North Korea Problems: President Clinton in Pyongyang

[ledhed]

Not if your major concern is terrorism from the middle east.

People seem to discount the fact that its not the terrorist we are really worried about .



Its what a few terrorist after an Unpredictable lying dictator ..like Saddam or Ill Kim provide them with weapons to hit us can do . They can do NOTHING to the US with all the power they posses but give just ONE halfway working nuke to a group of Jihadist and its a new ballgame.


Please ....those of you that think this is not only possible... but a likely
event , Chime in with your brilliant logic to explain otherwise .

We have been fighting Nuclear proliferation since during the cold war...so the EARTH could survive.

Having crackpot dictators and Religions that want God to visit earth after its bathed in blood having them is a big step back wards .

Wasting your breath babbling about Saddam NOT being a threat is useless..he was a PROVEN threat..how many more times did he have to prove it ? If he WASN'T a threat to you I guess you would wait until the missile or bomb in a basket was in front of your nose...then you would say .."NOW THATS A THREAT " and soon after your DNA would join the universe thus proving yet again Darwin's law .

 

[Keef]

Hey, let's have a hypothetical situation:


Let's say the NK, withour warning, launched a nuke headed for the west coast of the US. What do you think the world would do?

Personally, I think the US would try it's damndest to blow that sucker up while it's still en route, probably in the upper atmosphere. After that Ihave no clue. Maybe the military would round up every Daisy Cutter we have--just to avoid using The Bomb--and blanket NK? Somehow I don't think annihilation would happen.

 

[FoolKiller]

Hey, let's have a hypothetical situation:


Let's say the NK, withour warning, launched a nuke headed for the west coast of the US. What do you think the world would do?

Considering the success of their recent tests I wouldn't be surprised if it crashed into the ocean or even on their own soil. Of course, there would be a chance that it might hit Japan and I am betting that they are tired of nukes by this point.

Anyway, I think teh odds of it actually reaching the US are slim and then NK would have so many cruise missiles raining down on it that they woudln't know what to do.

 

[Danoff]

Hey, let's have a hypothetical situation:


Let's say the NK, withour warning, launched a nuke headed for the west coast of the US. What do you think the world would do?

We would try to intercept. At the same time, we'd launch retaliatory nukes that would elimiate pretty much all life in NK. NK and SK would just become Korea, the upper half of which would not be habitable.

We'd fail to intercept the nuke and it would strike LA and kill me.

But none of that would happen. If they launched a nuke it would be at SK or Japan. In which case we'd be hard pressed to launch counter nukes. We'd try to intercept a missile headed for Japan or SK, fail, and end up having to go to war with NK - at which point we'd bomb the hell out of them with bombers deployed from within the states. China would withdraw support and NK would be a humanitarian disaster within weeks.

But that won't happen either.

Instead they'll give a nuke to a terrorist organization (like Al Qaeda). They'll smuggle it into the US and blow it up in a coastal city like LA, NY, or even try to hit D.C. Then, we'd have a hard time convincing the world the NK was responsible for arming the terrorists. We'd have to retaliate against Al Qaeda instead of NK - but Kim would say something stupid like "this is what happens when you mess with us" and we'd go bomb the hell out of them. Europeans will protest the US aggression in NK and tell us that we should be trying to drop bombs only on military and that all civilian casualties make the action completely immoral. They'd claim that we deserved to be nuked.

 

[Keef]

I like the thrid scenario. I sounds the most realistic. That's too bad.

But would the rest of the world truly be shocked that a nuclear explosion occureed in this day and age? Would everyone be tempted to pull an end-of-the-world, or would they all just shut up and go about their own business. Would they side with anyone or would most countries seperate themselves from everyone else? Would we drop all our wars and give them up, or would we stretch our forces to the brink and give it a Hail Mary?

 

[ledhed]

One Mirv luanched at NK removes them from the earth .

We have a few thousand ...why are we being so cheap ?

 

[exigeracer]

You also have to realise that Japan made a major step only a few years ago when they deployed their first tropps for the first time since WW2 into Iraq. Since then they've been a defensive nation.

Even then, wasn't it but a handful of peacekeepers? The population was still in uproar over the decision.

People keep thinking back to invasions and such...no need for an invasion until the country you are going into has no working , army , air force, power grid , communications or logistics capability.

Learn the lessons of GW 1 and the last Gulf war . Not to mention Kosovo.

So you're saying the next time an invasion would be set in place would be WWIII?

