of their relationship and the tension that exists between those two because of the Kashmir Issue, terrorism, partition and whatnot, then I'd have to disagree. I was just saying that Pakistan, or any perceived threat from Pakistan, wasn't the sole reason for them to begin their nuclear program. Please correct me if I am wrong.

You are right.

India already had signficiant advantages against Pakistan. They have (or in some cases had) more manpower, a more modern military, better discipline and better doctrines. They also have a more favourable terrain and far larger industrial power. The first two wars against Pakistan were muddy and indecisive, but the '71 war was an Indian victory. They did not need the nukes to guard against Pakistan; it was definitely a secondary objective with their project, but it was probably not the primary.

The threat they did want to guard against was China, which already had nukes, and a frosty relationship with India. They fought a short war a few years before China got nukes, they do not have any proper treaties over the borders in the Himalayas. One may think there is not too much to fight for in the mountains, but there is: the sources of rivers.

There was also the issue of wanting something to symbolize national unity and strength. For some reason nukes fit the bill.

This is quite topical, as India just launched Agni-V, a ICBM which can reach most of Asia. It is notable how there was such an outcry over NKs failed launch, yet nobody really cares when India does it - despite that NK is in the same space of international legality when it comes to their nukes. Neither is a signatory of NPT, and as such they are actually free to develop nukes - they are not party of any international treaty which regulates it either way.

LMFAO

People generally try to bs about this subject without any understanding about it. First don't forget that South Korea has a fairly modern military with over 4 million in reserves. The North has practically left overs from WW2 in stockpile and some of the newer cold war equipment such as mig fighter planes (still decades old with no upgrades). In terms of conventional strengths there is no contest between the South and North Korea as South Korea has the capabilities to destroy most military target in North Korea in a matter of days. I remember hearing a south korean general saying that if the South Korean navy got serious they could sink the ENTIRE North Korean navy in HOURS. This is because

1) the South uses some of the most advanced radar on the market
2) the South has plenty of guided missiles
3) the north korean navy uses WW2 technology and has to manually aim their guns (which are limited to visible range)

As for the air forces South Korea would practically be turkey shooting since the north korean air force has almost no stealth capabilities and would be easy targets for all those heat seeking missiles fired from South Korea's F15s (which have been modified and significantly upgraded).

The problem is that North Korea has practically most of the South Korean population within artillery range and could cause significant civilian death, which South Koreans do not want. Thus South Korea does not do anything, and North Korea does not get too aggressive and its provocations; however, even in worse case where Seoul gets nuked and let's say 10 million South Koreans die, South Korea will still have a larger population than the North.

So to go to this statement
"The SK-NK border is volatile and will lead to disaster, but it won't erupt until there are more significant upheavals in the world."
The border is NOT volatile as it has not and will not change anytime soon, and it will not lead to disaster because neither side wants to risk a full out war. Just like how the US and Soviet Russia did have a couple incidents of shooting neither side wanted full out war and backed down, there is a similar situation on the Korean peninsula.
as for this statement
"And uniting it under one banner won't happen; an attempt to forcibly annex South Korea would lead to a very, very long civil war."
In all things considered North Korea would get completely leveled in a very short period of time the war would be very short, but if China gets involved (i don't think they would ever let North Korea off the leash making a war unlikely anyways) the conflict would be prolong, but then the war is now a global conflict and not a civil war.

In conclusion this is just continuation of cold war era MAD strategy and nothing significant will happen. Meanwhile if north korea continues with these provocations the south may just be persuaded to build their own nuclear weapons. In fact many respectable mainstream Korean politicians are now publicly supporting indigenous nuclear arms production.

In the short term nothing will happen because of MAD, and in the long run because of demographic trends and economic pains North Korea will fall just like the Soviet Union.

Apr 19, 2012 7:43 PM

#54

kraz8

Offline

Feb 2009

570

It's NK being NK. Instead of honoring agreements that would provide them international aid, they break the agreement and demand the aid anyway. They've been playing bully long enough and getting away with it, because there really is no benefit to any other nation to intervene, that they see it as the best course of action.

Crazy as they may be, the only way they would start a war would be if China guaranteed to supply them large scale aid and weapons shipments. Without that, they would be placing themselves under siege without the the means to feed and care for their own people, much less their army.

Is there another word for synonym?

Apr 19, 2012 7:54 PM

#55

shairn

Offline

Mar 2012

896

I've seen a few mentions about Japan, and I'd like to specify something:
Japan does not have an army capable of attacking another country.
Check out this article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Self-Defense_Forces#Article_9

やがて気づく本当の気持ちは
そして　人間が大好きでした

Apr 19, 2012 8:01 PM

#56

Xjellocross

Offline

Nov 2007

3402

shairn said:
I've seen a few mentions about Japan, and I'd like to specify something:
Japan does not have an army capable of attacking another country.
Check out this article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Self-Defense_Forces#Article_9

Defending is all they need do anyway. Japan would never instigate a war against North Korea.

