PDA

View Full Version : War with North Korea is close - a discussion



Peter1469
08-08-2017, 07:59 PM
We know North Korea has nuclear weapons.

We are told they may have miniaturized them. That is necessary to put it on top of an ICBM.

We know they have ICBMs.

Their last ICBM test seemed to indicate that a warhead would not survive re-entry into the atmosphere (the only good bit of news).

We know that North Korea claims as recently as this weekend that they will not end their nuclear and missile programs.

Here is an article that I posted in the past- it is what a US war with North Korea would look like.

Here's how a preemptive strike on North Korea would go down (http://www.businessinsider.com/us-preemptive-strike-north-korea-2017-3)

Business Insider spoke with Stratfor (https://www.stratfor.com/subscribe/WU-ghost?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=TSA%7cStratfor%7cBrand%7cSearch%7cMet ro%7cNYC&utm_content=NYC-Stratfor-Main&utm_term=stratfor&matchtype=e&gclid=CP_s0fqhu9ICFQmHswodn5wMOQ)'s Sim Tack (https://www.stratfor.com/content/sim-tack), a senior analyst who is an expert on North Korea, to determine exactly how the US could carry out a crippling strike against the Hermit Kingdom.

Military action against North Korea wouldn't be pretty. Civilians in South Korea, and possibly Japan, and US forces stationed in the Pacific would be likely to die in the undertaking no matter how smoothly things went.



In short, it's not a decision any US commander in chief would make lightly.



But the US would have to choose between a full-scale destruction of North Korea's nuclear facilities and ground forces or a quicker attack on only the most important nuclear facilities. The second option would focus more on crippling North Korea's nuclear program and destroying key threats to the US and its allies.



Since a full-scale attack could lead to "mission creep that could pull the US into a longterm conflict in East Asia," according to Tack of Stratfor, the US would most likely focus on a quick, surgical strike that would wipe out the bulk of North Korea's nuclear forces.

Read the rest at the link.

Safety
08-08-2017, 08:15 PM
All they would need to do is detonate one above the US that will shut down any grid and circuit board.

hanger4
08-08-2017, 08:20 PM
I believe Tiny Kim is all bluster.

Peter1469
08-08-2017, 08:24 PM
All they would need to do is detonate one above the US that will shut down any grid and circuit board.


Line of sight. But yes, the EMP Commission has studied this since 2000 or so. A well placed EMP strike (that may use 2-3 warheads) could destroy our grid and 90% of Americans would die inside a year.

Peter1469
08-08-2017, 08:25 PM
I believe Tiny Kim is all bluster.

He may very well be.

But will a US president risk inaction on that assumption?

hanger4
08-08-2017, 08:36 PM
He may very well be.

But will a US president risk inaction on that assumption?

Wouldn't that depend on the intelligence given the President ?? and would our IC purposely feed the President false information ??

resister
08-08-2017, 08:39 PM
He may very well be.

But will a US president risk inaction on that assumption?
Like Obama did?

Peter1469
08-08-2017, 08:46 PM
Wouldn't that depend on the intelligence given the President ?? and would our IC purposely feed the President false information ??

Yes.

And very likely yes.

Crepitus
08-08-2017, 09:15 PM
We know North Korea has nuclear weapons.

We are told they may have miniaturized them. That is necessary to put it on top of an ICBM.

We know they have ICBMs.

Their last ICBM test seemed to indicate that a warhead would not survive re-entry into the atmosphere (the only good bit of news).

We know that North Korea claims as recently as this weekend that they will not end their nuclear and missile programs.

Here is an article that I posted in the past- it is what a US war with North Korea would look like.

Here's how a preemptive strike on North Korea would go down (http://www.businessinsider.com/us-preemptive-strike-north-korea-2017-3)


Read the rest at the link.

The trick to a surgical strike is we'd have to get all of the launch facilities and fast or we could precipitate the very incident we fear.

Also, imho if we go that route I recommend a decapitation strike at the same time.

IMPress Polly
08-09-2017, 05:33 AM
Trump has spent his time in office behaving much like Kim Jong Un: escalating the threats, the military exercises, and nuclear tests of our own (which of course our selective news coverage probably hasn't told you about), in contrast to the previous administration's policy of basically just ignoring North Korea. It's not working. Instead, escalating tensions has only accelerated the North Korea's nuclear testing and threats. It's time to return to sanity. The last time the North froze their nuclear program, it was the result of ongoing talks. With the United States. South Korea has figured that out and elected a liberal government recently that wants to restart nuclear talks. It is high time we returned to that policy as well. For all our sakes. Enough of these authoritarian leaders comparing dick sizes at the expense of everyone else.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 06:57 AM
Like Obama did?

American presidents have relied on containment and diplomacy in the past - because of the clear danger to South Koreans in the case of a military strike. 100,000 + could be killed. The trigger in the past has been ICBM technology. That puts the US mainland at risk.

If North Korea had not fired off two ICBMs there would be zero talk of war today.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 06:58 AM
The trick to a surgical strike is we'd have to get all of the launch facilities and fast or we could precipitate the very incident we fear.

Also, imho if we go that route I recommend a decapitation strike at the same time.
I would expect the North to invade the South so our ground based forces will have their hands full.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 07:00 AM
Trump has spent his time in office behaving much like Kim Jong Un: escalating the threats, the military exercises, and nuclear tests of our own (which of course our selective news coverage probably hasn't told you about), in contrast to the previous administration's policy of basically just ignoring North Korea. It's not working. Instead, escalating tensions has only accelerated the North Korea's nuclear testing and threats. It's time to return to sanity. The last time the North froze their nuclear program, it was the result of ongoing talks. With the United States. South Korea has figured that out and elected a liberal government recently that wants to restart nuclear talks. It is high time we returned to that policy as well. For all our sakes. Enough of these authoritarian leaders comparing dick sizes at the expense of everyone else.
The North has indicated that its nuclear and missile program is not up for negotiation.

Newpublius
08-09-2017, 07:18 AM
Throw this onto China. Turn our backs, walk away, full on embargo until THEY resolve it.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 07:21 AM
Throw this onto China. Turn our backs, walk away, full on embargo until THEY resolve it.

China is fine with the status quo. What China really doesn't want is the a reunited Korea as a US ally.

Newpublius
08-09-2017, 07:27 AM
China is fine with the status quo. What China really doesn't want is the a reunited Korea as a US ally.

That's why I suggest embargo. It would hurt, but this is their baby.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 07:40 AM
That's why I suggest embargo. It would hurt, but this is their baby.

The UN just applied sanctions- supposedly the harshest ever. I doubt it will stop the North's nuclear or missile program. And we don't even know if China and Russia will really enforce the sanctions, although they both voted for them.

Perhaps Trump's fire speech yesterday was to remind China and Russia that Trump is "off" and they better act against North Korea before the "unbalanced" US president starts a war that will go nuclear. Trump did appear to be reading his statement- it wasn't a stream of consciousness remark.

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 07:56 AM
Trump has spent his time in office behaving much like Kim Jong Un: escalating the threats, the military exercises, and nuclear tests of our own (which of course our selective news coverage probably hasn't told you about), in contrast to the previous administration's policy of basically just ignoring North Korea. It's not working. Instead, escalating tensions has only accelerated the North Korea's nuclear testing and threats. It's time to return to sanity. The last time the North froze their nuclear program, it was the result of ongoing talks. With the United States. South Korea has figured that out and elected a liberal government recently that wants to restart nuclear talks. It is high time we returned to that policy as well. For all our sakes. Enough of these authoritarian leaders comparing dick sizes at the expense of everyone else.
Trump's policies haven't really differed from Obama's. You really think that in the 7 months Trump has been president NK magically obtained these capabilities and that was because of Trump?

