Acting against North Korea now.

[tramendous]

I just watched 4 'experts' talking about NK and their nuclear capabilities they have at the moment and how far away they really are from having missiles with nuclear heads that will be able to reach the United States. [I actually thought they already could judging by how the media goes on and on about how dangerous the country is.]

I get sick of their leader moaning about the States and the West, like a little child at times! I don't get too worried despite the fact he seems unstable, but once he can attack America with nuclear weapons things will be different.
Everytime NK does something there are news stories and politicians about it, the same old thing each time.
Instead of moaning constantly do something militarily, while it's still possible. Once it's confirmed that they do in fact have the capability to reach America, that'll be too late. The talk will be about 'oh, we should of done something when we had the opportunity.'

Couldn't the most powerful military the Universe has ever known[as far as we know] do something to end this evil regime in NK? To end the fear that one day 'fattie' will completely lose it and attack the West?
Would tactical nuclear weapons be suited to this? I don't know much about them but aren't they of different smaller sizes than the ones that ended up in Japan in '45? More precise? Or is that untrue?

We would have to know where some of their missiles are stored and their various military bases are? Although i'm sure there are ones we know nothing about.
I realize it's easy to say these things, but taking out these places as well as known residences of their leader could be something achievable, or not?
Instead of constant complaining about their leader and what he MIGHT do, do something ourselves! Before it's too late.
Yes lots of innocent people will die, but rather them than us, i'm afraid.
Yes the world will be up in arms about doing this, including China and Russia, but if it's done successfully it will show America, and possibly the West, are serious about their own safety in the world.
Not a half hearted attack, but destroy their capabilities to ever threaten us again. It'll will send a good message to China and Russia, who are after all, anti-America.

Living down here in Australia all this is very easy to say of course. As is the fact i know almost nothing about the military, and i'm naive about such things.
However i have concerns about the safety of The West and our lives. It seems to me all that ever happens in regards to NK is complaining by the world leaders and nothing else, and it's frustrating.
Also China wants to spread itself around the world and is now 'friendly' with the Philippines, which for an Aussie is getting too close to where i live!
We have these powerful militaries, use them.

Okay so you attack them, they lay waste to south korea's capital city and potentially millions of people die and a ground invasion is needed to clear them all out. North koreans are raised from childhood to worship their leader as a living god. Then youd have a massive huminatarian disaster. The country would then need to be occupied. Last time there was a korean war, china intervened with millions of troops and routed NATO forces all the way back to the south korean border and the us came close to nuking china. Youre basically causing a massive disaster to stop a potential one.

 

[tramendous]

America doesn't want to fuck with Asians.

Ever

Again

America lost the war for Korea, that's why we have a north and south Korea in the first place

America lost the war in Vietnam

America can't deal with slanty eye'd asians, it's better just get the ones that fuck camels

The korean war counts as a win for the US since the entire point of the war was for north korea to annex south korea. The primary nato objective was to stop this. The secondary objective was to then march on north korea's capital. Primary objective completed.

The north koreans it was the reverse. They failed in their primary objective of taking south korea and succeeded in their secondary objective of surviving.

 

[weed]

America doesn't want to fuck with Asians.

Ever

Hiroshima & Nagasaki

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

Depends on what you mean by lose

We "lost" in Vietnam by murdering the shit out of them and killing them way more than they could kill us, until we got sick of killing them and went home

We didnt lose the Korean War by any means

You lose by not achieving the desired political outcome you tried to cause by using force.
In Vietnam the US tried to make the North weak enough so it couldn't take over the South. It failed, badly.
Tons and tons of bombs and you were not able to disable the North Vietnamese army. As soon as the americans left they attacked and destroyed the south.
In Korea, the first stage of the war was successful, but then you got cocky and tried to take over North Korea and got routed by the chinese. So you lost the second phase. It was a stalemate in the end.

The amount of men killed is not really important, for countries like China and Vietnam men are expendable as bombs are for the USA. It's in fact a lot cheaper to make another charlie than to make a dumb bomb.