 

[///M-Spec]

Let's say the NK, withour warning, launched a nuke headed for the west coast of the US. What do you think the world would do?

Let me first say that I think the likelyhood of this happening is almost nil. The reason is because North Korea's leadership knows it would be certain suicide. Far more likely is danoff's scenario that Kim Jong Il sells a nuke to someone with a grudge against the US.

But for the sake of argument...

The very first thing that will happen is NORAD will order any defense assets in the theater to try intercepting it in the boost phase. This would probably be one of the prototype ABL 747s you see on The Military Channel all the time. I have no doubt if tensions have escalated to this point, there will be an airplane in the area.

If this doesn't work, then the GMD site in Ft. Greely, Alaska will no doubt take a shot at it. This is the missle defense system you keep hearing about that can't hit a damn thing.

What's more likely is the scenario Foolkiller mentioned; it falls harmlessly into the ocean somewhere in the boost phase. Regardless of whether or not it hits anything, US military response will be unbelievably swift.

I firmly believe that the US will not hesitate to launch a nuclear counter-attack against the North if it was attacked with a ICBM.

However, it will restrict nuclear targets to top level nuclear military installations and command centers only. In other words all the hardened military targets buried in the ground or protected in bunkers. Therefore the only victims of America's nuclear response will be military officers in the North Korean regime. These targets will be destroyed by tactical nuclear weapons fired in two waves: one, from submarines in the Sea of Japan and the Yellow Sea-- these will be a newer version of the nuclear tipped Tomahawks that were retired from service in the early 90s. The second wave will be from B-52Hs or B-1Bs forward deployed from Andersen AFB in Guam or a similar location.

The US ballistic missile fleet will be fueled up and ready to fire, but since they are mostly overkill for this situation, will probably stay quiet.

All of this will happen in a very short period of time and no doubt news of these events will reach world media in one jumbled mess. Japan and South Korean officials, then the rest of the world will be given some information as events unfold. China will be given a 'curteousy call' minutes before launch to ensure them the missles are not aimed at THEM.

In the next hours, remaining DPRK forces will be attacked with conventional weapons. Airstrikes, regular Tomahawks, even big guns from a battleship. This includes all military and civilian infrastructure targets; bases, units, bridges, power plants, factories, etc. The really big targets, aside from DPRK armor and troop formations, will be the mobile Scud launchers, no doubt chock packed with 'chemical goodness'.

South Korea will be a humanitarian catastrophe. 8,000 artillery peices. 10 million people. You do the math.

As for world reaction, I wager it will be muted a first; after all, what can people say after the US has been attacked with a nuclear weapon? Any opposition to a counter-attack by the US will probably center on the severity of US strikes.

Despite the amount of firepower the US military can bring to bear on the North, it will take a long time to fight half a million soldiers; there will undoubtedly be calls for a cease-fire within a week or two, especially once it is clear the North Korean leadership has been eradicated.

The tactical nukes will probably be a big source of contention. The Pentagon will say it is nessessary to use them because conventional ordinance is ineffective against targets buried deep underground. The pundits, of course, will complain about the number of them being used and second guess every decision the Pentagon makes. They will complain about fallout, the environmental impact, impact on civilians, etc.

I have no doubt in my mind that the conspiracy theory wonks will claim the US was warned about the attacks but ignored it. Or better yet, the US faked the attack on itself in order to do away with Crazy Specs and his regime.

The real contraversey will come weeks after the guns fall silent. Lots of finger pointing will ensue and lots and lots of pictures of the poor Korean people will plaster the airwaves. No doubt, people will find a way to blame Bush for it all.


M

 

[ledhed]

No more battleships ....dude... They all retired ...but the rest is just as plausible as anything I have heard although according to my source the first targets will be the massed Soldiers and artillery facing the South to ummm change the odds a bit....the rest at all known NK military sites and COC.

It will be a massive retaliation and the bunker busters only will be Nukes with the exception of a few strategic COC hardened targets that are far enough from vital areas and the topography will limit fallout .

Estimates are 200,000 or less SK civilian and military casualties and a few million NK . Almost all military . They cant dig deep enough for thee nuke bunker busters..they are entombed. Whats in the open and above ground can be destroyed in two rounds of air strikes if the assets are available.

This info comes from a former Intelligence officer in the US air force and someone part of war planning against NK in the 1980's...he says with todays tech NK is toast...but no way to completely stop major destruction of some of Seoul without a total surprise attack..never actually war gamed by his group but played with and still found to come up short wiping out all of NK military assets facing the South.