I think you're lapping up a lot of that "selective news coverage".

Crepitus
08-09-2017, 08:06 AM
I would expect the North to invade the South so our ground based forces will have their hands full.

Eggs are gonna get broken making this omelet no matter which method is used.

Crepitus
08-09-2017, 08:10 AM
Trump has spent his time in office behaving much like Kim Jong Un: escalating the threats, the military exercises, and nuclear tests of our own (which of course our selective news coverage probably hasn't told you about), in contrast to the previous administration's policy of basically just ignoring North Korea. It's not working. Instead, escalating tensions has only accelerated the North Korea's nuclear testing and threats. It's time to return to sanity. The last time the North froze their nuclear program, it was the result of ongoing talks. With the United States. South Korea has figured that out and elected a liberal government recently that wants to restart nuclear talks. It is high time we returned to that policy as well. For all our sakes. Enough of these authoritarian leaders comparing dick sizes at the expense of everyone else.

Unlike most of his problems, this isn't of Trump's manufacture. It is however his to deal with and I have little hope he can manage it.

Beevee
08-09-2017, 08:22 AM
The leaders of both countries only want to hear what they want to hear.
The difference is that Trump just ignores advise but Kim executes those who tell him what he does not want to hear.
If Kim is hell bent on a strike either nuclear or otherwise, talks wouldn't be that fruitful as those attending them would only tell him lies, if only to keep themselves alive for another 24 hours

pjohns
08-09-2017, 12:28 PM
The one thing that I am most opposed to is a return to the status quo ante--i.e. to Little Kim's being a perpetual thorn in our collective side.

So whenever I hear of someone's wanting a "de-escalation" of the current situation, I want to know, specifically, what he (or she) means.

I desire the total and utter destruction of The Hermit Kingdom.

Yes, this could be accomplished with all-out war--albeit not without significant "collateral damage."

On the other hand, it could also be accomplished by a coup against Little Kim--in other words, regime change--and the reunification of the two Koreas.

Regrettably, President Trump has said that he does not wish to go this route.

But I do think that it should be seriously considered.

jimmyz
08-09-2017, 12:42 PM
The fact that China and Russia voted with us and the rest of the UN's security council on the sanctions tells me there will be no war as long as Trump is smart with the advice he is accepting and the advice he is rejecting.

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 12:54 PM
The fact that China and Russia voted with us and the rest of the UN's security council on the sanctions tells me there will be no war as long as Trump is smart with the advice he is accepting and the advice he is rejecting.
I guess we will see when NK tests another ICBM or nuke.

IMPress Polly
08-09-2017, 01:30 PM
Peter wrote:
The North has indicated that its nuclear and missile program is not up for negotiation.

They say a lot of things, most of which are not to be believed.

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 01:35 PM
They say a lot of things, most of which are not to be believed.

The tests they are running and the success they are having disagrees with you. Could it be that you are sympathetic to NK as they run an ideology that aligns with your own? As such selective-reasoning is taking place?

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 02:58 PM
The tests they are running and the success they are having disagrees with you. Could it be that you are sympathetic to NK as they run an ideology that aligns with your own? As such selective-reasoning is taking place?
I don't expect an answer. You tend to not engage with those who disagree with you. Perhaps stick to video game reviews.

Archer0915
08-09-2017, 03:10 PM
We know North Korea has nuclear weapons.

We are told they may have miniaturized them. That is necessary to put it on top of an ICBM.

We know they have ICBMs.

Their last ICBM test seemed to indicate that a warhead would not survive re-entry into the atmosphere (the only good bit of news).

We know that North Korea claims as recently as this weekend that they will not end their nuclear and missile programs.

Here is an article that I posted in the past- it is what a US war with North Korea would look like.

Here's how a preemptive strike on North Korea would go down (http://www.businessinsider.com/us-preemptive-strike-north-korea-2017-3)




Read the rest at the link.

How to defeat N. Korea... Give them the option, remove the regime or we will commit to unlimited warfare against them if they damage any US or allied asset. Let them know we will unleash our generals and admirals on them with full backing and no intervention from their civilian masters.

Get this message out there and it will end in the first few days.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 03:14 PM
On the other hand, it could also be accomplished by a coup against Little Kim--in other words, regime change--and the reunification of the two Koreas.

Regrettably, President Trump has said that he does not wish to go this route.

But I do think that it should be seriously considered.
How would that happen?

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 03:15 PM
The fact that China and Russia voted with us and the rest of the UN's security council on the sanctions tells me there will be no war as long as Trump is smart with the advice he is accepting and the advice he is rejecting.

The Russians and Chinese can live with NK having nukes. Their main issue is to not have a reunified Korea as a US ally on their borders.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 03:17 PM
They say a lot of things, most of which are not to be believed.

Very true- they have violated every agreement reached so far. :smiley:

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 03:20 PM
How to defeat N. Korea... Give them the option, remove the regime or we will commit to unlimited warfare against them if they damage any US or allied asset. Let them know we will unleash our generals and admirals on them with full backing and no intervention from their civilian masters.

Get this message out there and it will end in the first few days.
At least so far as a nuclear attack goes, they already know that. We would hit them with a way more than needed number of nuclear weapons.

The problem isn't so much Los Angeles being turned into a nuclear wasteland. The problem is a competent EMP attack that would truly destroy the United States. We can't wait for that to happen to retaliate.

nic34
08-09-2017, 05:06 PM
I believe Tiny Kim is all bluster.

You misspelled tRump.

hanger4
08-09-2017, 05:42 PM
You misspelled tRump.

No, I'm aware of where I am;

The Current Events Room

Dr. Who
08-09-2017, 06:04 PM
The UN just applied sanctions- supposedly the harshest ever. I doubt it will stop the North's nuclear or missile program. And we don't even know if China and Russia will really enforce the sanctions, although they both voted for them.

Perhaps Trump's fire speech yesterday was to remind China and Russia that Trump is "off" and they better act against North Korea before the "unbalanced" US president starts a war that will go nuclear. Trump did appear to be reading his statement- it wasn't a stream of consciousness remark.
The key to all of this is China. I doubt that nuclear war with America is in their 5-year plan or even their 10-year plan. They are enjoying trade with the west and N. Korea is not worth losing the economic gains that they have made.

Email from State Department to China: Please leash your dog.

pjohns
08-09-2017, 06:05 PM
They say a lot of things, most of which are not to be believed.

You are correct in this.

But whenever Little Kim speaks in a self-serving manner, we can probably believe him...

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 06:06 PM
The key to all of this is China. I doubt that nuclear war with America is in their 5-year plan or even their 10-year plan. They are enjoying trade with the west and N. Korea is not worth losing the economic gains that they have made.

Email from State Department to China: Please leash your dog.

Hopefully China will listen.

pjohns
08-09-2017, 06:09 PM
How would that happen?

I will readily admit that I am a bit short on specifics. But it would surely entail America's (or, alternately, South Korea's) somehow infiltrating Little Kim's inner circle, and then taking him out.

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 06:14 PM
Very true- they have violated every agreement reached so far. :smiley:
But then her statement isn't true. If they violated every agreement they've entered into then obviously they are not to be believed but not in the context Polly was trying to insert.

Well played.

pjohns
08-09-2017, 06:16 PM
The key to all of this is China.
In a sense, you are correct.