There's also the fact that the US has 35,000 troops stationed there.

Apr 19, 2012 8:26 PM

#57

MadScientist

Offline

Sep 2011

556

Supergrunt8 said:
Time to break out the Gundams.

shh, nobody's supposed to know they really exist yet.

some really funny pictures of NK's so called space programs launch control.
http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2012/04/10/north-korean-launch-control-quite-a-sight/

MadScientistApr 19, 2012 8:31 PM

NEETs (No Employment Education Training) are the least desirable people anybody would want to hire and yet they are the first choice to become moderators/admins around the internet. They have yet to have established a sense of responsibility or role in society and many are plain leeches (with minor exceptions). They are given "authority" to police sections of the internet with the powers of The Judge, Jury, and Executioner. Isn't that weird?
-Migrating to another site-
Update 11/9/2016 - Inactive Over a Year. Logged in to laugh at elections.

Apr 19, 2012 8:44 PM

#58

Kaiserpingvin

Offline

Jan 2008

4016

ShinR said:
So to go to this statement
"The SK-NK border is volatile and will lead to disaster, but it won't erupt until there are more significant upheavals in the world."
The border is NOT volatile as it has not and will not change anytime soon, and it will not lead to disaster because neither side wants to risk a full out war. Just like how the US and Soviet Russia did have a couple incidents of shooting neither side wanted full out war and backed down, there is a similar situation on the Korean peninsula.

I do not think you understood what I was saying at all, so, urh, okay.

ShinR said:
"And uniting it under one banner won't happen; an attempt to forcibly annex South Korea would lead to a very, very long civil war."
In all things considered North Korea would get completely leveled in a very short period of time the war would be very short, but if China gets involved (i don't think they would ever let North Korea off the leash making a war unlikely anyways) the conflict would be prolong, but then the war is now a global conflict and not a civil war.

Yes. Did you read my post at all?

What I meant was, if you don't feel like reading it now either, that granted the very unlikely case of the world community just standing by and letting the North unify the peninsula, and granted the uncertain case that they won, they would not exactly have an easy time of it. Because, you know, the South Koreans would resist.

It's one of a multitude of reasons Jong Un won't actually press the button.

ShinR said:
In the short term nothing will happen because of MAD, and in the long run because of demographic trends and economic pains North Korea will fall just like the Soviet Union.

Whaaaat?

North Korea does not have any inkling of nationalist movements. It's nothing like the preconditions for the Unions' dissolution.

And their economy is way worse off than the SUs was even during the darkest hour of Operation Barbarossa, and has been so for long. It also doesn't work like the SUs economy, nor does it have the same goals.

It's not an apt analogy in any way at all.

shairn said:
I've seen a few mentions about Japan, and I'd like to specify something:
Japan does not have an army capable of attacking another country.
Check out this article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Self-Defense_Forces#Article_9

Yeah, I was talking about the hypothetical scenario where North Korea started a nuclear war. Japan would, quite sensibly, feel threatened, and seek out the most effective countermeasures, among them their own nuclear weapon.

We're talking hypotheticals upon hypotheticals here, in a vague scenario which won't happen, and is only significant as a reason for why it won't happen.

Apr 19, 2012 9:00 PM

#59

Vioslink

Offline

Apr 2011

220

Have I become jaded or do I simply play devil's advocate for the fuck of it?

Snigger and stroke your undeserved sense of superiority because Norkish scienticians failed at rocketry -- a subject 101% of the sniggerknockers fail to comprehend, I don't doubt.

But here's the thing. It's been 50 or 60 years since the ceasefire on the Korean War (America's first police action! How cute. The birth of Un War War.) ... and we've managed to drive fucking dirt farmers towards such extremes they are now armed with nukes.

A detente with dirt farmers, and they manage to develope nukes. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banners ahoy.

Apr 19, 2012 9:15 PM

#60

removed-user

Offline

Jul 2018

564605

VioSlink said:
Have I become jaded or do I simply play devil's advocate for the fuck of it?

Snigger and stroke your undeserved sense of superiority because Norkish scienticians failed at rocketry -- a subject 101% of the sniggerknockers fail to comprehend, I don't doubt.

But here's the thing. It's been 50 or 60 years since the ceasefire on the Korean War (America's first police action! How cute. The birth of Un War War.) ... and we've managed to drive fucking dirt farmers towards such extremes they are now armed with nukes.

A detente with dirt farmers, and they manage to develope nukes. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banners ahoy.

wat

North Korea has one of the largest militaries in the world, bro. I'd hardly call them dirt farmers.

Apr 19, 2012 9:22 PM

#61

Kazeshini

Offline

May 2010

1396

just neutralize the government of both nations, the US and North Korea...

Apr 19, 2012 10:00 PM

#62

kraz8

Offline

Feb 2009

570

sleeplesstown said:

wat

North Korea has one of the largest militaries in the world, bro. I'd hardly call them dirt farmers.