 

[j123]

North Korea always tries to show the world how powerful they are and we just point and laugh. My cousin has a more developed air delivery drone than NK that he bought at Toys R Us.

lol @ Toys r' Us

They do sell their fare share of quadcopters, that reminds me, I should get new one

 

[j123]

You lose by not achieving the desired political outcome you tried to cause by using force.
In Vietnam the US tried to make the North weak enough so it couldn't take over the South. It failed, badly.
Tons and tons of bombs and you were not able to disable the North Vietnamese army. As soon as the americans left they attacked and destroyed the south.
In Korea, the first stage of the war was successful, but then you got cocky and tried to take over North Korea and got routed by the chinese. So you lost the second phase. It was a stalemate in the end.

The amount of men killed is not really important, for countries like China and Vietnam men are expendable as bombs are for the USA. It's in fact a lot cheaper to make another charlie than to make a dumb bomb.

They were actually on their last legs, had America continued fighting and assisting a bit more, they would've folded.

They pushed through when Kissinger sold out the south, and China gave the VC the green light

 

[Byron Carter]

Even if they had the capability to reach the U.S., North Korea will never be a threat to the United States.

Our missile defense system is so exhaustive and redundant, even a coordinated attack from Russia, China, North Korea, Iran combined would likely prove futile.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't stop North Korea. Invade them, kill their communist leaders, and liberate their people. Their human rights violations have gone on way too long.

If we're gonna play "World Police", let's do it right.

 

[7437]

Even if they had the capability to reach the U.S., North Korea will never be a threat to the United States.

Our missile defense system is so exhaustive and redundant, even a coordinated attack from Russia, China, North Korea, Iran combined would likely prove futile.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't stop North Korea. Invade them, kill their communist leaders, and liberate their people. Their human rights violations have gone on way too long.

If we're gonna play "World Police", let's do it right.

Agree that NK is no threat.

Lets not though. The exact scenario you described played out in iraq. Its not a good move for us.

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

Our missile defense system is so exhaustive and redundant, even a coordinated attack from Russia, China, North Korea, Iran combined would likely prove futile.

 

[Byron Carter]

Agree that NK is no threat.

Lets not though. The exact scenario you described played out in iraq. Its not a good move for us.

Different people, different situation.

Iraq wasn't an ideal place to live, but it was pretty good by Mid East standards.

South Korea already has a functioning democracy (Albeit with some controversy and corruption of their own presently), and they speak the exact same language.

We wouldn't have to invest as heavily to rebuild. South Korea would help.

 

[tramendous]

You lose by not achieving the desired political outcome you tried to cause by using force.
In Vietnam the US tried to make the North weak enough so it couldn't take over the South. It failed, badly.
Tons and tons of bombs and you were not able to disable the North Vietnamese army. As soon as the americans left they attacked and destroyed the south.
In Korea, the first stage of the war was successful, but then you got cocky and tried to take over North Korea and got routed by the chinese. So you lost the second phase. It was a stalemate in the end.

The amount of men killed is not really important, for countries like China and Vietnam men are expendable as bombs are for the USA. It's in fact a lot cheaper to make another charlie than to make a dumb bomb.

If you invade another country to annex it, the only thing that the other side needs to do to get a 'win' is preserve the status quo. Anything else in addition that they succeed or fail to do is them trying to make the agressor lose more badly then they already have.

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

If you invade another country to annex it, the only thing that the other side needs to do to get a 'win' is preserve the status quo. Anything else in addition that they succeed or fail to do is them trying to make the agressor lose more badly then they already have.

That is what China did too. China intervened to preserve the status quo ante bellum. To avoid NK being annexed to SK with US help. So they also won in that regards.

 

[evansusmc2]

America doesn't want to fuck with Asians.

Ever

Again

America lost the war for Korea, that's why we have a north and south Korea in the first place

America lost the war in Vietnam

America can't deal with slanty eye'd asians, it's better just get the ones that fuck camels

All of Korea was taken over except ONE city. Then American forces got involved to push them back to the point they are now. How is that a loss?

Vietnam? Militarily we beat them but didn't really complete an objective. We did successfully evacuate most of the South Vietnamese.

 

[Selukrid612]

That is what China did too. China intervened to preserve the status quo ante bellum. To avoid NK being annexed to SK with US help. So they also won in that regards.