But our desires do not align precisely with China's.

One serious difference is this: We would really like to see a re-unified, Western-style Korea; whereas China does not wish to see a Western state on its border (or millions of citizens of the DPRK flooding over China's border).

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 06:16 PM
You misspelled tRump.
Not surprising that you would want a Kim over Trump. After all you're more aligned with his policies than you are of Trump's.

Tell me. Which Conservatives would you execute first with anti-aircraft weapondry? Come now. Don't be shy. Be honest.

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 06:21 PM
Hopefully China will listen.
Right now China is sitting on the sidelines with their dicks in their hands. They have little to no influence on little Kim. I bet that's really pissing them off which is why they voted for the sanctions. As if that matters. Lil Kim would gladly let his people starve over suffering or acknowledging disrespect from the rest of the world.

When daddy Kim died the world was hopeful with regards to a new regime being more amenable than the last. It's turned out to be the exact opposite. Despite Lil Kim being a product of Western education.

What does that say about Western education? It makes one wonder if he left that world thinking even less about the Western world as he did previously. That is the agenda of the prof progs after all.

Dr. Who
08-09-2017, 06:25 PM
In a sense, you are correct.

But our desires do not align precisely with China's.

One serious difference is this: We would really like to see a re-unified, Western-style Korea; whereas China does not wish to see a Western state on its border (or millions of citizens of the DPRK flooding over China's border).

Of course, but there is some commonality of interests - trade. No trade and millions of citizens of the DPRK flooding China's border would be infinitely worse. The Mexican standoff between North and South Korea has been going on for 60 years. There is no pressing need to change that status quo.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 06:32 PM
I will readily admit that I am a bit short on specifics. But it would surely entail America's (or, alternately, South Korea's) somehow infiltrating Little Kim's inner circle, and then taking him out.

I guarantee you that the CIA has been working on that for a long time. It just might not be possible.

One thing we could try is to actually blockade the North's ports. Put limpet mines on ships at port. Close it down. Nothing in, nothing out.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 06:34 PM
In a sense, you are correct.

But our desires do not align precisely with China's.

One serious difference is this: We would really like to see a re-unified, Western-style Korea; whereas China does not wish to see a Western state on its border (or millions of citizens of the DPRK flooding over China's border).


It would be nice if the Korean peninsula was united. But it is far from being a vital national security interest for the US.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 06:36 PM
Of course, but there is some commonality of interests - trade. No trade and millions of citizens of the DPRK flooding China's border would be infinitely worse. The Mexican standoff between North and South Korea has been going on for 60 years. There is no pressing need to change that status quo.
That standoff is of slight concern to the US.

What does concern the US is NK's ability to reach the US with nuclear weapons. If they are going to attack, pray that their intention is to destroy a US city rather than employ a competent EMP attack.

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 06:37 PM
It would be nice if the Korean peninsula was united. But it is far from being a vital national security interest for the US.
Just like in the 50's China won't let that happen and will engage the US to stop it.

DGUtley
08-09-2017, 06:42 PM
Line of sight. But yes, the EMP Commission has studied this since 2000 or so. A well placed EMP strike (that may use 2-3 warheads) could destroy our grid and 90% of Americans would die inside a year.

Why would 90% die?

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 06:42 PM
Just like in the 50's China won't let that happen and will engage the US to stop it.


Certainly if we try to invade and occupy the place.

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 06:43 PM
That standoff is of slight concern to the US.

What does concern the US is NK's ability to reach the US with nuclear weapons. If they are going to attack, pray that their intention is to destroy a US city rather than employ a competent EMP attack.

Even if China were to launch against the US the strike would be limited in scale and as such probably
wouldnt penetrate our ICBM defenses. Add that to the improbability that they have the skill to successfully pull of a successful air burst and I don't think that is the major concern.

The fact that they were able to reduce the size of a nuke should be more of a concern with regards to their ability to infiltrate our trade and the avenues by which they can deliver "suitcase" nukes to any American city we have.

We really don't have a surefire defense against that like we have with a missile defense system. It's all guesswork intelligence.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 06:46 PM
Why would 90% die?

Our society depends on electricity. We use just in time shipping models to stock our grocery stores. That means when the trucks don't run the shelves are bare in a day or two. Anything that needs refrigeration goes bad. That includes steaks, milk, frozen foods, insulin. Diabetics will, well die off. People who can't adapt to a pre-industrial age will die off. Others will turn violent and form gangs or worse to oppress others.

Winter will come and more will die. How many people know how to put seeds in the ground in the spring to grow food?

No electronic communications. No transportation other than the remaining pre-late 1980s vehicles that still run.

The EMP Commission has it in detail. They have released numerous reports since the early 2000s.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 06:51 PM
They can hit the US (https://www.google.com/search?q=range+of+chinese+missiles&sa=X&tbm=isch&imgil=NW7tmoxS8RaksM%253A%253BNe8QsmHpt4fyMM%253Bh ttps%25253A%25252F%25252Fdefence.pk%25252Fpdf%2525 2Fthreads%25252Fchinese-missiles-news-discussions.84215%25252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=NW7tmoxS8RaksM%253A%252CNe8QsmHpt4fyMM%252C_&usg=__Uan8VDEepbxOLAk08lhbH__ihik%3D&biw=1017&bih=441&ved=0ahUKEwihitPfq8vVAhUB44MKHR9tBVIQyjcIeQ&ei=l5-LWeHiO4HGjwSf2pWQBQ#imgrc=fvEvf91TMPG9LM:), but I think most of their nukes are medium range.

http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/5550d4c0eab8ea4964915edd-1180-782/screen%20shot%202015-05-11%20at%2011.58.41%20am.png (http://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-missiles-can-hit-entirety-of-us-2015-5)



Even if China were to launch against the US the strike would be limited in scale and as such probably
wouldnt penetrate our ICBM defenses. Add that to the improbability that they have the skill to successfully pull of a successful air burst and I don't think that is the major concern.

The fact that they were able to reduce the size of a nuke should be more of a concern with regards to their ability to infiltrate our trade and the avenues by which they can deliver "suitcase" nukes to any American city we have.

We really don't have a surefire defense against that like we have with a missile defense system. It's all guesswork intelligence.

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 06:53 PM
Certainly if we try to invade and occupy the place.
No reason to. The difference between 70 years of technological advancement is that we could all but eliminate any and all resistance to the S. Korean military with regards to uniting the penensula. Even if there wasn't a single American boot on the ground if it looked like unification was a possibility we'd be looking at war with China.

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 06:55 PM
They can hit the US (https://www.google.com/search?q=range+of+chinese+missiles&sa=X&tbm=isch&imgil=NW7tmoxS8RaksM%3A%3BNe8QsmHpt4fyMM%3Bhttps%2 53A%252F%252Fdefence.pk%252Fpdf%252Fthreads%252Fch inese-missiles-news-discussions.84215%252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=NW7tmoxS8RaksM%3A%2CNe8QsmHpt4fyMM%2C_&usg=__Uan8VDEepbxOLAk08lhbH__ihik%3D&biw=1017&bih=441&ved=0ahUKEwihitPfq8vVAhUB44MKHR9tBVIQyjcIeQ&ei=l5-LWeHiO4HGjwSf2pWQBQ#imgrc=fvEvf91TMPG9LM:), but I think most of their nukes are medium range.

http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/5550d4c0eab8ea4964915edd-1180-782/screen shot 2015-05-11 at 11.58.41 am.png (http://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-missiles-can-hit-entirety-of-us-2015-5)

This info is not taking into consideration NK's last tests which shows they could hit us in Chicago if they wanted. Hopefully, if they decide to go that route, Chicago is the target they choose.

