Strike on North Korea [Archive] - Page 4 - SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

Delgard

10-14-17, 09:24 AM

In relation to the JSF and Korea I found that the JSF has been going on for 4-5 years.

As of AUG 2016, “The F-35 program continues to grow and accelerate as we complete additional flight testing and increase deliveries to our U.S. and partner warfighters," said Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, F-35 Joint Program Executive Officer. More than 250 F-35 pilots and 2,400 aircraft maintainers from six nations were trained and more than 110 jets are jointly under construction at both the U.S. and Italian production facilities.

F-35s were flying at eight operating locations: Edwards Air Force Base, California, Eglin AFB, Florida, Hill AFB, Utah, Luke AFB, Arizona, Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, South Carolina, MCAS Yuma, Arizona, Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland, and Nellis AFB, Nevada. Jets are also flown at two F-35 depot locations at MCAS Cherry Point, North Carolina, and the Ogden Air Logistics Complex at Hill AFB, Utah.

“The F-35 program continues to grow and accelerate as we complete additional flight testing and increase deliveries to our U.S. and partner warfighters," said Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, F-35 Joint Program Executive Officer. “The next 50,000 hours will be achieved much quicker as we double the size of the F-35 fleet worldwide in the next three years alone."

Plans called for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to get its first overseas deployment in 2017 to Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni. Air Force F-35s probably would head to four bases: Misawa, Japan; Kadena, Japan; Osan Air Base, Korea; and Kunsan Air Base, Korea. The ones at Iwakuni are the ones that I heard about when I was in Japan. I was a big news item there.

These Stateside locations are decisions by service as presented in Aug 2016;

Air Force
Burlington Air Guard Station (AGS), Vermont*
Hill Air Force Base (AFB), Utah*
Jacksonville AGS, Florida
McEntire Joint National Guard Base (JNGB), South Carolina
Mountain Home AFB, Idaho
Shaw AFB, South Carolina

Marine Corps
Yuma MCAS, Arizona

Navy
Lenoore NAS, California

Note: Obviously, Homeland Security aircraft flying out of ANG bases have some priority. The Italian factory is probably servicing European orders and Japan has started receiving. It won't happen overnight, but the General (Aug 2016) stated that over 250 have been built.

As to a Korean deployment, I suspect that the U.S. today, can get 100 forward deployed. Those left behind would consolidate their missions to cover priority missions, If anyone lives near these places, news would be good. When I suggested possible locations I thought more that each Theater COCOM would get a stateside-based squadron and not the Homeland Security needs or I suppose that could be based and do both missions.

For this discussion I thought more about Korea.

ikalugin

10-14-17, 03:44 PM

Oberon

10-15-17, 09:03 AM

Oberon, yes we use storable propellants.

The trade offs tend to be that liquid fueled missiles would have greater payload all other factors being the same while being somewhat more complex mechanically and having a longer burn time.

I guess it's that maintainence upkeep that discourages other nations from going down the liquid propellant route for things like SLBMs, that and things like K-219 as well I'd wager. The Bulava is an interesting case though since it's a three stage SLBM that uses both solid fuel and liquid fuel as propellant. Probably that complexity which coupled with manufacturing faults caused the initial high failure rate.

So what liquid fuel do the new SLBMs use? Presumably something more stable than the UDMH/NTO mixture of the R-27s?

Getting back to the DPRK, a mixture of US force is heading to the ROK this week, the Ronald Reagan and the Michigan, and a load of US aerial assets heading for a defence expo:

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2017/10/15/0301000000AEN20171015002100315.html?utm_content=bu ffer43bf7&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

The DPRK meanwhile has been playing TEL shuffle, so something might be in the offing.

Delgard

10-15-17, 11:50 AM

Yonhap is a decent service. Any bias still needs to be watched for, though. Basic news, sans editorial commentary, is noticeably clearer.

ikalugin

10-15-17, 01:06 PM

I think the primary reason is path dependence, back in 60s when US made the decision to go all solid fuelled it did so because they perceived solid fuelled missiles as being more reliable/easy to maintain.

By 70s/80s Soviets solved the reliability issues with new generation of weapons (ie R29 series).

Bulava is a solid fuel missile (made by the company that never desighned SLBMs btw), unless you count the bus.

Rockstar

10-15-17, 02:39 PM

"Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says President Donald Trump wants him to push forward on diplomacy with North Korea “until the first bomb drops.”

Until?

Tillerson’s comments on CNN’s “State of the Union” program on Sunday apparently weren’t meant literally as a timeline for war, as he preceded that quote by saying, “He has made it clear to me to continue my diplomatic efforts,” and that those efforts “will continue until the first bomb drops.”"

:har: why am I reminded of this? (from one of my favorite movies)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=74&v=R3Igz5SfBCE

Delgard

10-15-17, 03:24 PM

It gets Trump out of a deadline. Yes, there are a lot of naval and air forces going to SK this week, but it does not tie him down. Also, NK has not done anything in 30 days. I do wonder if a decision has been made to shoot down missiles that overfly Japan, though. That will up the gambit.

mapuc

10-15-17, 04:03 PM

Some hours ago I read this in a Danish news paper (Berlingske)

I have used google translate

"
The editor Consider

The fear of nuclear war

Not since the worst period of the Cold War, have there been a greater fear of nuclear war between the United States and North Korea, than it is now. The uncertainty is not made less by the fact that the media are filled with more or less solve stories about chaos in the White House.
There are actually also speculation about President Donald Trump mental stamina to withstand such a crisis, spiced with speculation about what will happen if the unthinkable should happen - that Trump in rage orders a nuclear attack on North Korea, and his generals and top ministers are against it, but in reality powerless once the order is given.

Of course, it is far out, we think in Europe that this fear has got the dimensions it has. But the Americans are bombarded daily by a combination of new verbal and concrete war threats from North Korea paired with counterparts from Trumps twitter account.
And as said with American media, there is a lot of speculation about how the collaborative climate really is in the White House, where one day rumors that Foreign Minister Rex Tillerson is on his way out for the next day to know that It is the Chief of Staff of the White House, John Kelly, who has had enough. The trained general apparently does not fully control Trump.
This may again cause concern for a population that may also suffer from violent twitter outbreaks from the president against soon one and soon the other politician who thrashed on his nerves .

