North Korea!
Of all the unstable nations that we tolerate with nuclear weapons, NK is the one we don't want with them. They are amongst the most criminally-inclined, reckless, and vicious people on the planet.
They would cheerfully let off a nuclear weapon on any one of a dozen of their hated "adversaries", even if it meant serious destruction of their own country.
They would cheerfully let off a nuclear weapon on any one of a dozen of their hated "adversaries", even if it meant serious destruction of their own country.
You must have trouble sleeping at night carrying all that worry around with you.
Fear not. NK will do no such thing. MAD still applies.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's not to say that DPRK cannot hold the civilian population of Seoul hostage with it's artillery. But actually using that artillery against the civilian populace will expose that artillery to almost certain destruction. And once that artillery is destroyed, the rest of the DPRK military becomes much more vulnerable. So such an attack will very likely come at a heavy price.
I'm not sure they would be prepared to lose either, just to try and save Seoul from an artillery barrage.
NK's capability to inflict a massive blow on Seoul has been seriously undermined by PGMs. Carving artillery pieces into fixed mountain positions may have worked back in the day, but now it just helps form a tomb around the poor souls inside.
NK's capability to inflict a massive blow on Seoul has been seriously undermined by PGMs. Carving artillery pieces into fixed mountain positions may have worked back in the day, but now it just helps form a tomb around the poor souls inside.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree. That is why there is considerable counter battery capability in ROK, to prevent Seoul's destruction, and not just to win the war that would follow Seoul's destruction.
Well...we hope so, but if true then parties on both sides of the Pacific would speak more responsibly. It is a precipice no one should want to be close to. Care is truly warranted.
Missile test failures are a temporary phenomenon that should not lull us to sleep - sooner or late they are likely to get it right. My hunch is that someone in our leadership is seriously undertaking very thorough planning for preemptive action of some sort. I can only wish our diplomats were likewise sparing no effort seeking a peaceful resolution.
Missile test failures are a temporary phenomenon that should not lull us to sleep - sooner or late they are likely to get it right. My hunch is that someone in our leadership is seriously undertaking very thorough planning for preemptive action of some sort. I can only wish our diplomats were likewise sparing no effort seeking a peaceful resolution.
Turin
Wish I had your sense of optimism. This is a nation that in the recent past sunk a SK navy ship, a bellicose action that killed many. Pretty sure they don't use the same calculus as the rest of us in their actions. We've come to learn that Muslim terrorists don't place the same value on life, the same could very well apply to the Norks leadership.
Wish I had your sense of optimism. This is a nation that in the recent past sunk a SK navy ship, a bellicose action that killed many. Pretty sure they don't use the same calculus as the rest of us in their actions. We've come to learn that Muslim terrorists don't place the same value on life, the same could very well apply to the Norks leadership.
KenV makes some valid points.
The more you dig into the claim NK could level Seoul with artillery - the more nuanced the picture becomes.
According to some of the Stratfor reports, there's quite a high rate of misfires among their batteries.
Also, apparently they can't reach all of Seoul, just the Northern suburbs.
According to some of the reports I've read (which I'll try to find and post) it would be a pretty nasty barrage - but not the all out firestorm that the popular media makes out.
No doubt short range missiles would be used to fill the gaps that artillery couldn't hit - but one assumes they're a different engagement scenario.
Several of the US Senators who went to the recent classified briefing spoke of very thorough and considered planning for US/SK military options.
EDIT - Jeez that MLRS is a nasty piece of kit! Love the nickname `The Grid Square removal system"!
The more you dig into the claim NK could level Seoul with artillery - the more nuanced the picture becomes.
According to some of the Stratfor reports, there's quite a high rate of misfires among their batteries.
Also, apparently they can't reach all of Seoul, just the Northern suburbs.
According to some of the reports I've read (which I'll try to find and post) it would be a pretty nasty barrage - but not the all out firestorm that the popular media makes out.
No doubt short range missiles would be used to fill the gaps that artillery couldn't hit - but one assumes they're a different engagement scenario.
Several of the US Senators who went to the recent classified briefing spoke of very thorough and considered planning for US/SK military options.
EDIT - Jeez that MLRS is a nasty piece of kit! Love the nickname `The Grid Square removal system"!
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: RPVI
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Poorly handled by Trump from the outset.
No need for shouting names in public. The PRC should have been quitely told at the outset that there was going to be a regime change in PDRK. Its just a matter of whether the PRC wants to organise it with a new regime that is acceptable to them or the US / ROK do it - the hard way if needs must.
No need for shouting names in public. The PRC should have been quitely told at the outset that there was going to be a regime change in PDRK. Its just a matter of whether the PRC wants to organise it with a new regime that is acceptable to them or the US / ROK do it - the hard way if needs must.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well some Korean guys I had lunch with recently were split - one wanted to unify the motherland ASAP at whatever the cost, another couldn't see the point of beggaring themselves to take over several million losers and the third was worreid they'd all finish up in a car crash and poor......