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 06:59 PM
Our society depends on electricity. We use just in time shipping models to stock our grocery stores. That means when the trucks don't run the shelves are bare in a day or two. Anything that needs refrigeration goes bad. That includes steaks, milk, frozen foods, insulin. Diabetics will, well die off. People who can't adapt to a pre-industrial age will die off. Others will turn violent and form gangs or worse to oppress others.

Winter will come and more will die. How many people know how to put seeds in the ground in the spring to grow food?

No electronic communications. No transportation other than the remaining pre-late 1980s vehicles that still run.

The EMP Commission has it in detail. They have released numerous reports since the early 2000s.
Individuals who do not understand the gravity of this situation are frustrating. They will be the first to die. It makes you wonder what kind of horrific impact both our PC education system combined with our partisan media reporting has on us as a society.

pjohns
08-09-2017, 07:16 PM
The Mexican standoff between North and South Korea has been going on for 60 years. There is no pressing need to change that status quo.
This "Mexican standoff" will not endure ad infinitum; and that is especially true if Little Kim attempts to invade South Korea.

So there is, indeed, a "pressing need" to change the current situation...

Dr. Who
08-09-2017, 07:18 PM
This info is not taking into consideration NK's last tests which shows they could hit us in Chicago if they wanted. Hopefully, if they decide to go that route, Chicago is the target they choose.
They would enjoy their victory for about 10 minutes and then they would cease to exist. I doubt Kim is so naive as to think that retribution won't be swift and ultimately final.

Private Pickle
08-09-2017, 07:24 PM
They would enjoy their victory for about 10 minutes and then they would cease to exist. I doubt Kim is so naive as to think that retribution won't be swift and ultimately final.

You sure? Like I said before an ICBM is the least of our worries. NK could quite reasonably sneak 10 "suitcase" nukes into the US and detonate them at the same time given our lack of ability to police our imports.
Detonate them all and the chances of us having a response is reduced greatly. But you're most likely right. We would retaliate. Which would probably not kill lil'Kim as he would be just as secure as our leaders would be... Does it really matter what would happen next? Do you think if the Kim's would let their people starve in mass they would care about a nuke attack which they themselves would almost certainly survive?

Nah...

Adelaide
08-09-2017, 08:23 PM
You misspelled tRump.
Reminder that this is a subforum in the Serious Side.

Peter1469
08-09-2017, 08:46 PM
This is Chinese missile range.

The first ICBM that NK fired off could hit Alaska. The second could hit much of the US, but the analysis of the data shows that second missile would not have protected a nuclear warhead on reentry- not that it would matter if they went the EMP route.


This info is not taking into consideration NK's last tests which shows they could hit us in Chicago if they wanted. Hopefully, if they decide to go that route, Chicago is the target they choose.

Dr. Who
08-09-2017, 08:51 PM
You sure? Like I said before an ICBM is the least of our worries. NK could quite reasonably sneak 10 "suitcase" nukes into the US and detonate them at the same time given our lack of ability to police our imports.
Detonate them all and the chances of us having a response is reduced greatly. But you're most likely right. We would retaliate. Which would probably not kill lil'Kim as he would be just as secure as our leaders would be... Does it really matter what would happen next? Do you think if the Kim's would let their people starve in mass they would care about a nuke attack which they themselves would almost certainly survive?

Nah...

What's the point of being a narcissistic despot, if you have no one to rule and no economy, thus no money. Then you are just a narcissist with a price on your head.

Archer0915
08-09-2017, 10:12 PM
At least so far as a nuclear attack goes, they already know that. We would hit them with a way more than needed number of nuclear weapons.

The problem isn't so much Los Angeles being turned into a nuclear wasteland. The problem is a competent EMP attack that would truly destroy the United States. We can't wait for that to happen to retaliate.
The EMP threat is overblown.

Private Pickle
08-10-2017, 07:25 AM
What's the point of being a narcissistic despot, if you have no one to rule and no economy, thus no money. Then you are just a narcissist with a price on your head.
The attention you get...

Peter1469
08-10-2017, 07:34 AM
The EMP threat is overblown.

Do you believe our grid would survive a properly conducted EMP attack, or do you think we could repair / replace it quickly?

Peter1469
08-10-2017, 10:03 AM
One thing to consider is telling China and Russia that we will greatly increase our research into missile defense systems unless they solve the North Korea problem.

Archer0915
08-10-2017, 12:50 PM
Do you believe our grid would survive a properly conducted EMP attack, or do you think we could repair / replace it quickly?

What is truth Peter? Is there such a thing as an EMP? Yes there is! Could it bring a quick resolution to the Korea issue if we used one? Yes but nobody has even mentioned us using one.

How much effect would it have in reality? I believe it would be very negligible, and here is why! I personally believe most of it is BS put out by company researchers to make money for the military industrial complex.

Archer0915
08-10-2017, 12:51 PM
Japan already said they could shoot anything out of the sky that N. Korea sent toward Guam.

Captain Obvious
08-10-2017, 02:02 PM
Been saying this for years now, literally.

We sat here and watched them. Watched them develope nukes, watched them develope long rang capabilities. Did nothing.

Absolutely nothing.

When the west coast or a territory gets nuked, guess who we should blame first?

Go ahead, take a guess.

Trish
08-10-2017, 02:05 PM
Been saying this for years now, literally.
We sat here and watched them. Watched them develope nukes, watched them develope long rang capabilities. Did nothing.
Absolutely nothing.
When the west coast or a territory gets nuked, guess who we should blame first?
Go ahead, take a guess.

I find this situation immensely frustrating. I wish we could just blow them out of the water but we have to deal with NK's enabler - China. They aren't so easily dismissed or ignored.

Captain Obvious
08-10-2017, 02:15 PM
First GW, he gets the blame for ignoring the real enemies, N Korea and Iran and embroiling us in the Iraq war quagmire.

Been saying this for years and guess what?

I'm fucking right yet again, go figure.

Then blame Bamny. Hell, he aids our enemies.

Trump inherited this mess but the low information idiots will blame him regardless.

William
08-10-2017, 03:02 PM
I don't think war with North Korea is close. I think this is just the media making a big deal out of everything, and two stupid, big-headed men shooting their mouths off. Nobody - not North Korea, not Iran, not China, and not Russia, is going to make a nuclear attack on the USA. Not only is there the MAD doctrine, but what kind of idiot uses his four or five nukes to attack a nation which has thousands?

What should the US do about the nutter in North Korea? Simple - just ignore him, and let him develop his few puny nukes - the same with Iran. If either attacks US citizens or US property - turn them into glass parking lots. You know you can do that, and they know you can do that - and you both know that will never happen. But if it did, no one would blame you for defending yourself.

The other thing you can do is declare war on North Korea, and see Seoul obliterated by North Korean artillery, and hundreds of thousands of South Koreans, as well as tens of thousands of US troops slaughtered. And they will have every right to do that if the South joins with the US. And after Pyong Yang has been obliterated by US nukes, what do you think the Chinese and the Russians might do? I doubt either will have any great sympathy for the North Koreans, but will either want a US dominated Korean peninsula?

And in the event of conflict with either Russia or China, I wonder how many of your traditional allies (who have been snubbed by your Dear Leader,) will be that keen to rush to your side?