But it would be massive and total if a nuke was fired at any nation in the region ...except China. At that time..things may have changed .

 

[DuckRacer]

I firmly believe that the US will not hesitate to launch a nuclear counter-attack against the North if it was attacked with a ICBM.

When you say "attacked", do you mean a nuclear missle from NK that successfully hits the US, or something that was intended to strike the US, but it fell into the ocean?

 

[Dave A]

we'd go bomb the hell out of them. Europeans will protest the US aggression in NK and tell us that we should be trying to drop bombs only on military and that all civilian casualties make the action completely immoral. They'd claim that we deserved to be nuked.

Generally our view is that just because someone else kills civillians from your country doesn't mean your given a right or justified to kill civillians yourselves. Ofcourse there's always collateral damage when firing missiles and rockets, but it's the measures taken to avoid killing civillians that matters. the reaction from England would largly depend on that. Actually that's BS, it would depend on how the media portrays your actions which is unfortunately how it is in all the western world, generally speaking.

 

[Danoff]

Generally our view is that just because someone else kills civillians from your country doesn't mean your given a right or justified to kill civillians yourselves.

That depends. In your mind I suppose it's impossible to justify killing civilians of any sort. I'd say it depends on intent.

 

[YSSMAN]

Hey, let's have a hypothetical situation:


Let's say the NK, withour warning, launched a nuke headed for the west coast of the US. What do you think the world would do?

And in Brad's Doomsday Scenario:

...I don't think the DPRK has the resources to directly attack the US on our own soil. Generally speaking, the DPRK would be more likely to attack our Allies in Seoul or Tokyo, or maybe even US forces scattered about the area. Simply put, the DPRK doesn't have the resources to get a Taepo-Dong II to his the western United States, much less have it carry a nuclear warhead.

Assuming for a moment that the DPRK does what we know they can do, launch short-range missles at Japan while shelling South Korea, and possibly attacking US forces in both countries, it would only be a matter of time before US fighterplanes are in the skies over North Korea and the air-war begins. Given how limited our ground forces are in South Korea and Japan (fewer than 50,000 men I belive), we would have to rely on air-power to destroy DPRK soliders and millitary instalations. Given the current positioning of destroyers and aircraft carriers in the Sea of Japan, they too would probably lob Tomahawks into North Korea at a fever pitch.

Given that these attacks on our Allies and ourselves would have come for little or no reason, I would then assume that the UN would back our actions, and I would expect many of our European Allies to do the same, although it is questionable as to what kind of role they would play. About 99% of what happens after the inital attack and retaliation would depend on how China decides to addres the problem. Without their support, things could fall apart quickly.

...Then there are the questions as to how to deal with the post-war DPRK. China certainly would prefer to have a Comunist Ally in Asia, but I think the consensus idea of having a united Korea once more would be supported eventually by most nations.

This also leaves out what exactly North Korea's ally in Iran would do should war break-out, but that I think is for another thread...

 

[a6m5]

I don't think it would a long war at all. North Korean military is so poorly equipped(outdated weaponery or too few up-to-date weaponery) and probably poorly trained(no $$$), I think they will crumble, if they don't actually turn on Kim Jong-il, first.

NK's 1 million men army is not as impressive as it sounds. I'm pretty certain South Korea by itself can defeat the North without too much trouble, if given reasonable time. Numbers deceive you:

South Korea has fewer troops: But if you include the SK's reserves(much larger than that of NK's), there isn't that much difference in number of troops.

South Korea has fewer jets: But is much more modern. Last time I checked, SK had over 150 F16s. Number of NK's newer jets don't even come close to that. They do have handful of MiG29(sweet!) and other cool jets, but again, they lack funds. I wonder how well those planes are maintained. They are very expensive.

South Korea has fewer tanks: Most of the North Korean tanks are laughably outdated. They would be no match for South Korean tanks and their attack choppers(they have bunch).
----------------------------------------------------
If North Korea do fire the WMDs, I would think that most of them would target South Korea, and that would give NK an advantage. They will probably fire some cheapshots at Japan, but their immediate threats will be from the Southern border. It would be impossible to predict how much WMD will hit the South, but I'd be surprised if more than 1, or 2 actually do a considerable damage. I've always said that North Korea is like a big Nazi concentration camp. My guess is that Kim Jong-il will have enough trouble keeping his own countrymen in line. His army will not be firing in all cylinders, and I think some intended WMD launches might "misfire".