In the midst of all this, China has no real clue about the situation with North Korea, in addition, Chinese does not seem to have much control over North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un.
He is able to play with the fire both in relation to the United States and China, without it having any real consequences. One must say that it is well done by a young man who lives his own life in a world built around a goddess of the dynasty founded by Kim's grandfather.

Several calculations show that if the war breaks out, one million. people will lose their lives in the first 24 hours of such a war. So serious are the consequences if nuclear weapons are used.

So the big question is how to negotiate with a North Korea who is not interested in negotiating. Trump has ridiculed his foreign minister to try to talk to North Korea at all and said that it is, of course, a waste of time.
But Tillerson has more than suggested that the United States has an opening and can talk to the regime in North Korea.
Perhaps closer to the country's foreign minister, Ri Yong-ho, who has been most active, both with warlike outcomes and more thoughtful opinions, but is still prepared to speak.

Kim Jong-un is out of reach. Unfortunately, it seems that so is Trump. The US president is currently busy repuding another Republican politician who has questioned his capacity as president. No wonder the Americans keep their breath.

I can't say if this Editor is right in his considering. if he is, then the question is who among the staff in the White house have enough nerve to stay calm when it is really needed-Is it Rex Tillerson ?

Markus

Oberon

10-15-17, 04:40 PM

I do wonder if a decision has been made to shoot down missiles that overfly Japan, though. That will up the gambit.

Risky, since by the time they're going over Japan they're some 600-700km high, which is higher than anything ever intercepted by AEGIS before.

I think the primary reason is path dependence, back in 60s when US made the decision to go all solid fuelled it did so because they perceived solid fuelled missiles as being more reliable/easy to maintain.

That's a fair point, the infrastructure is all in place for liquid fueled missiles in Russia so I guess if they haven't broken it.

Bulava is a solid fuel missile (made by the company that never desighned SLBMs btw), unless you count the bus.

Yeah, I meant the bus. :yep:

Aktungbby

10-15-17, 06:12 PM

I'm sure that if we ask Kim Jong-un nicely he'll stand down and hand himself over to be tried by the international courts. :yep: Ridiculous! The arrest warrant for his half-brother's VXatious Malaysian murder being my idea.... Nonetheless, I have a much simpler solution: http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/599d5075d0302048f653ba99-1134/kim%20wall%20submarine.jpgIf only we could hire Peter Madsen of the Nautilus to skipper the 'other' Kim's submarine...http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/6e46c82b3ddbf875b5f31107902f4e3f

Delgard

10-15-17, 06:43 PM

But will the firing of another missile over Japan prompt a response? What will cross the Trump line, the Chinese line, what about the world line.

As to a single Seal Team, There are about 6-700 SOF personnel in the immediate area. But, at this point they don't do squiddley when nukes are considered.

It is about gamesmanship.

Rockstar

10-15-17, 07:22 PM

Hit or miss attempting to intercept an ICBM with THAAD or a SM3 block iia might not be such a good idea.

I think there is the possibility of a miss and should that occur it could lead to embarrassment and more fuel for the NorKs propaganda machine.

However even worse, if one was fired and it successfully intercepted that ICBM. I can only imagine the fear which would overcome more than just a few nations. As they witness the most powerful nation in world not only with its own intercontinental ballistic nuclear arsenal, but now with the capability of shooting down everyone else's.

Delgard

10-16-17, 08:41 AM

Some General, at the SK IDEX, said that their were 187 active F35s. He also said that SK will receive 40 of them starting next year.

Just clarity and the latest.

Oberon

10-17-17, 02:24 PM

New SSB under construction in the DPRK, said to be bigger than their current SSB.

https://thediplomat.com/2017/10/the-sinpo-c-class-a-new-north-korean-ballistic-missile-submarine-is-under-construction/

Also, a good article on the DPRKs missile ranges here:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-16/north-korea-missile-range-map/8880894

Delgard

10-17-17, 04:30 PM

And they are just now talking about it? But, The Diplomat writes quality as compared to quickness.

Oberon

10-17-17, 08:10 PM

And they are just now talking about it? But, The Diplomat writes quality as compared to quickness.

Yeah, there's been suspicions for a while, but at least they've taken the time to put it together. Will be interesting when we get some pics of the new boat, I doubt they'll put the missiles in the sail if they're hoping to get four of them in there, IIRC most sail launched boomers didn't have more than three in there. So either they'll have quite a long conning tower, or they're going to stick the things in a missile compartment in the hull...in which case will they go for a hump based design like the Delta and Type 094, or a flatter surface like an Ohio or Triomphant.

I'm also interested in how they're going to deploy these new subs, since they're not exactly going to be the most stealthy things around, so you can pretty much guarantee that each SSB will get an ROK tail as soon as it leaves port, probably a USN one too for that matter, maybe even a JMSDF one, and any of those tails will blow it out of the water as soon as it even looks funny at South Korea. So the plan to deploy it south of the THAAD and then destroy the THAAD system by attacking from its blindspot is a bit of a suicide mission. If I were KJU I'd be looking into creating a bastion for them somewhere in the western sea...but this then brings up another question. What would they be used for? Since the usual idea of an at sea deterrent is to have either a second strike capability (in the case of the US) or a strike capability which cannot easily be destroyed (in the case of the UK) so either the DPRK is going to use the SSBs as a back-up in case his land based forces get taken out, or he's got them as a second strike capability along side his first strike capability in his land based forces...in which case, a second strike against who? By the time the dust has settled after the first exchange the ROK will be wrecked, Japan badly damaged and the damage more spread out the further away from the DPRK you get...but the Pukguksong SLBM cannot reach the US from the DPRK, and the Gorae would be committing suicide if it tried to approach the US west coast...so who would that second strike ability be used against? Any US invasion force mustering points perhaps? Or perhaps the size of the new Gorae is to future-proof it for the next generation of Puksuksong missiles which might have increased range. :hmmm: Ideally, we know that the goal of the DPRK would be to have SLBMs equivalent to the Russian R-39, so they can put their SSBs into a bastion and have the ability to hit the US from there.

I think they'll be able to do it, and sooner than we'd expect, it took the PRC about 20-30 years to go from the JL-1 to the JL-2, which has a longer range than the R-39, I give the DPRK 10 years maximum before they have the missile...maybe another five for the submarine, another ten if they decide to make it an SSBN rather than SSB.