There is an ancient Chinese curse which says "May you live in interesting times." :grin:

Peter1469
08-10-2017, 05:14 PM
What is truth Peter? Is there such a thing as an EMP? Yes there is! Could it bring a quick resolution to the Korea issue if we used one? Yes but nobody has even mentioned us using one.

How much effect would it have in reality? I believe it would be very negligible, and here is why! I personally believe most of it is BS put out by company researchers to make money for the military industrial complex.


I don't know how much effect an EMP attack would have against North Korea. Older systems are more resilient to the effects of EMPs.

Russia and China are developing non-nuclear EMP weapons as is the US. At least so far as the US is concerned the intent is to take out command and control in a small area- not destroy the electronic infrastructure of a State.

Peter1469
08-10-2017, 05:15 PM
Been saying this for years now, literally.

We sat here and watched them. Watched them develope nukes, watched them develope long rang capabilities. Did nothing.

Absolutely nothing.

When the west coast or a territory gets nuked, guess who we should blame first?

Go ahead, take a guess.

Risking large numbers of lives in South Korea put a military strike off the table until the North got ICBM tech.

Peter1469
08-10-2017, 07:23 PM
A Chinese paper- run by the Party (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-china-media-idUSKBN1AR005) says that China should remain neutral if NK attacks first. But if the US attacks first, China should stop the US. I assume this is Chinese policy based on the source. But that may not be the case.


If North Korea launches an attack that threatens the United States then China should stay neutral, but if the United States attacks first and tries to overthrow North Korea's government China will stop then, a Chinese state-run newspaper said on Friday.

Read the article at the link.

pjohns
08-10-2017, 07:48 PM
It is, at best, a tangential subject; however, as horrific as a nuclear blast in America would be, I would prefer even 10--yes 10!--nuclear blasts, in major American cities, to an EMP attack that would knock out all communications over the entire country.

Of course, the latter could be accomplished by an enemy's detonating a nuclear bomb in the atmosphere, over the US.

This would create total chaos; anarchy would quickly reign in America.

Peter1469
08-10-2017, 07:52 PM
Here is a good article (https://geopoliticalfutures.com/north-korea-nukes-negotiations/)from Geopolitical Futures that sums up the current situation well.


The narrative about North Korea, a narrative I believe to be true and have since early March, is simple: The North Koreans have reached a point in their nuclear and missile programs (https://geopoliticalfutures.com/north-korea-approaching-red-line/) where they could soon have the capability to strike the United States. The U.S. isn’t prepared to let itself be vulnerable to the whims of what is seen as a dangerously unpredictable regime in Pyongyang. Therefore, the U.S. is prepared to strike at North Korea’s nuclear and missile facilities.
At the same time, the U.S. is extremely reluctant to attack. The nuclear program sites are dispersed and hardened, making airstrikes difficult, and North Korean artillery concentrated near the demilitarized zone could devastate Seoul (https://geopoliticalfutures.com/devil-details-korean-war/). So as it considers not just whether a strike should be made, but whether one is even possible, the U.S. has been trying to motivate China to use its influence in North Korea to get Pyongyang to halt its weapons development. The U.S. position is that a strike will take place if diplomacy fails, but also that a conflict with North Korea would be difficult, dangerous and potentially devastating to allies. Thus, the U.S. is postponing such an action as long as possible.


As time passes, it is important to re-examine old assessments. The United States didn’t suddenly in the last few months conclude that an attack on North Korea was dangerous. The Americans had to have known the North Korean nuclear development program was dispersed and hardened, and they have publicly spoken about the artillery threat to Seoul. But they might have been galvanized by indications that the North Koreans had a miniaturized and ruggedized warhead and were close to having an intercontinental delivery capability. Given the degree of U.S. focus on North Korea, however, the appearance of sudden apprehension is odd.

Peter1469
08-10-2017, 07:55 PM
Mattis: Military solution in place to address North Korea threat (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/10/james-mattis-military-solution-in-place-to-address/)
The military is ready for the Go order.


U.S. military strategists at the Pentagon have a military solution in place to address the growing threat emanating from North Korea, but they are holding their fire in favor of ongoing diplomatic efforts by Washington and its allies, Defense Secretary James Mattis said Thursday.

The Pentagon chief remained largely mum on the details of that military solution, which theoretically would curb Pyongyang’s efforts to develop a nuclear-capable, ballistic missile arsenal, except to say any military option would be a multilateral one involving a number of regional powers in the Pacific.



“Do I have military options? Of course, I do. That’s my responsibility, to have those. And we work very closely with allies to ensure that this is not unilateral either … and of course there’s a military solution,” Mr. Mattis told reporters en route to meet with senior leaders in the technology sector in Seattle and California.


The former four-star general declined to provide any additional insight to a statement released Wednesday, warning that the North’s continued provocations — including alleged plans for an attack against U.S. forces in Guam by Pyongyang — “would lead to the end of its regime and the destruction of its people.”

Crepitus
08-10-2017, 11:37 PM
I don't know how much effect an EMP attack would have against North Korea. Older systems are more resilient to the effects of EMPs.

Russia and China are developing non-nuclear EMP weapons as is the US. At least so far as the US is concerned the intent is to take out command and control in a small area- not destroy the electronic infrastructure of a State.

Seen some info on those. Massive explosive driven capacitors. Neat stuff..

Ethereal
08-11-2017, 10:29 AM
North Korea and China have both been making reasonable offers in an attempt to calm tensions between the USA and North Korea. The US government simply refuses to compromise, just like they refused to compromise with Saddam, Qaddafi, and Assad. The US government is the number bully and aggressor in the world. It's only through relentless propaganda that they've managed to convince so many Americans otherwise. North Korea has barely gone outside its own borders in decades, whereas the US government roves around the world wantonly destroying country after country. North Koreans have every reason to fear and even hate the US government.

Ethereal
08-11-2017, 10:34 AM
Eggs are gonna get broken making this omelet no matter which method is used.
Yes, that's usually the case whenever the US government is involved. War, destruction, intimidation, violence, this is all the US government knows and most Americans are just fine with it. They refuse to admit what the rest of the world already knows: That the US government is a rogue entity marauding its way around the planet, leaving massive destruction in its wake. The US government has been in a nearly constant state of warfare since 1898 when it invaded and occupied the Philippines. Do Americans care? Of course not! They live inside a propaganda bubble that tells them how "exceptional" and "indispensable" they are to the world. Meanwhile, the world just looks at us like a bunch of bullies and rogues.

Ethereal
08-11-2017, 10:37 AM
So whenever I hear of someone's wanting a "de-escalation" of the current situation, I want to know, specifically, what he (or she) means.

Stop conducting provocative military exercises off North Korea's shores; stop threatening to destroy their country; enter into peace talks in good faith; involve the international community; stop behaving like we own the entire planet.

Ethereal
08-11-2017, 10:43 AM
The key to all of this is China. I doubt that nuclear war with America is in their 5-year plan or even their 10-year plan. They are enjoying trade with the west and N. Korea is not worth losing the economic gains that they have made.

Email from State Department to China: Please leash your dog.
The only dog who needs to be leashed is the US government. They're the ones going around the world attacking and destroying country after country for no reason at all. Who has North Korea attacked? Nobody. Just like Iran hasn't attacked anyone either. The US government is nothing more than an instrument of death and destruction, wielded by profiteering bankers and arms manufacturers who want to rule the world. And westerners are none the wiser thanks to a corporate media who relentlessly conditions and propagandizes them.

Ethereal
08-11-2017, 10:50 AM
I guarantee you that the CIA has been working on that for a long time.

