Post: #1

North Korea recently tested a Nuke this morning which is twice as strong as the one launched in January. Obama strongly condemned it and will stop further tests with stern words. How would nuke test or attack be stopped with a non interventionist policy?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/08/asia/north...-activity/

Post: #2

You can make the biggest baddest bomb in the world, but if you can't launch it to where you want accurately what good is it?

Post: #3

One think I like about North Korea is they could give fuck all about Obama.

Post: #4

They are working on ballistics missiles as well to launch them. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/wit...l#comments

Could be bull shit too.

Post: #5

Doesn't have to be accurate. Just rig it for EMP and set it off anywhere within line of sight of the CONUS, including in low orbit.

Post: #6

I beg to differ.

So far all analyzes of Western sources have not been accurate, and understated the actual result.

First Korean nuclear test was declared fake, only to be confirmed 2 months later. Ever subsequent test was underrated in terms of yield. Submarine missile launch was declared fake, only to be repeated in matter of months live. Rodong missiles were declared as a gimmick, only to land within couple of miles of Japanese maritime border, etc.

This test was confirmed by US and South Korea to have 20 kiloton yield. Reality is, it's probably tad bit stronger, while you should also take into account that they probably cannot try the maximum output because of security and environmental concerns (they test them in underground tunnels)

Then, there is another marketing moment there. They are proving how fast they can deploy new bombs, which is important. There is a difference between making and testing one, and being able to make a working stockpile fast. A nuclear power must be capable of increasing it's arsenal at will.

Post: #7

NK is a child with ADHD and a few sharp knives. Eventually one sharp knife will go into a place it shouldn't. I doubt they're detonating nukes because not only would China assassinate Kim J, they'd glass the military as well.

I don't doubt the looney toons in that country, I do doubt their ability to detonate nuclear weapons and launch them.

Post: #8

Extremely aggressive South Korean response. US considering going beyond sanctions?

"We could annihilate Pyongyang"

Quote:North Korea nuclear test: South would reduce Pyongyang 'to ashes'

South Korea has a plan to annihilate the North Korean capital if it shows any signs of mounting a nuclear attack, according to reports from Seoul.
A military source told the Yonhap news agency every part of Pyongyang "will be completely destroyed by ballistic missiles and high-explosives shells".
Yonhap has close ties to South Korea's government and is publicly funded.
On Friday North Korea carried out what it said was its fifth, and largest, nuclear test.
The international community is considering its response.
The US says it is considering its own sanctions, in addition to any imposed by the UN Security Council, Japan and South Korea.
Pyongyang responded on Sunday by calling the threats of "meaningless sanctions... highly laughable".

The South Korean military official told Yonhap that Pyongyang districts thought to be hiding the North's leadership would be particularly targeted in any attack. The city, the source said, "will be reduced to ashes and removed from the map".
The BBC's Korea correspondent Steve Evans says the South is using the same bloodcurdling rhetoric that the North frequently uses about the South Korean government in Seoul.
He says there has been rising criticism within South Korea of the government as its attempts to isolate the North have failed to deter leader Kim Jong-un's nuclear ambitions.
News of South Korea's attack plan for the North is believed to have been revealed to parliament following Friday's nuclear test.

South Korea's military said the test appeared to be the North's biggest yet
Meanwhile, the US's special envoy for North Korea says Washington is considering taking unilateral action against Pyongyang.
"North Korea continues to present a growing threat to the region, to our allies, to ourselves, and we will do everything possible to defend against that growing threat," Sung Kim said.
"In addition to sanctions in the Security Council, both the US and Japan, together with [South Korea], will be looking at any unilateral measures as well as bilateral measures as well as possible trilateral cooperation."

North Korea is banned by the UN from any tests of nuclear or missile technology and has been hit by five sets of UN sanctions since its first test in 2006.
The North said Friday's test had been of a "nuclear warhead that has been standardised to be able to be mounted on strategic ballistic rockets".
Estimates of the explosive yield of the latest blast have varied. South Korea's military said it was about 10 kilotonnes, enough to make it the North's "strongest nuclear test ever". Other experts say initial indications suggest 20 kilotonnes or more.
The nuclear bomb dropped by the US on Hiroshima in 1945 had a yield of about 15 kilotonnes.

Post: #9

Just about every scenario involves millions of refugees from the North flooding into Korea which instantly tanks their economy.

Unfortunately it really might be in S. Korea's best interests to just bomb the entire place into a crisp along with every living thing in it.

Post: #10

North Korea already has a delivery system for their nuclear weapons that can reliably reach any city in the USA.

It's called intermodal shipping container. Disguise it and possibly bribe a few customs officials. I would hazard a guess that North Korea already has a few nukes in the USA...if I were them and I successfully detonated a nuke as they are known to have, then that's exactly what I would do.