Military enlistment is the second largest career in NK, right behind dirt farming.

All of NK's tech came from the Cold War support of the USSR who, just like the US, was trying to strengthen allies and weaken their enemies for their eventual defeat of the other guy. They weren't driven to it, they were given it. Do you think a country that hasn't even developed its own aircraft can just jump ahead to developing launching rockets into space or missiles across the world? Even their cars are either poor knockoffs or prefab kits sent in from China.

I actually pray for them when they conduct their next nuclear test. After losing face with this whole rocket launch, I'm sure they'll try to do something more visibe with their nuclear test and end up wiping out a city...

Edit:
*I'm referring to one of their own cities when they screw up the test...

kraz8Apr 20, 2012 3:24 AM

Is there another word for synonym?

Apr 20, 2012 1:05 AM

#63

kyuuzo2

Offline

Mar 2012

59

Xjellocross said:

jrgcool35 said:
Also all you people claiming WW3 would happen, who would back North Korea up? China? Like hell China would put their trade with the rest of the world in danger, and make themselves enemy number one.

Seriously, the lack of understanding in this matter is hilarious. No one in their right mind would side with North Korea if nuclear war ever came to fruition. Economically, China is N. Korea's largest trade partner. N. Korea isn't even in the top 80 for China. The relationship is incredibly one-sided.

China has generally supported them, but as of late, especially concerning N. Korea's nuclear program, they've been getting more impatient. In 2010, China referred to them a "spoiled child".

Meanwhile on the Internet

I actually think china wouldn't AID them, but use it as a excuse to launch there own war. They have the men, the power, and a vendetta against the USA. Use North Korea as a paun honestly.

Apr 20, 2012 6:57 AM

#64

rekindledflame

Offline

Jul 2011

847

kyuuzo2 said:

Xjellocross said:

jrgcool35 said:
Also all you people claiming WW3 would happen, who would back North Korea up? China? Like hell China would put their trade with the rest of the world in danger, and make themselves enemy number one.

Seriously, the lack of understanding in this matter is hilarious. No one in their right mind would side with North Korea if nuclear war ever came to fruition. Economically, China is N. Korea's largest trade partner. N. Korea isn't even in the top 80 for China. The relationship is incredibly one-sided.

China has generally supported them, but as of late, especially concerning N. Korea's nuclear program, they've been getting more impatient. In 2010, China referred to them a "spoiled child".

Meanwhile on the Internet

I actually think china wouldn't AID them, but use it as a excuse to launch there own war. They have the men, the power, and a vendetta against the USA. Use North Korea as a paun honestly.

It's not beneficial for two countries with nukes to war, so I find it highly unlikely they are looking to instigate a war over North Korea.

Apr 20, 2012 7:05 AM

#65

decay

Offline

Nov 2007

85

Apr 20, 2012 11:26 AM

#66

Xjellocross

Offline

Nov 2007

3402

kyuuzo2 said:
I actually think china wouldn't AID them, but use it as a excuse to launch there own war. They have the men, the power, and a vendetta against the USA. Use North Korea as a paun honestly.

What? The US is China's largest trading partner by a long shot. There's no reason at all to destroy a relationship like that unless they wanted the global economy to collapse.

Apr 20, 2012 12:12 PM

#67

rekindledflame

Offline

Jul 2011

847

Xjellocross said:

kyuuzo2 said:
I actually think china wouldn't AID them, but use it as a excuse to launch there own war. They have the men, the power, and a vendetta against the USA. Use North Korea as a paun honestly.

What? The US is China's largest trading partner by a long shot. There's no reason at all to destroy a relationship like that unless they wanted the global economy to collapse.

Unless Mitt Romney is elected, who has some rather strong views on China and our trading relationship that won't go over to well imo. Of course, he could be all talk too, like so many before him.

Apr 20, 2012 3:52 PM

#68

traed

Offline

Mar 2008

47016

Guys dont worry they are asian. Their missiles are smaller than other countries missiles.

Apr 20, 2012 4:49 PM

#69

traed

Offline

Mar 2008

47016

ForeverDreaming said:
My cousins husband went to school with Kim Jong-un.

haha awesome ask for the yearbook photos!

Apr 21, 2012 11:34 AM

#70

sisgood

Offline

Feb 2012

580

Ragix said:
North Korea logic
Test launches rocket.
Fails.

Wants to test launch nuke on another rocket.

Bye Bye North Korea.

Let's hope they continue their tradition of failed military tests. It would be beyond awesome if a "test nuke" was to drop back down on their heads.
I feel extreme pity for the people, but not enough that I want ANOTHER military nut with his finger on the nuke button. Between the Ills and Iadmitiamanidiot ajad, I do NOT feel safe anymore!

Things were more relaxed during the Cold War!

Apr 21, 2012 9:11 PM

#71