That's why it's technically considered a stalemate, but the stalemate title is still a bit misleading because US policymakers chose that it should end that way and had to kill a lot of Chinese to get them to accept it. The US only had 300,000 men in Korea, they could've poured troops into the area and finished the job. China was not nearly as well positioned to supply their troops, but the US chose not to escalate and adopted a strategy of defense. So, on paper it's a stalemate. In reality China did pretty much all they physically could, while the US held back significantly because at the end of the day North Korea was not worth the commitment when the US and it's allies were far more concerned about containing the Soviets.

 

[IDL]

If a large powerful world power intentionally went about trying to isolate your country from the ability to sustain trading relationships with other countries so that you cant sustain economic freedom, wouldn't you go about to make a pain in their ass ?

I don't think North Korea really wants open (two way) economic systems, but I'm sure it's a complex situation.

I can see the utility of trying to get aid by trying to act threatening and gain concession. You seem to think I am making harsh judgements on their geo-political strategy when I haven't. I don't know enough about the situation.

My point was about them being a threat to the US. I don't think it makes sense for them to actually attack someone.

 

[evansusmc2]

Even if they had the capability to reach the U.S., North Korea will never be a threat to the United States.

Our missile defense system is so exhaustive and redundant, even a coordinated attack from Russia, China, North Korea, Iran combined would likely prove futile.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't stop North Korea. Invade them, kill their communist leaders, and liberate their people. Their human rights violations have gone on way too long.

If we're gonna play "World Police", let's do it right.

You want to stop North Korea? BE MY GUEST!

See my location? I'd rather enjoy my time over here than to see Seoul obliterated just so we can clean up a Northern rat nest.

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

All of Korea was taken over except ONE city. Then American forces got involved to push them back to the point they are now. How is that a loss?

All of Korea was taken over except ONE city. Then Chinese forces got involved to push them back to the point they are now. How is that a win?

That's why it's technically considered a stalemate, but the stalemate title is still a bit misleading because US policymakers chose that it should end that way and had to kill a lot of Chinese to get them to accept it. The US only had 300,000 men in Korea, they could've poured troops into the area and finished the job. China was not nearly as well positioned to supply their troops, but the US chose not to escalate and adopted a strategy of defense. So, on paper it's a stalemate. In reality China did pretty much all they physically could, while the US held back significantly because at the end of the day North Korea was not worth the commitment when the US and it's allies were far more concerned about containing the Soviets.

I'm not sure about China. China was pretty poor at the time but it had almost 4 times the USA population(562 million vs 150 million) and the soviets could eventually supply them with more and more weapons. Or even join the fight themselves in addition to the pilots they sent.
It would be a really long meat grinder and as you said the USA had to also dedicate resources elsewhere.

 

[M3t4tr0n]

Why cant we ignore him? He isnt a threat to us.

No we should only ignore Russia. Everyone else is dangerous

 

[AGGAMEMNON66]

I'm afraid the United States is not in the position to be able to launch any kind of a "pre-emptive" strike, especially with China half-heartedly backing the North Korean regime.

Based on North Korea's history, they seem to be more of a "defensive cult" than an outright, aggressive cult, although things might change in the hands of a young, potentially more ambitious leader. Attacking them might be the worst possible solution, because it would give them all the reasons in the world to believe what they have been told about foreign invaders.

Ultimately, the only country that has any kind of pull with North Korea, is China. They are the ones who are going to be responsible for the mess that North Korea might potentially cause. How they handle it, is going to gauge their ability to act as a responsible super power. If China can't mantain stability amongst its own neighbours, then we should probably start coming up with ways to make the world economy less dependent on China.

NK leaders are sadistic bullies content to push around their own population when they want to feel powerful.


The rest is all hot air with them. A bully doesn't fuck with someone that will hit them back and not let them back up. People like that won't want to risk losing what they have by fucking with people that can take it from them.

 

[sverre054]

The biggest issue is money. North korea falling will cause either China or South Korea, to bare the heaviest burden. China has propped up NK for years, to allow a buffer between itself and USA ally SK. NK relationship with China has taken a huge hit in recent years and China is getting sick of them, and at the same time are losing some control due to turmoil in the NK regime.

South Korea would be heavily burdened trying to integrate and support millions of North Koreans. There is little industry and resources in the north that would benefit the south. It would likely lower the quality of life and services the south enjoys. Basically be the most modern and technologically advanced societies, trying to integrate people 50 years technically behind them.