Join Date: May 2002
Location: No longer a hot and sandy place....but back to the UK for an indefinite period
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have worked in SK. Most of the larger companies have monthly drills to instil in the employees how to react in the event of a war with the North. It is a threat that they have been living with for a number of years.
Sadly, I cannot see a good outcome of war breaking out in the peninsular.
Sadly, I cannot see a good outcome of war breaking out in the peninsular.
Looks like the Fat Wun is pissin off his best neighbor.
Credit to JB:
For 1st time, North Korea directly threatens vital ally China
North Korea media directly threatens China with "grave" consequences over nuclear standoff - CBS News
Credit to JB:
For 1st time, North Korea directly threatens vital ally China
North Korea media directly threatens China with "grave" consequences over nuclear standoff - CBS News
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: RPVI
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ken, in theory, but it would become a classic attrition exchange.
The winner would be the one with the most guns.
Could make an interesting computer game. A fires 100 guns. B counter fires 75 and eliminates 100. A retaliated with 100 and eliminates 75 and so on. The skill being to use and lose less guns.
The winner would be the one with the most guns.
Could make an interesting computer game. A fires 100 guns. B counter fires 75 and eliminates 100. A retaliated with 100 and eliminates 75 and so on. The skill being to use and lose less guns.
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: RPVI
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ken, in theory, but it would become a classic attrition exchange.
The winner would be the one with the most guns.
Could make an interesting computer game. A fires 100 guns. B counter fires 75 and eliminates 100. A retaliated with 100 and eliminates 75 and so on. The skill being to use and lose less guns.
The winner would be the one with the most guns.
Could make an interesting computer game. A fires 100 guns. B counter fires 75 and eliminates 100. A retaliated with 100 and eliminates 75 and so on. The skill being to use and lose less guns.
Another major concern is the unknown status of the PDRK nuclear arsenal.
How many nuclear warheads are available? Does the PDRK have the political will to use them and accept the consequences? (Given the dodgy haircut on the great fat one you cannot but help wonder if he is a couple of peas short of a pod.) Bearing in mind that they are not necessarily limited to conventional delivery means such as aircraft, missiles and artillery, how can they be delivered and to where? (Again we are not necessarily limited to locations within the Korean locality. For examples sake, what if bombs were loaded into merchant ships and sailed in plain sight into distant harbours and detonated?)
Evertonian
Even if the DPRK has superiority in the number of artillery they are limited in their mobility. I strongly suspect that US / ROK airpower will ensure that the DPRK will rapidly be decimated in any shooting war. A major concern for the ROK is that they will most likely survive long enough to give anything within range a very hard time for a week or two.
Another major concern is the unknown status of the PDRK nuclear arsenal.
How many nuclear warheads are available? Does the PDRK have the political will to use them and accept the consequences? (Given the dodgy haircut on the great fat one you cannot but help wonder if he is a couple of peas short of a pod.) Bearing in mind that they are not necessarily limited to conventional delivery means such as aircraft, missiles and artillery, how can they be delivered and to where? (Again we are not necessarily limited to locations within the Korean locality. For examples sake, what if bombs were loaded into merchant ships and sailed in plain sight into distant harbours and detonated?)
Another major concern is the unknown status of the PDRK nuclear arsenal.
How many nuclear warheads are available? Does the PDRK have the political will to use them and accept the consequences? (Given the dodgy haircut on the great fat one you cannot but help wonder if he is a couple of peas short of a pod.) Bearing in mind that they are not necessarily limited to conventional delivery means such as aircraft, missiles and artillery, how can they be delivered and to where? (Again we are not necessarily limited to locations within the Korean locality. For examples sake, what if bombs were loaded into merchant ships and sailed in plain sight into distant harbours and detonated?)
Turin
Wish I had your sense of optimism. This is a nation that in the recent past sunk a SK navy ship, a bellicose action that killed many. Pretty sure they don't use the same calculus as the rest of us in their actions. We've come to learn that Muslim terrorists don't place the same value on life, the same could very well apply to the Norks leadership.
Wish I had your sense of optimism. This is a nation that in the recent past sunk a SK navy ship, a bellicose action that killed many. Pretty sure they don't use the same calculus as the rest of us in their actions. We've come to learn that Muslim terrorists don't place the same value on life, the same could very well apply to the Norks leadership.
I'm just being pragmatic.
NK will not risk absolute destruction by starting a war it can't win.
NK doesn't have any oil so the comparison with the Middle East dictatorships doesn't wash.
Now, if we suddenly find that NK is sponsoring a bunch of brainwashed fools to go and blow themselves up in the name of... er, atheist doctrine?
They have folks just as radicalized as any IED wearing Muslim. When their operatives have been discovered, suicide seems to be preferred over capture. Not long ago Japanese were flying into ships for their emperor. Extremist motivation can come from more than religion.
Your premise about remaining in power, not to sure. Other than pointing out a western philosophy about survival, I see nothing to indicate it applies to the Norks leadership.
Your premise about remaining in power, not to sure. Other than pointing out a western philosophy about survival, I see nothing to indicate it applies to the Norks leadership.
Last edited by West Coast; 6th May 2017 at 14:49.