 

[ledhed]

Did you watch the CNNN special on the NK dissidents and the film they manage to sneak out...Orwell could never have even thought up the sheer bleakness of the place..people just die and fall down and the rest of the hungry walk around the bodies like it was nothing..the soldier who defected said they would shoot a few people every once in a while so they didnt get out of line as a " warning ' . The tape I watched was a nightmare .

IT was Anderson Cooper ...and like a dope I watched it before I fell asleep ..

 

[///M-Spec]

When you say "attacked", do you mean a nuclear missle from NK that successfully hits the US, or something that was intended to strike the US, but it fell into the ocean?

I think the US response would be about the same, while world response would be somewhat different.

The rest of the world would probably understand and accept complete elimination of the North Korean armed forces, but have very strict limits on collateral damage to the North Korean citizen. The world would probably not tolorate, for example, a nuclear strike on a NK major city, unless a US city was similarly devastated.

As far as the US is concerned: How would anyone know if the NEXT missle would miss? Better safe than very, very sorry.

Which is why the use of tactical, low yield nuclear warheads would be warranted. Missle silos, command centers and related facilities have a nasty habit of being "hardened" against most forms of attack. Cheyenne Mountain, for example, was designed to surive a near direct hit with a multi-megaton thermonuclear device.

No more battleships ....dude... They all retired

Oh yeah... whoops.


M

 

[YSSMAN]

YOU SUNK MY BATTLESHIP!!!

---

Good point a6m5, but just because they are poorly equiped and theoretically poorly trained doesn't make them any less of an adversary. I think you are right in that the people may rise up against his government, but that may be stretching the truth a bit as well.

...As long as the United States and Japan maintain their air and naval superiority, I would doubt very highly that the South Korean ground troops would have much (if any) difficulty with the ground war, given that they have been trained by American troops, use American equipment, etc...

 

[a6m5]

Good point a6m5, but just because they are poorly equiped and theoretically poorly trained doesn't make them any less of an adversary. I think you are right in that the people may rise up against his government, but that may be stretching the truth a bit as well.

Thank you. I beg to differ here on a couple of points though. Trainings, excercises are very important IMO. I can barely remember it, maybe you guys remember it. North Korea Air Force scrambled to intercept an American plane, a while back. I think it was a surveillance plane. Their MiG29s(again, I think ) got to the American plane in a very short time, and I was very impressed.

Problem is, with limited training and excercises, they probably won't be able to pull that off consistently. With poor execution, they are less of an adversary.

As far as the "equipments" go, much of North Korean jets, tanks are of the third world quality. North Korean pitching their ancient tanks and jets against the South Koreans counterpart should be interesting.

Combine that with lack of funds affecting the maintenance and parts for their arsenal. I think South Korea have a HUGE advantage over the North.

As for stretching of the truth, that was just my opinion. As poor as that nation is, I'd be really surprised, if the North Koreans actually put their life on the line for their beloved Kimmy.

 

[Max_DC]

Yesterday I saw sth about Kim Jong Ill in TV. He had a cook for 12 years I think, a Japanese Sushi expert. That cook wanted to stay in N. Korea for a few months, but then Jong Ill persuaded him to stay... he earned a fortune and got several presents like cars and motobikes... and I'm not talking about soem old Soviet trucks
This guy seems to have a nice life, the best food and drinks from all over the world for several 10k $... He has several mansions, all equipped with basketball courts for his son... Of course, as every dicator, he and his coleaders drive Mercedes S-classes...
and when he throws a party he always has 50k dollars around him, little green presents for his staff...

Well, I thought at least this ultra communist wouldn't be that extreme, but....
The cook didn't return from one of his shopping journeys btw, he is now living in Japan, hiding from N. Koreankiller commandos...

 

[ledhed]

Must be nice while the rest of his paradise are starving and drop dead in the street .

 

[///M-Spec]

Must be nice while the rest off his paradise are starving and drop dead in the street .

Yeah. But of course it's all America's fault. We should be sending them more aid so K-Dong can feed his people AND have money left over for weapons with which to threaten us.


M

 

[FoolKiller]

I love this train of thought.
-Our people are starving.
-With more money we can feed our people.
-Other countries have plenty of money, how can we get that?
-Let's spend billions of dollars developing nuclear weapons with which to hold the world hostage so they will give us money to feed our people.