Delgard

10-17-17, 08:32 PM

I doubt that it would make it past the 12 mile limit. There are just to many observers. To build a "sufficient" boat would take money and a fair bit of time.

A sub can't go in a cave and come out somewhere else. Just too many observers.

A mobile TEL has a much better chance of survivability, and cheaper.

vienna

10-17-17, 11:55 PM

The estimates and evaluations of if and when NK, or any other nation, may be skewed by the person or persons doing the evaluation and the extent of their knowledge of attendant technologies. If the 'evaluator' isn't fully up on the tech, they may underestimate and/or misread a situation. This may be what has happened with NK. It seems to happen, over and over again, that the estimates and evaluations of NK capabilities have fallen short. Given the extremely rapid progression of tech and the increased means of its dissemination, licit and illicit, with NK it may be better to not rely on the old evaluations of "Well, they're just another poor, backward country", and begin to deal with the situation on the basis NK may very well be much farther along than the "experts" care to admit...

<O>

Platapus

10-18-17, 03:20 PM

A mobile TEL has a much better chance of survivability, and cheaper.

And with the terrain, easier to hide and harder to kill

Delgard

10-19-17, 07:20 AM

Just noted this morning from Foreign Policy magazine.

U.S. warships on alert. After a North Korean missile test in mid-September, a U.S. warship patrolling the Sea of Japan received a warning order, or WARNO, to be prepared to fire Tomahawk missiles at North Korean targets, a military source told (http://link.foreignpolicy.com/click/10986329.93558/aHR0cDovL2ZvcmVpZ25wb2xpY3kuY29tLzIwMTcvMTAvMTgvYX JtYWdlZGRvbi1ieS1hY2NpZGVudC1ub3J0aC1rb3JlYS1udWNs ZWFyLXdhci1taXNzaWxlcy8/5254400ec16bcfa46f6f014bBf1de110f) FP’s Jenna McLaughlin, Dan De Luce and Elias Groll.

“It’s not unheard of to do that,” a former senior defense official said. “But I would say it is a fairly significant indicator that the possibility of using Tomahawks is rising.”

More from FP (http://link.foreignpolicy.com/click/10986329.93558/aHR0cDovL2ZvcmVpZ25wb2xpY3kuY29tLzIwMTcvMTAvMTgvYX JtYWdlZGRvbi1ieS1hY2NpZGVudC1ub3J0aC1rb3JlYS1udWNs ZWFyLXdhci1taXNzaWxlcy8/5254400ec16bcfa46f6f014bCf1de110f): “If North Korea launched missiles at Guam, Japan, or South Korea, ‘you would certainly want your Tomahawks ready in a fast-moving scenario like that should the president or secretary of defense make the judgement to respond with an offensive strike,’ said the former senior official, who is familiar with Pentagon contingency planning.”

Just for SA...

Oberon

10-19-17, 09:04 AM

Senior Hill Republicans think a 'limited strike' is coming:

https://twitter.com/Dalzell60/status/920997151924252672

https://media.giphy.com/media/U19Bwu85X2vPG/giphy.gif

Mr Quatro

10-19-17, 09:09 AM

Senior Hill Republicans think a 'limited strike' is coming:

You didn't say it ... you just linked it, but no way will a limited strike work to find out what NK would do. All hell would break loose before Kim Jong-un would loose face and let a limited strike violate his country.

Oberon

10-19-17, 09:13 AM

You didn't say it ... you just linked it, but no way will a limited strike work to find out what NK would do. All hell would break loose before Kim Jong-un would loose face and let a limited strike violate his country.

I agree.

Let's hope that it's just a false rumour going round.

vienna

10-19-17, 09:18 AM

I also hope its not true...

...however, Trump does need something to distract from his other fails...

<O>

Oberon

10-19-17, 11:10 AM

Trump does need something to distract from his other fails...

Dread to think what's going to happen when Mueller finishes... :doh:

Mr Quatro

10-19-17, 11:25 AM

I also hope its not true...

...however, Trump does need something to distract from his other fails...

<O>

John Candy's last movie Canadian Bacon comes to mind :yep:

The U.S. President, low in the opinion polls, gets talked into raising his popularity by trying to start a cold war against Canada.

The US economy is in a rut, and so is the president's approval rating. What we need is a good war, but the Russians aren't interested. Hey -- how about that big polite country to the north?

Rockstar

10-19-17, 11:45 AM

As ol' George once said: "The only use for an atomic bomb is to keep somebody else from using one"

I suspect any limited strike by the U.S. would be conventional in nature. If as some say Fatboy is so mentally unstable and self absorbed he wouldn't hesitate to use nuclear weapons for his own selfish suicidal desires. Then it would be best to remove such a man from the world stage immediately. Because the future is darker than the present idea of removing fatboy from power today.

mapuc

10-19-17, 12:28 PM

So far I have thought that it would be KJU who would fire the first bullet. Now by reading the lastest comments and links I start to get a second thought about this.

If USA strikes first I'm 99.99 % sure it will be with conventional type of weapons. If KJU decide to revenge this, which I'm very sure of he will.

Then the questions will be:

1. Where will he strike first ?
2. When will he make this strike ?
3. What kind of weapon will he use ?

If KJU decide to use nukes another question comes into my mind

What will USA response be ?
Will they response with Nukes ?
Will they increase their bombing campaign against NK using both smart and dumb bombs ?

Markus

Onkel Neal

10-19-17, 01:08 PM

Things should've never gotten to this point.

Delgard

10-19-17, 01:33 PM

I have only heard of one nuclear processing facility. But, to stop the fuel is to stop further production from this point. That does not eliminate, but it meets international acceptance...I believe.

To chase down produced warheads is futile. The are most likely moving at this moment.

I just heard G. W. Bush and his senior advisors talking in support of democratic ideals.

Oh, BTW, the economy is cruising.

Oberon

10-19-17, 02:14 PM

Then the questions will be:

1. Where will he strike first ?

Hard to say for certain, I think a lot will depend on how damaging the strike is. If it's just a single missile destroyed then he might be content with just some firing over the DMZ. If it's a decapitation attempt then you can be sure that the response will be a lot stronger. The problem with asymmetric escalation is that it starts the nuclear ball rolling at a very early stage, but it is also a greater deterrent because your opponent doesn't have many ways they can strike at you without risking immediate full nuclear retaliation.
So the options range from shells across the DMZ, to a conventional explosive warhead on Guam, right up to the Grand Tour which will come in one of two ways. Either he'll launch all but the ICBMs, hitting targets in South Korea, Japan and Guam, and then threaten the US with the ICBMs if they don't end the war now, or he'll fire everything in a use it or lose it style scenario.