No doubt they have. The CIA is the most meddlesome organization in the world. They are the secret army of the corporate overlords who own the west. Any nation that doesn't submit to the rule of international capitalists is targeted by the CIA for isolation, subversion and destabilization. If that doesn't work, then the next step is military action. We've seen it again and again and again. And it's this pattern of meddlesome, aggressive behavior that caused North Korea to pursue nuclear weaponry. They've seen what happens to countries who don't have nukes.

Ethereal
08-11-2017, 10:51 AM
That standoff is of slight concern to the US.

What does concern the US is NK's ability to reach the US with nuclear weapons. If they are going to attack, pray that their intention is to destroy a US city rather than employ a competent EMP attack.
North Korea doesn't want to attack the USA. They just want the USA to leave them the hell alone. Nukes are the surest way to achieve that goal.

pjohns
08-11-2017, 02:42 PM
North Korea and China have both been making reasonable offers in an attempt to calm tensions between the USA and North Korea. The US government simply refuses to compromise, just like they refused to compromise with Saddam, Qaddafi, and Assad. The US government is the number bully and aggressor in the world. It's only through relentless propaganda that they've managed to convince so many Americans otherwise. North Korea has barely gone outside its own borders in decades, whereas the US government roves around the world wantonly destroying country after country. North Koreans have every reason to fear and even hate the US government.
Well, at least we now know which side you are on...

pjohns
08-11-2017, 02:45 PM
[Americans] live inside a propaganda bubble that tells them how "exceptional" and "indispensable" they are to the world. Meanwhile, the world just looks at us like a bunch of bullies and rogues.

Oh, I see: Americans are the victims of mere "propaganda," whereas the North Korean people know The Truth.

Got it...

pjohns
08-11-2017, 03:04 PM
Stop conducting provocative military exercises off North Korea's shores...

Do you mean the very same military exercises that have been jointly conducted between the US and South Korea now, since the Korean Conflict ended in an armistice, in 1953?


[S]top threatening to destroy their country...

Uh, I believe that it is Kim Jong-un that has made these threats...


[E]nter into peace talks in good faith...

Why, exactly, would we need to begin "peace talks"?

I suppose that it could be argued, technically, that we never ceased our war with North Korea, since the Korean Conflict ended only in an armistice; but there has certainly been no armed conflict on the Korean Peninsula, involving the US, for 64 years now...


involve the international community...

That sounds like just another pitch for "multilateralism"--a.k.a. globalism.

And I have far more respect for my toilet tissue than I have for globalism...


stop behaving like we own the entire planet.

Of course the US does not "own the entire planet."

But neither does North Korea...

Peter1469
08-11-2017, 03:31 PM
Stop conducting provocative military exercises off North Korea's shores; stop threatening to destroy their country; enter into peace talks in good faith; involve the international community; stop behaving like we own the entire planet.

When I was in Korea (both times), the military exercises were for typical US training along with joint operations with the ROK military. We trained on what would likely occur should the North invade. We never trained on invading the North.

Peter1469
08-11-2017, 03:34 PM
North Korea doesn't want to attack the USA. They just want the USA to leave them the hell alone. Nukes are the surest way to achieve that goal.

I imagine they have transmitted that through back channels. If not, they may have problems.

There is nothing historically unusual in this situation. A great power is bumping up against a lesser power. There is nothing new under the sun.

William
08-11-2017, 03:40 PM
Well, at least we now know which side you are on...

That's a 'black or white', 'if you are not with us, you are against us' type of reaction. And I'm sure Ethereal is not the only American who is aware of those things, and has the courage to say them. These are historical facts, not a question of taking sides, and the web is full of sites proving what Ethereal writes is fact.

And the US-led invasion of Iraq, a nation which has never attacked the USA, does seem to give credibility to his theory that many nations will think the best way to avoid being attacked or invaded by anyone would be to have nuclear weapons.

Any American who can read can get access to this information, but totally nationalistic Americans will choose not to. So it is unfair to accuse Ethereal of being anti-American cos he tells the truth about your history. It is not anti-American to talk about these things, any more than it is anti-British to talk about the occupation of North America - it is just history. The biggest kid on the playing field is almost always the biggest bully.

Ethereal
08-11-2017, 05:40 PM
Well, at least we now know which side you are on...

Same side as always: Truth and justice!

Ethereal
08-11-2017, 05:41 PM
Oh, I see: Americans are the victims of mere "propaganda," whereas the North Korean people know The Truth.

Got it...

They know A truth, not THE truth.

Ethereal
08-11-2017, 05:46 PM
Do you mean the very same military exercises that have been jointly conducted between the US and South Korea now, since the Korean Conflict ended in an armistice, in 1953?

The very same.


Uh, I believe that it is Kim Jong-un that has made these threats...

His threats must be viewed in the larger context of US aggression.


Why, exactly, would we need to begin "peace talks"?

To promote peace between the USA and North Korea.


I suppose that it could be argued, technically, that we never ceased our war with North Korea, since the Korean Conflict ended only in an armistice; but there has certainly been no armed conflict on the Korean Peninsula, involving the US, for 64 years now...

Peace is a process as well as an outcome. If we don't engage in the process of peace (diplomacy, dialog, etc.), then we cannot achieve the outcome of peace.


That sounds like just another pitch for "multilateralism"--a.k.a. globalism.

And I have far more respect for my toilet tissue than I have for globalism...

It's really not. Simply involving the international community in the peace process does not require a global government. It just requires cooperation.


Of course the US does not "own the entire planet."

But neither does North Korea...

True, but the US is the only one who acts like they do.

Ethereal
08-11-2017, 05:48 PM
When I was in Korea (both times), the military exercises were for typical US training along with joint operations with the ROK military. We trained on what would likely occur should the North invade. We never trained on invading the North.

I trained with the ROK Marines, too. Rightly or wrongly, North Korea interprets US presence in the region as provocative. Something tells me the US would feel much the same way if Russia or China were in Mexico conducting such exercises. And the US has already invaded North Korea once, leaving behind incredible devastation, so North Koreans have a right to worry.

Peter1469
08-11-2017, 06:12 PM
I trained with the ROK Marines, too. Rightly or wrongly, North Korea interprets US presence in the region as provocative. Something tells me the US would feel much the same way if Russia or China were in Mexico conducting such exercises. And the US has already invaded North Korea once, leaving behind incredible devastation, so North Koreans have a right to worry.
The US invasion of North Korea was a counter attack.

Dr. Who
08-11-2017, 06:46 PM
The only dog who needs to be leashed is the US government. They're the ones going around the world attacking and destroying country after country for no reason at all. Who has North Korea attacked? Nobody. Just like Iran hasn't attacked anyone either. The US government is nothing more than an instrument of death and destruction, wielded by profiteering bankers and arms manufacturers who want to rule the world. And westerners are none the wiser thanks to a corporate media who relentlessly conditions and propagandizes them.
Look, I don't really disagree with what you are saying, but NK is poking the bear by testing nukes every other month. That's just a neocon/Warhawk beacon and the current Administration is attempting to do the opposite of the last, so as much as Obama ignored NK, Trump is now breathing down their neck. Kim is predictably responding by flipping the US the bird and Trump is responding with veiled threats. Trump will not back down. Someone else will have to rein in NK or bad things will happen.

Ethereal
08-11-2017, 07:20 PM
The US invasion of North Korea was a counter attack.
That's the conventional wisdom. But some academics have questioned whether or not it was as simple as that.