That way, if I were to be threatened then I would go ahead and detonate that shipping container nuke and state I had more of those even if I didn't. And how many containers do we have in the USA? 600,000? Maybe more. Good luck searching through all of them.

I think it is for this reason why we cannot reasonably destroy North Korea; I mean we could but that'd be a high price to pay.

Post: #11

(09-11-2016 08:07 PM)Ivan996 Wrote:  North Korea already has a delivery system for their nuclear weapons that can reliably reach any city in the USA.

It's called intermodal shipping container. Disguise it and possibly bribe a few customs officials. I would hazard a guess that North Korea already has a few nukes in the USA...if I were them and I successfully detonated a nuke as they are known to have, then that's exactly what I would do.

That way, if I were to be threatened then I would go ahead and detonate that shipping container nuke and state I had more of those even if I didn't. And how many containers do we have in the USA? 600,000? Maybe more. Good luck searching through all of them.

I think it is for this reason why we cannot reasonably destroy North Korea; I mean we could but that'd be a high price to pay.

I used to work for a government contractor that helped test devices intended to detect nuclear materials coming into the country by water or land. The government would make a big show of using the devices at ports, on boats, at border crossings, etc. A lot of the devices didn't work very well, but I think their attitude was, "Yeah, but the terrorists don't know that."

It's kinda surprising sometimes how long vulnerabilities exist before they're exploited. For example, 9/11 probably could've happened years earlier than it did, given the security weaknesses that existed.

Post: #12

(09-11-2016 10:19 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  Just about every scenario involves millions of refugees from the North flooding into Korea which instantly tanks their economy.

Unfortunately it really might be in S. Korea's best interests to just bomb the entire place into a crisp along with every living thing in it.

So we're just going to casually throw about the use of nuclear weapons on a country whose population is just a group of sheep led by a pack of wolves?

A better idea would be to kill the leader, his followers and anyone else who supports him.

Post: #13

(09-12-2016 07:23 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(09-11-2016 10:19 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  Just about every scenario involves millions of refugees from the North flooding into Korea which instantly tanks their economy.

Unfortunately it really might be in S. Korea's best interests to just bomb the entire place into a crisp along with every living thing in it.

So we're just going to casually throw about the use of nuclear weapons on a country whose population is just a group of sheep led by a pack of wolves?

A better idea would be to kill the leader, his followers and anyone else who supports him.

I'm not saying it's morally the right thing to do it's just probably in their best interests from a practical standpoint.

Realistically it will never happen that way.

A scenario which involves killing off the leadership and a vast % of the military command and probably the most hardline brainwashed cannon fodder is likely.

The refugee crisis afterwards is very real though. It's something that China and S. Korea have both considered in a North Korean regime collapse.

The UN would probably have to step in of course and that would create all sorts of complications in the region. Any international aid would involve billions if not trillions of dollars to rebuild.

Post: #14

NK is just under 2/3 the size of Iraq. It has many millions of people with no real skills apart from being a peasant, soldiers, some engineers and scientists with the women being home makers and soldiers.

China wouldn't be too happy about it and neither would Japan. This is the problem on our side and NK knows it. Nothing will happen unless China says so and China isn't about to let some nut blow up their half of the world. We would see 100+ million on the move in multiple countries, possibly more.

The Communists want social and communal unity. Dropping a nuke over the border would create social upheaval.

Post: #15

(09-12-2016 09:06 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  

(09-12-2016 07:23 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(09-11-2016 10:19 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  Just about every scenario involves millions of refugees from the North flooding into Korea which instantly tanks their economy.

Unfortunately it really might be in S. Korea's best interests to just bomb the entire place into a crisp along with every living thing in it.

So we're just going to casually throw about the use of nuclear weapons on a country whose population is just a group of sheep led by a pack of wolves?

A better idea would be to kill the leader, his followers and anyone else who supports him.

I'm not saying it's morally the right thing to do it's just probably in their best interests from a practical standpoint.

Realistically it will never happen that way.

A scenario which involves killing off the leadership and a vast % of the military command and probably the most hardline brainwashed cannon fodder is likely.

The refugee crisis afterwards is very real though. It's something that China and S. Korea have both considered in a North Korean regime collapse.

The UN would probably have to step in of course and that would create all sorts of complications in the region. Any international aid would involve billions if not trillions of dollars to rebuild.

South Korea has enough money to help them out.

Remember, the South Koreans consider those trapped up North to be family and cousins. They will not spare any money to help them. They would easily take on as much debt as needed to send aid.

But obviously many other countries and organizations would come to help as well.

Post: #16

Exchange 2.5 Million Arab refugees against North Koreans. Do we have a deal?
And how good a divided country can get along, look at Germany. The eastern parts are still weaker in economy, people leave them. The "Ossi" (Eastern) jokes about the people are not so common any more but we still pay this special tax to support them. The economical gap between the north and the south in Korea is even bigger. It will mess up the economy quite a lot.