2. When will he make this strike ?

Again, hard to be certain, but two scenarios come to mind. It'll either be before a US strike or after one. If North Korea figures that the US is about to start hitting its nuclear infrastructure then it may well decide to act first in order to get its punches in while it still has them. You see in the stand-off in Korea whoever goes first gets an advantage, so it's in the best interests of all the players to be the first one to fire...but there's the knowledge that when they do fire they will create a firestorm that will be hard to stop.

3. What kind of weapon will he use ?
If it doesn't escalate then it'll be conventional weaponry, but it's more likely to be nuclear, biological and chemical. So your standard nuclear fare plus 2,500 to 5,000 tons of nerve and blister agents, and then there's anthrax, VX, Smallpox, Cholera, the plague, and all other kinds of lovely stuff. All of which will be sprinkled liberally over Japan and South Korea, quite possibly over Guam, Hawaii and the US too for that matter.

If KJU decide to use nukes another question comes into my mind

What will USA response be ?

Well, it will probably start with a gravity dropped thermonuclear device over Pyongyang, and the permission for forces bombing North Korea to use nuclear 'bunker buster' weapons against hardened sites.

Will they response with Nukes ?

Very likely.

Will they increase their bombing campaign against NK using both smart and dumb bombs ?

Definitely. They will throw the whole kitchen sink at North Korea.

The key question which remains after all the missiles have flown though is 'what next?'. Will the US have to march to the Yalu in order to end the war? Will China get involved in order to prevent the US from going that far?

It could be that the opening millions of deaths are just the first casualties in a drawn out war and occupation which would last for decades.

mapuc

10-19-17, 02:28 PM

Thank you so much for your answer Oberon.

We have heard so much about KJU. On the other hand we may not really know how good he is when it comes to lead his troops and his strategic skills.

Or does USA/SK/JP and others have a very good insight on how good or bad he is.

Markus

ikalugin

10-19-17, 03:52 PM

It appears that some, due to the apparent conventional superiority of the US, assume that nuclear weapons deter only other WMDs and forget the fairly recent historical example of early cold war era NATO, where nuclear weapons were used to deter a perceived conventional threat from being realised.

So yes, in the current situation, DPRK uses nuclear weapons to deter a conventional attack. As such, it must keep it's deterent credible and thus allow no doubt that nuclear weapons would be used if any significant attack (that their conventional cant handle) occurs.

The reasons behind this stance are simple - nuclear deterence is cheaper and DPRK is not exactly a wealthy country.

Morever I do not see any incentive not to use non strategic and strategic nuclear weapons if a significant attack occurs - as Yugoslavia, Iraq, Lybia, Syria show once you are in trouble without backup you are dead anyway.

Delgard

10-19-17, 04:43 PM

Mupac, I don't know if an all out situation will occur first. Containment is a strong consideration considering the amount of death/ destruction. Especially on the side of the Americans. Clean-up will still be expected and WMD is...messy.

Things can change. Things seem to have been quiet, comparatively anyway. For me, I am glad that a tough stance is being taken. The world has let NK slide for a long time and NK comes across as radically irresponsible to a high degree. The use of VX seems to have awaken countries to the danger of NK, not to mention longer range missiles.

I wish we had a tougher stance on the cyber attacks, though.

mapuc

10-19-17, 05:00 PM

Oberon

10-19-17, 08:13 PM

Most important-I truly hope they will find a peaceful solution.
(I know I'm a dreamer)

If the first shot is fired the situation could in the worse case, escalate very very fast within hours instead of 1-2 day or days.

It can goes from a local showdown to a would-out showdown within hours

That's why it's so important to find a peaceful solution. A war shall always be the last outcome in a crisis.

Markus

There are a lot of unknowns in this situation, if the US does launch a limited conventional strike and does not aim for a decapitation strike or target the nuclear weapons where they are stored, then Kim Jong-un may decide on a limited conventional retaliation against US bases in the ROK, Japan or Guam.
It's very much a game of bluff, like most nuclear confrontations, neither side wants to use them but if they don't use them when they said that they would then it undermines the deterrent effect of the weapons. Not to mention that given the knife-edge political theatre of the DPRK if KJU showed too much weakness then he'd suffer a 7mm brain hemorrhage and someone else would take over, potentially his sister puppeted by the generals.
One has to remember that Kim is stuck between the US on one side, and his own generals on the other. When Kim Jong-il took control after Kim Il-sung died back in the 1990s, one of the first things he had to do was put down a military coup. Fast forward to the last days of Kim Jong-il and what do you see, the Cheonan incident and the shelling of Yeonpyeong island, not to mention more than a few purges in the DPRK military, all attempts by KJU to solidify his control over the military. Now I'm sure that many shed no tears for Kim Jong-un, but I'm not so convinced that a) a civil war is healthy for the Korean peninsula and eastern Asia as a whole, and b) that there is no risk that whatever replaces Kim Jong-un won't be even worse than him.

So yeah, I'm a dreamer with you right here, but both sides have pushed forward this escalation, and neither side are willing to take the embarrassment that de-escalating it would result in, so slowly but surely on this road, we're all heading for one place.

Mr Quatro

10-19-17, 11:10 PM

We have US Army intell, US Air Force intell, US Navy intell, CIA intell, NSA intell and who know how many think tanks.

Would it not be easier to just put a price on Kim (rocket man's) head?

A price or a prize if you will to take him out ... no more problem with nuclear development of a way to end life on earth as we know it?

Cost of a war in the billions of dollars to wage one and the billions of dollars to repair the damages from one plus the tens of thousands of lives lost.

Not to make fun of the situation, but Trump can't make that many phone calls to the parents and wives of the lost servicemen now can he?

Take the dude out before he causes anymore trouble :yep:

ikalugin

10-20-17, 02:45 AM

Not really, placing a bounty on his head would not work.