Peter1469
08-11-2017, 08:24 PM
That's the conventional wisdom. But some academics have questioned whether or not it was as simple as that.

That would be news to the forces that were quickly overrun.

Ethereal
08-13-2017, 02:30 AM
That would be news to the forces that were quickly overrun.
There were border skirmishes between the North and South before the war officially broke out, so it might not be as simple as saying one side "started" it. Border conflicts can be messy and uncertain affairs.

Common
08-13-2017, 04:26 AM
Stop conducting provocative military exercises off North Korea's shores; stop threatening to destroy their country; enter into peace talks in good faith; involve the international community; stop behaving like we own the entire planet.

Uh weve had many peace talks with NK and they break every one, even when weve giving them lots of money they do nothing in good faith
Im not saying we are perfect, I am saying that theres no negotiating any treaty that will last. They are like Iran

pjohns
08-15-2017, 12:45 PM
As of today, Kim Jong-un has apparently backed down, albeit with a face-saving measure--as I expected that he would.

The face-saving measure, however--as I understand it--is that the US and South Korea no longer conduct joint exercises.

And if that is, indeed, his proposal, then it contains a so-called "poison pill"...

ThirdTerm
08-17-2017, 03:29 AM
Kim backed away from attacking Guam only because President Trump hinted at bombing dozens of North Korean missile sites in retaliation in an event of an ICBM attack on Guam. America needs to keep playing tough to contain North Korea without relying on South Korea. The new South Korean president is a leftist known for being sympathetic toward North Korea and South Korea is an unreliable ally under Moon, who would do the best he can to get in Trump's way.

The president of South Korea has some sharp words for President Trump: South Korea gets to make the call about going to war with North Korea.“Only the Republic of Korea can make the decision for military action on the Korean Peninsula,” President Moon Jae-in said (http://english1.president.go.kr/activity/speeches.php?srh[board_no]=24&srh[view_mode]=detail&srh[seq]=1001&srh[detail_no]=13) Tuesday in a nationally televised address. “Without the consent of the Republic of Korea, no country can determine to take military action.”

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/8/16/16152774/south-korea-north-korea-trump-military-liberation-day-speech

Peter1469
08-17-2017, 10:16 AM
Kim backed away from attacking Guam only because President Trump hinted at bombing dozens of North Korean missile sites in retaliation in an event of an ICBM attack on Guam. America needs to keep playing tough to contain North Korea without relying on South Korea. The new South Korean president is a leftist known for being sympathetic toward North Korea and South Korea is an unreliable ally under Moon, who would do the best he can to get in Trump's way.

The president of South Korea has some sharp words for President Trump: South Korea gets to make the call about going to war with North Korea.“Only the Republic of Korea can make the decision for military action on the Korean Peninsula,” President Moon Jae-in said (http://english1.president.go.kr/activity/speeches.php?srh[board_no]=24&srh[view_mode]=detail&srh[seq]=1001&srh[detail_no]=13) Tuesday in a nationally televised address. “Without the consent of the Republic of Korea, no country can determine to take military action.”

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/8/16/16152774/south-korea-north-korea-trump-military-liberation-day-speech
I agree.

Newpublius
08-17-2017, 09:40 PM
The president of South Korea has some sharp words for President Trump: South Korea gets to make the call about going to war with North Korea.“Only the Republic of Korea can make the decision for military action on the Korean Peninsula,” President Moon Jae-in said Tuesday in a nationally televised address. “Without the consent of the Republic of Korea, no country can determine to take military action.”


-----

Trust me, I would love to leave the Korean peninsula. But if NK hits the US proper......we dont need his consent.

Peter1469
08-18-2017, 03:09 PM
The president of South Korea has some sharp words for President Trump: South Korea gets to make the call about going to war with North Korea.“Only the Republic of Korea can make the decision for military action on the Korean Peninsula,” President Moon Jae-in said Tuesday in a nationally televised address. “Without the consent of the Republic of Korea, no country can determine to take military action.”


-----

Trust me, I would love to leave the Korean peninsula. But if NK hits the US proper......we dont need his consent.
I agree. Here is an article from the Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/no-american-strike-on-north-korea-without-my-consent-says-souths-president/2017/08/17/775290e8-8332-11e7-82a4-920da1aeb507_story.html?utm_term=.77e971ac7314) on Moon Jae-in's statement.

Staller
08-27-2017, 11:09 AM
North Korea doesn't want to attack the USA. They just want the USA to leave them the hell alone. Nukes are the surest way to achieve that goal.

Unfortunately, the powers in command could care less. That is what will cause Guam's ruin.

If they don't care enough about their own people to leave NK alone, why shouldn't NK melt them as they have done to NK.

Nobody wins.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MisterVeritis
08-27-2017, 11:36 AM
Many wars begin in April.

Tahuyaman
08-28-2017, 04:55 PM
Line of sight. But yes, the EMP Commission has studied this since 2000 or so. A well placed EMP strike (that may use 2-3 warheads) could destroy our grid and 90% of Americans would die inside a year.

I think that's a bit dramatic.

MisterVeritis
08-28-2017, 06:12 PM
Line of sight. But yes, the EMP Commission has studied this since 2000 or so. A well placed EMP strike (that may use 2-3 warheads) could destroy our grid and 90% of Americans would die inside a year.

I think that's a bit dramatic.
Everyone with medical conditions needing refrigerated meds will be high on the casualty list. The lack of clean water guarantees water-borne illnesses. The very young and the old will be dead within a month.

The food supply runs out in less than a week. We become tribal. Those of us with weapons will take what we must to ensure our families are fed. I expect between 5-10% will be killed resisting. Another third will starve within three months. That gets us up to around one-half of the population.

All news will be local. Canada will be off the grid. Northern Mexico too. Anyone coming will be coming to plunder and loot (just like our government).

Peter1469
08-28-2017, 06:18 PM
I think that's a bit dramatic.

An internet / industrial people suddenly dropped into a pre-industrial age? It would be brutal.

Peter1469
08-28-2017, 06:19 PM
Line of sight. But yes, the EMP Commission has studied this since 2000 or so. A well placed EMP strike (that may use 2-3 warheads) could destroy our grid and 90% of Americans would die inside a year.

Everyone with medical conditions needing refrigerated meds will be high on the casualty list. The lack of clean water guarantees water-borne illnesses. The very young and the old will be dead within a month.

The food supply runs out in less than a week. We become tribal. Those of us with weapons will take what we must to ensure our families are fed. I expect between 5-10 will be killed resisting. Another third will starve within three months. That gets us up to around one-half of the population.

All news will be local. Canada will be off the grid. Northern Mexico too. Anyone coming will be coming to plunder and loot (just like our government).

Winter is coming.....:smiley:

MisterVeritis
08-28-2017, 06:21 PM
Winter is coming.....:smiley:
For an enemy early to mid-January is a great time to strike the US.

Peter1469
08-28-2017, 06:23 PM
For an enemy early to mid-January is a great time to strike the US.

They would have the same problems dealing with a pre-industrial age winter that we would. Canadians may have to come south just to survive.

MisterVeritis
08-28-2017, 06:30 PM
They would have the same problems dealing with a pre-industrial age winter that we would. Canadians may have to come south just to survive.
They? Who?

Peter1469
08-28-2017, 06:31 PM
They? Who?
Whoever wanted to attack in the winter.

MisterVeritis
08-28-2017, 06:35 PM
Whoever wanted to attack in the winter.
Our vulnerabilities are unique to us. North Korea is rocky and mountainous. The EMP effects (E1, 2, and 3) would not bind very well to the ground in North Korea as they can do here.