 

[YSSMAN]

Yeah. But of course it's all America's fault. We should be sending them more aid so K-Dong can feed his people AND have money left over for weapons with which to threaten us.


M

...Its been funny watching the blame game get played here in the US. Of course, it can't be Clinton's because the nuclear weapons weren't developed and tested while he was in office (actually, we funded their programs... and knew that he could have eight weapons ready by 2010), its all Bush's fault because he didn't do enough to stop it.

Because you know, when we go in alone, thats WRONG... But when we go in with other nations and don't get things done, we should have gone in alone.

 

[FoolKiller]

...Its been funny watching the blame game get played here in the US. Of course, it can't be Clinton's because the nuclear weapons weren't developed and tested while he was in office (actually, we funded their programs... and knew that he could have eight weapons ready by 2010), its all Bush's fault because he didn't do enough to stop it.

Because you know, when we go in alone, thats WRONG... But when we go in with other nations and don't get things done, we should have gone in alone.

Round and round the politics go; where it stops, nobody knows.

 

[Swift]

This is excatly why I hate having political parties. One party can pray on the pure ignorance of the populous and hope that they aren't smart enough to research it.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/4/30/110516.shtml

Without a doubt, the worst politician in office right now. Just lying...

 

[Keef]

"Heeeyy, you're a crazy b****, but you **** so good I'm on top of it..."

That's the song Billie Boy was singing when he met Hillary.

 

[YSSMAN]

...I can't belive that anyone is even defending what Clinton and Albright did. Yet again we see that six years down the road, his policies have failed, AGAIN. Sure, he may have been a strong President on the domestic front, but under his administration, he screwed a lot of things up internationally. People complain about Bush's foreign policy, but atleast they are making moves on the geopolitical table, attempting to fix what Clinton and Albright didn't do...

 

[Touring Mars]

Here is a fascinating and at times slightly disturbing documentary I found about North Korea and US policy towards North Korea.... 53 minutes over 6 parts, it's a useful 'potted history' which may help to put the current situation into a broader context.

(from here)

 

[ledhed]

Here is a fascinating and at times slightly disturbing documentary I found about North Korea and US policy towards North Korea.... 53 minutes over 6 parts, it's a useful 'potted history' which may help to put the current situation into a broader context.

(from here)

This was just on Discovery ( one of the three dIscovery chennels ) !!! And they had an even better one on CNN about dissenters with tape smuggled in and out of North Korea...

Your right its a great piece ...but its still a damned if you do and damned if you dont situation...South Korea and now even Japan is being held hostage by a Mad ,Insane ...and very smart ..fool . But he knows that no one has the balls to stop him . And like EVERY other dictator / madman / cult leader its going to take a strong hard slap to his face to stop him...because as far as he is concerned HE is GOD and lord of all he surveys and the rest of the world exist at HIS sufference . He has A Superpower ( midget version) DANCING to his flute ..CHINA ..and common wisdom has North Korea a puppet of China....ummmm I think NOW it is more CHINA being USED by NK

History has show that the only way to deal with his type is to do a Saddam on him ..instead of farting around for ten years while the world burns likess we did with Saddam BEFORE we tackled that problem...we now have a guy to deal with that CANT wait ten years for the next fella with balls to step up .

George is smart ...he knows he cany fight NK without China on his side .
So he plays the diplomacy game ...I'll bet air assests are being quitely prepared to blow the NK regime into hell as soon as China says its ok with them .

The problem is the quid pro quo involved.....will china accept a Hong Kong like NK with close ties to the south and a possible reunification if it doesnt have COMPLETE controll over it ?

I am almost DEAD sure that the fear of a US dominated ( economically and culturally ) Korea , with US bases on it WILL not ever be accepted by the current Chinese leadership.

Otherwise KIm ill bung would be very dead already .

 

[Touring Mars]

I'm not saying that I totally disagree with the policy, but it certainly is interesting to hear members of the current US administration saying that their top priority is the safety and security of themselves above anything else... whereas the Russians and Chinese, although they also just backed UN sanctions - with the proviso that there is no threat of military action - seem to be adopting a less 'inward-looking' stance.

It is highly ironic that both the US and the DPRK have their own individual securities as their main priorities. It is also interesting to note the level of disagreement between the US and South Korea - especially after Bush took over from Clinton and abandoned the South's 'Sunshine Policy' and chose instead to opt down the road of brinksmanship...