The simple question you have to ask - what would happen if the glorious leader dies? Would it change the situation, or would it lead to another person taking his place, a person that knows that the west is after his head and thus has no insentive to negotiate?

Catfish

10-20-17, 06:58 AM

^ the problem seems to be that decaptating a head of the state is a no-no in internatioanl politics.
It is much better to let millions of ordinary people suffer and die, instead of removing a lunatic. It is also much easier to influence one person, instead of millions.

Rockstar

10-20-17, 07:34 AM

If you compare what's happening today to history its nothing new. The rhetoric always gets ramped up every single time the U.S. and S.Korea conduct war games. Nothing to see here move along.

ikalugin

10-20-17, 08:26 AM

^ the problem seems to be that decaptating a head of the state is a no-no in internatioanl politics.
It is much better to let millions of ordinary people suffer and die, instead of removing a lunatic.
The king is dead - all hail the king.

By removing a person you belive to be a lunatic you would either install another lunatic or destroy the state.

Oberon

10-20-17, 11:27 AM

The king is dead - all hail the king.

By removing a person you belive to be a lunatic you would either install another lunatic or destroy the state.

Yup, lessons that should have been learnt at least twice already.

That doesn't make what the lunatic in question is doing any better mind you, although one has to be careful in who they label as a lunatic since, let's face it, there's more than a few people who consider a certain major world power to have a lunatic for a leader, and yet no-one would consider leading a war to overthrow them. However, the conditions in the DPRK are certainly a crime of their own, but it's questionable how much they would be improved through the total destruction of North Korea and the ruining of South Korea.

Onkel Neal

10-20-17, 11:31 AM

The king is dead - all hail the king.

By removing a person you belive to be a lunatic you would either install another lunatic or destroy the state.

Or, break the cycle of lunacy and there is a possibility his replacement will be a halfway rational person. Think of Kruschev after replacing Stalin

ikalugin

10-20-17, 12:44 PM

Or, break the cycle of lunacy and there is a possibility his replacement will be a halfway rational person. Think of Kruschev after replacing Stalin
In your example the "lunatic" was not removed through violence by an external party.

Nor was Khrushev a better leader than Stalin.

Oberon

10-20-17, 02:11 PM

I think the key difference here, which is also highlighted in the comparison between Krushchev and Stalin is the differences in what the west considers to be a decent leader and what the east does. The west tends to look favourably on Krushchev because of his more liberal policies and the de-stalinisation process, whereas he is seen in Russia as being quite a weak figure.
The sort of person that we in the west might want to run North Korea would probably be overthrown by Koreans fairly quickly or killed.
Plus there's the chaos that would be caused by the removal of the top figures of North Korea, think of Iraq but this time the terrorists have ICBMs.
We really should learn from our past mistakes before we make new ones. :yep:

ikalugin

10-20-17, 02:48 PM

I think in this context we forget the Cuban missile crisis and his various experiments (ie agricultural ones).

Just because he wasnt as demonised as Stalin was doesnt make him a nice person (within the "western" liberal moral system ofc).

The sort of person that we in the west might want to run North Korea would probably be overthrown by Koreans fairly quickly or killed.
Plus there's the chaos that would be caused by the removal of the top figures of North Korea, think of Iraq but this time the terrorists have ICBMs.
We really should learn from our past mistakes before we make new ones.
With that I agree, I believe that the best leaders come through gradual change in the system.

I think it is worth mentioning not only the obvious example in case of the OIF - Saddam US did not prosecute him for gasing Kurds by the way), but also the old Baathist generals, who then formed ISIS core.

Catfish

10-20-17, 03:09 PM

[...] With that I agree, I believe that the best leaders come through gradual change in the system. [...]

Too bad that gradual change in systems can take centuries in certain countries, and the lifespan of people (as well as their possibility to remember certain things) is so short. Propaganda also helps to prolong an existing system and justify murderous ones, of course.

..I think it is worth mentioning not only the obvious example in case of the OIF - Saddam US did not prosecute him for gasing Kurds by the way), but also the old Baathist generals, who then formed ISIS core.

The US has sided with some pretty bad governments in the past, to reach certain political and trade goals, Realpolitik if you so want. Not nice, but which country would you prefer to live in.

ikalugin

10-20-17, 04:22 PM

Realpolitik is fine, the problem (in my view) is when it tries to coexist with ideologically driven stuff, as it creates double standards.

Mr Quatro

10-20-17, 11:27 PM

I had to look that one up:

re·al·po·li·tik
rāˈälpōliˌtēk/Submit
noun
a system of politics or principles based on practical rather than moral or ideological considerations.

Sometimes it takes years to find out that they lied, but lie they do do :yep:

Delgard

10-25-17, 07:00 AM

F-35A scheduled for first operational deployment to Indo-Asia-Pacific

Pacific Air Forces Public Affairs / Published October 24, 2017

JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR-HICKAM, Hawaii (AFNS) -- Approximately 300 Airmen and 12 F-35A Lightning IIs from Hill Air Force Base, Utah's 34th Fighter Squadron are set to deploy to Kadena Air Base, Japan for a six month rotation. The aircraft and supporting personnel are scheduled to arrive at Kadena AB in early November 2017.

This marks U.S. Pacific Command's first operational tasking for the F-35A and builds upon the U.S. Air Force fifth-generation stealth fighter's successful debut in the Indo-Asia-Pacific at the Seoul International Aerospace and Defense Exhibition earlier this month.

"The F-35A gives the joint warfighter unprecedented global precision attack capability against current and emerging threats while complementing our air superiority fleet," said Gen. Terrence J. O'Shaughnessy, Pacific Air Forces commander. "The airframe is ideally suited to meet our command's obligations, and we look forward to integrating it into our training and operations."

The F-35A is being deployed under USPACOM's theater security package program, which has been in operation since 2004. This long-planned deployment is designed to demonstrate the continuing U.S. commitment to stability and security in the region.

While a first in-theater for the F-35A, the Marine Corps F-35B variant has been stationed at Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Japan since January 2017.

Delgard

10-25-17, 07:08 AM

North Korean ballistic missile scientists carried out a static test of a new type of solid-fuel engine early last week, a U.S. government source with knowledge of North Korea’s ballistic missile programs told The Diplomat.