We would have a hard time restricting the pulse to just one country. I tend to doubt we would use weapons for that purpose against the NORKs.

Peter1469
08-28-2017, 07:24 PM
Our vulnerabilities are unique to us. North Korea is rocky and mountainous. The EMP effects (E1, 2, and 3) would not bind very well to the ground in North Korea as they can do here.

We would have a hard time restricting the pulse to just one country. I tend to doubt we would use weapons for that purpose against the NORKs.

I am not sure if a successful EMP attack would hurt the NKs much.

Our response would be a massive nuclear attack in the traditional sense.

MisterVeritis
08-28-2017, 08:59 PM
I am not sure if a successful EMP attack would hurt the NKs much.

Our response would be a massive nuclear attack in the traditional sense.
I hate to be a naysayer. :-)

I doubt we would use more than two or three nuclear weapons. Our precision weapons are so good we likely wouldn't need them. I suspect we would use nuclear weapons at the theater level to catch prompt high-value targets imprecisely located. A TEL in a valley might be a suitable target for a medium yield weapon detonated at a low to medium altitude.

Captdon
08-30-2017, 07:40 PM
The only times that North Korea has done anything we want was when ewe bribed them. They took what we gave them and went right back to nuclear development.

You can't deal with Kim and more than England dealt with Hitler. That didn't work and dealing with Kim won't work.

Peter1469
08-30-2017, 08:22 PM
The only times that North Korea has done anything we want was when ewe bribed them. They took what we gave them and went right back to nuclear development.

You can't deal with Kim and more than England dealt with Hitler. That didn't work and dealing with Kim won't work.


And if Kim wasn't going for weapons that could reach the US, he wouldn't matter. (To the US)

William
08-31-2017, 12:06 AM
IMO, the only way a war between the USA and North Korea would happen, would be if the USA made a pre-emptive strike on NK. Nobody, no matter how doo-lally, would openly attack the most powerful military force on earth - the North Koreans know they would be squashed like a bug underfoot. They also know that if they deliberately attack a close ally of the US - they will be wiped out - and nobody is that crazy. The danger to Americans is much more likely to come from some terrorist attack - a dirty bomb, or pollution of the water supply, etc.

Archer0915
08-31-2017, 06:14 AM
IMO, the only way a war between the USA and North Korea would happen, would be if the USA made a pre-emptive strike on NK. Nobody, no matter how doo-lally, would openly attack the most powerful military force on earth - the North Koreans know they would be squashed like a bug underfoot. They also know that if they deliberately attack a close ally of the US - they will be wiped out - and nobody is that crazy. The danger to Americans is much more likely to come from some terrorist attack - a dirty bomb, or pollution of the water supply, etc.
Little KIM has a mental defect and his people believe everything he says because the state control everything. If he says they can destroy the US them the majority believe it. Most do not know the power of the US and they beleive they defeated the US in the Korean conflict. They do not understand that we STOPPED.

Peter1469
08-31-2017, 09:23 AM
IMO, the only way a war between the USA and North Korea would happen, would be if the USA made a pre-emptive strike on NK. Nobody, no matter how doo-lally, would openly attack the most powerful military force on earth - the North Koreans know they would be squashed like a bug underfoot. They also know that if they deliberately attack a close ally of the US - they will be wiped out - and nobody is that crazy. The danger to Americans is much more likely to come from some terrorist attack - a dirty bomb, or pollution of the water supply, etc.
What about an EMP attack?

Peter1469
08-31-2017, 09:24 AM
Little KIM has a mental defect and his people believe everything he says because the state control everything. If he says they can destroy the US them the majority believe it. Most do not know the power of the US and they beleive they defeated the US in the Korean conflict. They do not understand that we STOPPED.

Because we couldn't kill all of the Chinese.

Archer0915
08-31-2017, 10:17 AM
Because we couldn't kill all of the Chinese.
We could have taken care of it but WWII had just passed. McAurthor was correct.

Adelaide
08-31-2017, 10:58 AM
IMO, the only way a war between the USA and North Korea would happen, would be if the USA made a pre-emptive strike on NK. Nobody, no matter how doo-lally, would openly attack the most powerful military force on earth - the North Koreans know they would be squashed like a bug underfoot. They also know that if they deliberately attack a close ally of the US - they will be wiped out - and nobody is that crazy. The danger to Americans is much more likely to come from some terrorist attack - a dirty bomb, or pollution of the water supply, etc.

They have been getting away with things for years. Honestly, they probably think they can continue to get away with more and more without an aggressive attack by the United States. Previously presidents and cabinets failed to really take them seriously. Former deals fell through with hardly any consequences, unless you count starving NK citizens (but who really care about that?).

Peter1469
09-04-2017, 01:18 AM
We are getting closer to war.

US will launch 'massive military response' to NKorea threats: Mattis (https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-launch-massive-military-response-nkorea-threats-mattis-195826168.html)

he United States will launch a "massive military response" to threats from North Korea, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis said Sunday.He spoke after President Donald Trump met with his national security advisers following a test of what Pyongyang said was a hydrogen bomb able to fit atop a missile.


"Any threat to the United States or its territories, including Guam, or our allies will be met with a massive military response, a response both effective and overwhelming," Mattis said.


He added: "Kim Jong-Un should take heed of the United Nations Security Council's unified voice. All members unanimously agreed on the threat North Korea poses and remain unanimous in their commitment to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.


"We are not looking to the total annihilation of a country, namely North Korea, but as I said, we have many options to do so."

Peter1469
09-04-2017, 01:24 AM
Here is a good article from CNN about hydrogen bombs.

What is a hydrogen bomb and can North Korea deliver one? (http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/03/asia/hydrogen-bomb-north-korea-explainer/index.html)

North Korea says it has successfully tested a hydrogen bomb (http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/03/asia/north-korea-nuclear-test/index.html), raising fears it is getting closer to achieving its goal of a nuclear-tipped intercontinental missile.



Hydrogen bombs have a far larger yield than traditional weapons, meaning devices can be smaller while providing greater devastation.





Making them small enough to fit on a missile is a challenging task, and one that North Korea claims to have achieved. Experts are not so sure, but as long as Pyongyang claims to have the technology, the working assumption is that it's true.

NapRover
09-04-2017, 07:46 PM
NOKO seems to be playing with an ace up their sleeve, defiant, hostile and aggressive in every way. Is that ace China? Do you suppose that China will step in like they did last time? They've built their military up, in fact built new islands for them. New weapons, including an aircraft carrier and who knows what else. It just seems to me that KJU can't be this stupid, to take on the USA and allies. If all hell breaks loose and we initiate action, will China step in? I say yes. They don't want SOKO on their border and they don't want NOKO refugees streaming in. They want Taiwan, and might think this is a good time to jump them.

Peter1469
09-04-2017, 07:48 PM
NOKO seems to be playing with an ace up their sleeve, defiant, hostile and aggressive in every way. Is that ace China? Do you suppose that China will step in like they did last time? They've built their military up, in fact built new islands for them. New weapons, including an aircraft carrier and who knows what else. It just seems to me that KJU can't be this stupid, to take on the USA and allies. If all hell breaks loose and we initiate action, will China step in? I say yes. They don't want SOKO on their border and they don't want NOKO refugees streaming in. They want Taiwan, and might think this is a good time to jump them.
China has warned NK that they would not back them if they attack first.

But we may be past that stage. After this last nuclear test the US may take the initiative.