To date, large solid-fuel engines have been associated with North Korea’s Pukguksong (Polaris) family of ballistic missiles. The March 2016 engine was first seen on the KN11/Pukguksong-1 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM), which had started out as a liquid-fueled system and eventually shifted to a solid-fuel design.

In February 2017, North Korea flight-tested another solid-fuel missile: the medium-range KN15/Pukguksong-2, which was effectively a canisterized, ground-launched version of the Pukguksong-1 operating out of an integrated transporter-erector-launcher.

Kim Jong-un declared the Pukguksong-2 operational earlier this year after a second flight test and called for its mass production. U.S. military intelligence has detected signs that the Pukguksong-2 has entered serial production in North Korea, The Diplomat has learned.

It’s unclear what missile the engine tested in October 2017 may be associated with. The Diplomat was unable to ascertain if the engine tested was similar in size to the March 2016 test or if it may have been larger. However, U.S. military intelligence has assessed the engine to be different from what was tested in March 2016.

However, that Kim Jong-un presumably did not observe last week’s solid-fuel engine test may suggest that it involved an iterative design on the existing Pukguksong-1/2 engines. Had Kim observed the test, North Korean state media would likely have announced his visit to the site and even released images.

Solid propellants will likely play an important role in the future development of North Korea’s ballistic missile program. At an April parade this year, North Korea demonstrated two large intercontinental-range ballistic missile-sized canisters that may suggest a longer-term aspiration for large road-mobile solid-fuel missiles like China’s DF-41 or Russia’s Topol-M.

Outside of the two flight-tested Pukguksong missiles, North Korea is known to only use solid propellants for its rocket artillery or the KN02/Toksa, a close-range ballistic missile.

Mr Quatro

10-25-17, 01:47 PM

Jimbuna

10-28-17, 08:18 AM

The threat of nuclear attack from North Korea is increasing, US Defence Secretary James Mattis said during a visit to South Korea.
Mr Mattis warned it would face a "massive military response" if it used nuclear weapons.
Separately, North Korea released a South Korean fishing boat which it said had been found in North Korean waters illegally.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-41787235

A small gesture of goodwill perhaps? :hmmm:

Delgard

10-28-17, 08:38 AM

"A small gesture of goodwill"? While it continues research and development?

Mr Quatro

11-02-17, 01:51 PM

Takes the problem to a whole new level: http://www.ibtimes.com/north-korea-possibly-readying-another-missile-test-report-says-2609524

“North Korean officers are trained to press their button without any further instructions from the general command if anything happens on their side,” Thae told the House Foreign Affairs Committee, according to the Associated Press. “We have to remember that tens of millions of South Korean population are living 70 to 80 kilometers away from the military demarcation line.”

Oberon

11-02-17, 02:05 PM

Takes the problem to a whole new level: http://www.ibtimes.com/north-korea-possibly-readying-another-missile-test-report-says-2609524

Not surprising. Fail Deadly.

ikalugin

11-02-17, 03:09 PM

You sort of have to make your system fail deadly if you cannot afford complex survivable/reliable/secure C3 systems.

Delgard

11-02-17, 04:04 PM

Yes, it says circumstantial. All those people at the testing site could just be diggers to clean out and rebuild.

The fuel rod refinement is a concern, though.

Yonhap has some good stuff, but I have not seen U.S. news picking up the story.

I hope for corroberative reporting.

Aktungbby

11-03-17, 12:16 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-41787235

A small gesture of goodwill perhaps? :hmmm: Separately, North Korea released a South Korean fishing boat which it said had been found in North Korean waters illegally.
The crew of 10 were released on Friday evening, South Korean officials said. Well he may have released the crew but he kept the boat for practice in walking on water....a trick which he has not yet quite mastered.:timeout: http://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Kim-Jong-Un-Im-On-A-Boat.jpg:()1:I imagine when he finally does, The Donald will B .... all a'twitter!:yep:

Delgard

11-03-17, 01:20 PM

An SK fishing boat is like a Mercedes compared to an NK fishing boat.

Last Spring, I read that SK used a tug to return a disabled NK fishing boat back to NK waters. It had no worth to keep.

It was a good act in front of the media.

STEED

11-05-17, 12:53 PM

Joint Chiefs say invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea

A Pentagon assessment has declared the only way to completely destroy all parts of North Korea's nuclear weapons programme is through a ground invasion.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-41878123

What do you guys in America make of this?

Rather troubling.

Platapus

11-05-17, 01:06 PM

Troubling, it's insane.
If the only objective is to destroy all of North Korea's weapon programs, then yes, I guess invasion and killing/destroying large parts of their country is the only way to be sure.

But that should not be the only objective. Perhaps a better objective is not to force North Korea into a position where they think the above is the US's only objective and that North Korea has "nothing to lose".

ikalugin

11-05-17, 02:02 PM

Just watched the "13 days" and this sort of reminds me of it.

mapuc

11-05-17, 02:19 PM

One thing I know for sure....China will never approve such action from USA.

Markus

Delgard

11-05-17, 02:20 PM

It is good to have doves and hawks. Obviously, the SEC State talks diplomacy and the JCS talks destroying the threat. The VEEP talks stability and, well, POTUS talks a tough position.

Their seems to be a long pause. If the U.S. rhetoric keeps NK from doing what they are doing for 4 years, that will be seen as an effective strategy.

NK needs to test missiles and warheads; without that, they slow down and permit China, Japan, and SK to better prepare.

I see it as NK's turn.

STEED

11-05-17, 02:22 PM

One thing I know for sure....China will never approve such action from USA.

Markus

China has made that very clear, if we strike first they will support NK. If NK strikes first they are on their own.

mapuc

11-05-17, 02:38 PM

China has made that very clear, if we strike first they will support NK. If NK strikes first they are on their own.

Not even if NK should strikes first, will they allow an American invasion of North Korea.

Markus

STEED

11-05-17, 02:48 PM

Not even if NK should strikes first, will they allow an American invasion of North Korea.

Markus

I doubt we need not bother with that as the Nukes probably be flying.

Delgard

11-05-17, 03:04 PM

Way down below China was discussed on and off.

For me, in learning, I think China has drifted a bit from just arbitrarily coming to NK's defense. They have drifted towards their own agenda since KJU took over. I think they see the world in color as compared to NKs black and white.

Just me.

Mr Quatro

11-05-17, 03:07 PM

As a military kind of thinker, opposed to a political thinker, I say we call their bluff ... China won't do a thing or risk war themselves.

They won't unleash their nuclear arsenal of weapons to defend poor little NK.

They will of course protest along with Russia and Trump will assert that that NK had it coming due to it's constant disregard for peace talks to put their weapons program on hold.

Gentlemen war is on the way ... I am sure of that. Before they have the ability to strike back in the numbers game of deadly nuclear tipped missiles. :o

This war is between good and evil ... it is good to stop evil before they can strike back and hurt the mother land.

One or two EMP strikes over NK should take out any accuracy of their launching a second attack.

Delgard

11-05-17, 03:08 PM

...(and so the CJCS speaks...)

:D

ikalugin

11-05-17, 04:05 PM

One or two EMP strikes over NK should take out any accuracy of their launching a second attack.
Implying that they need any of that to hit cities.

Delgard

11-05-17, 06:47 PM

I saw a nighttime satellite view of NK. Do they even have electricity?

:D

ikalugin

11-06-17, 12:03 AM

I saw a nighttime satellite view of NK. Do they even have electricity?

:D
Just pretend that they are too green to actually use it :D

Delgard

11-06-17, 08:06 AM

Just saw this in the news...I have thought on it often in the past.

"If the Pentagon wants to secure all of North Korea's nuclear weapons in the event of a conflict, it's going to have to send in lots of ground troops (http://link.foreignpolicy.com/click/11173284.92854/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cud2FzaGluZ3RvbnBvc3QuY29tL3dvcmxkL2 5hdGlvbmFsLXNlY3VyaXR5L3NlY3VyaW5nLW5vcnRoLWtvcmVh bi1udWNsZWFyLXNpdGVzLXdvdWxkLXJlcXVpcmUtYS1ncm91bm QtaW52YXNpb24tcGVudGFnb24tc2F5cy8yMDE3LzExLzA0LzMy ZDVmNmZhLWMwY2YtMTFlNy05N2Q5LWJkYWI1YTBhYjM4MV9zdG 9yeS5odG1s/5254400ec16bcfa46f6f014bBe6ddf812) to get the job done. That's the conclusion shared with lawmakers in a letter from vice director of the Joint Staff Rear Adm. Michael J. Dumont. Dumont also writes that North Korea would also consider the use of biological and chemical weapons in the event of a war with the United States."

Reason is that if U.S. forces flow into SK, those arrival sites (ports/airfields) would be prime targets for short/medium range missile(s)

ikalugin

11-06-17, 09:09 AM

China would love ground invasion of DPRK and massive US presense in Korea on it's border.

Delgard

11-06-17, 11:24 AM

I'm of the thought that China will come south to control a "buffer zone".

Platapus

11-08-17, 07:26 PM

This war is between good and evil

Which side will the US be on?

Buddahaid

11-09-17, 12:35 AM

Evilly good of course.

vienna

11-09-17, 04:55 PM

http://blogforarizona.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Trump_Strangelove.jpg

...unless, of course, bone spurs don't get in the way...

<O>

mapuc

11-09-17, 05:45 PM

56 days since last NK test

http://abcnews.go.com/International/repeated-tests-north-korea-launched-missile-56-days/story?id=51024512

Markus

Jimbuna

11-10-17, 07:42 AM

Trump BANS US flights from North Korea airspace after MISSILE almost hits passenger plane.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/877748/North-Korea-Donald-Trump-Kim-Jong-un-Pyongyang-China-Washington-President-USA-Japan

The decision comes after the hermit kingdom fired a missile on July 28 that came close to a plane carrying 323 passengers on board.

First time I've heard of it being called a 'hermit kingdom' :haha:

Aktungbby

11-10-17, 11:45 AM

https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/78/590x/secondary/North-Korea-North-Korea-Donald-Trump-North-Korea-Kim-Jong-un-North-Korea-Pyongyang-North-Korea-China-North-Korea-Washington-1124540.jpg
The term hermit kingdom can be used to refer to any country, organization or society which willfully walls itself off, either metaphorically or physically, from the rest of the world - but is particularly associated with North Korea.
Korea in the age of Joseon dynasty (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseon) was the subject of the first use of the term, in William Elliot Griffis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Elliot_Griffis)' 1882 book Corea: The Hermit Nation, and Korea was frequently described as a hermit kingdom until 1905 when it became a protectorate of Japan. The term is still commonplace throughout Korea and it is often used by Koreans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koreans) themselves to describe pre-modern Korea. Today, the term is often applied to North Korea (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea) in news media, and in 2009 it was used by United States former Secretary of State (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_State)Hillary Clinton (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseon)

Onkel Neal

11-14-17, 07:44 AM

North Korea: 3 US aircraft carriers creating 'worst ever' situation (http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/12/politics/us-navy-three-carrier-exercise-pacific/?iid=ob_lockedrail_bottomlist)

Something's up... three carriers in the same region?

ikalugin

11-14-17, 08:02 AM

Show of force?

Delgard

11-14-17, 08:42 AM

It is a command display.

Onkel Neal

11-14-17, 11:16 AM

I keep thinking of those articles that warn of the disaster that would follow the sinking of a US carrier and there are three of them out there! I don't have a lot of faith in the US Navy's ability to protect these assets after all the ship collisions they've had lately.

ikalugin

11-14-17, 11:56 AM

I won't be that pessemistic :)

Jimbuna

11-14-17, 01:12 PM

Gerald

11-14-17, 01:58 PM

A North Korean who defected at the heavily guarded Demilitarised Zone was shot at least five times and is in a critical condition, South Korea says.
The soldier crossed to the South Korean side of the Joint Security Area (JSA) in the village of Panmunjom on Monday.
He had driven near the JSA, but had to finish his journey by foot when a wheel came loose, the South said.
North Korean troops shot at him 40 times - but he made it across and was found under a pile of leaves, it added.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41979423
:doh:

Jimbuna

11-14-17, 02:29 PM

^Above thread merged to the already existing thread regarding NK.

Mr Quatro

11-14-17, 03:10 PM

Me neither but it would appear to have shut Kim up somewhat whilst Trump is on tour.

I fear what Rocket man will do if America turns on Trump to dump him.

Taunting is just 15 yards in football, but with Trump no telling what he will do. :o

Jimbuna

11-14-17, 03:19 PM

I fear what Rocket man will do if America turns on Trump to dump him.

Taunting is just 15 yards in football, but with Trump no telling what he will do. :o

I should imagine Kim would then have to try and guess what the military command response would be and if it is because of an attack against US territory or that of her allies I would presume either scenario would bring about almost identical consequences.

Mr Quatro

11-17-17, 05:02 PM

new NK submarine for rocket man to send out against imperial forces of America and it's allies

http://www.businessinsider.com/north-korea-ballistic-missile-submarine-2017-11

Satellite images taken this month of a North Korean naval shipyard indicate Pyongyang is pursuing an "aggressive schedule" to build its first operational ballistic missile submarine, a U.S. institute reported on Thursday.

Washington-based 38 North, a North Korea monitoring project, cited images taken on Nov. 5 showing activity at North Korea's Sinpo South Shipyard.

"The presence of what appear to be sections of a submarine's pressure hull in the yards suggests construction of a new submarine, possibly the SINPO-C ballistic missile submarine - the follow-on to the current SINPO-class experimental ballistic missile submarine,"

https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/zcs.EhcY5UxbMjNblBkSzw--/YXBwaWQ9eW15O3c9NjQwO3E9NzU7c209MQ--/http://media.zenfs.com/en-GB/homerun/the_telegraph_258/488fc611cfd44cf16af99f5211b44952

North Korea is also thought to be working on a solid-fuel missile for submarine launches.

Last month, The Diplomat magazine quoted a US government source as saying US military intelligence had detected a new diesel-electric submarine under construction at Sinpo and dubbed it the Sinpo-C.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/nintchdbpict000367510429.jpg?strip=all&w=903

Jimbuna

11-18-17, 08:34 AM

Let em build it, launch it, then 'disappear' the moment it enters international waters.

STEED

11-18-17, 08:40 AM

As said we can not act first, so its down to NK to keep the words of war going or the real thing that no one wants.

ikalugin

11-18-17, 11:30 AM

Let em build it, launch it, then 'disappear' the moment it enters international waters.
Illegal act of war?

Delgard

11-18-17, 01:49 PM

I just read and thought the same thing.

Japan "could" shoot them down as they go over...

Rockstar

11-18-17, 03:29 PM

Illegal act of war?

Its only illegal if you get caught. :03:

Jimbuna

11-19-17, 06:49 AM

Illegal act of war?

Just put it down as an unsolved, unfortunate incident, abit like the Cheonan.

Its only illegal if you get caught. :03:

Rgr that.

STEED

11-19-17, 09:07 AM

Donald Trump nuclear order could be refused - General John Hyten

General John Hyten suggests the President could be ignored if he ordered a nuclear strike on North Korea or anywhere else.

If Donald Tump ordered a nuclear strike that was not legal, the top US nuclear commander says he would not carry it out.

https://news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-nuclear-order-could-be-refused-general-john-hyten-11134032

Can the President really be told no? :hmmm:

Delgard

11-19-17, 10:53 AM

That has always been there to a fair degree; just not presented openly. What it does indicate is that if their was a 1st strike against the U.S., it might take some time to decide. Time is not what the U.S. will have, though.

Really, the issue is the mini-nuke use against a facility or other hardened target. But, that would be fully vetted by advisors and that includes the CG for STATCOM. It would mostly likely be a very large tele-conference.

If that one General has an issue, he would be removed hastily.

I fully believe that there is conscious and rational thought when their needs to be that. Listening to the press can be bad, very bad. They are out for profit, drama, and muck-racking.

Rockstar

11-19-17, 11:36 AM

https://news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-nuclear-order-could-be-refused-general-john-hyten-11134032

Can the President really be told no? :hmmm:

Yes the President can be told no. Contrary to popular believe a president cannot in any way shape or form on a whim launch a nuclear strike. As Delgard pointed out there is doctrine already in place which is to be followed after certain criteria has been met for such an event to happen.

mapuc

11-19-17, 12:01 PM

https://news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-nuclear-order-could-be-refused-general-john-hyten-11134032

Can the President really be told no? :hmmm:

Some weeks ago I saw an issue on our News channel, where some historian to US politics said something about

Nixon's last day in office. Another person(can't remember who) made a deal with some at NORAD-If Nixon order a nuclear strike they should call this person to get either a confirmation or a non-confirmation

Markus

Platapus

11-19-17, 12:08 PM

It needs to be understood that the President is never in a position of making decisions without support. In the context of nuclear weapons, the primary decision support organization is the National Command Authority, of which the President is a member.

Any decision to launch nuclear weapons will originate from the NCA. The President, not only being a member of the NCA but also being the President is the person to issue the order "make it so".

It is literally inconceivable that the President has access to any information that the NCA does not have. The NCA's job it to always know more than the President knows so they can amply advise the President on any issue as critical as the use of nuclear weapons.

The President does not have any information that is not given to him by subordinate staff. The NCA, consisting of several individuals each with an extensive support staff, can naturally process more information than a single President. In short, the NCA tells the President "we need to launch nuclear weapons."

If the President were to suddenly decide to nuke Bolivia, the first thing the NCA would do is ask the President "why?" If anything nuke worthy was happening in Bolivia, the rest of the NCA as well as the JCS would already know. IN fact, it would be these groups and other groups that would be informing the President, not the other way around.

Any unexpected order to nuke a country without sound military rational would be suspect. This is why the SecDef has to approve the launch decision. Only the President can initiate the decision to launch, but in the case of an irrational decision, there are subordinate levels of protection.

The President is incapable of launching any nuclear weapons. The President has the capability to order the military to launch the nuclear weapons.

Contrary to popular belief, the President's decision to launch nuclear weapons is not the start of a nuclear decision process, but is actually near the end of nuclear decision process.

ikalugin

11-19-17, 01:21 PM

Yes the President can be told no. Contrary to popular believe a president cannot in any way shape or form on a whim launch a nuclear strike. As Delgard pointed out there is doctrine already in place which is to be followed after certain criteria has been met for such an event to happen.
In this case popular belief is right.

While there is a theoretical possibility of sabotaging an unlawfull order, the realities of the nuclear C3 preclude this from happening. The C3 for nuclear weapons is built to be fast, reliable, secure, survivable. Morever, POTUS is the sole command authority in case of nuclear weapons and does not require to consult with anyone regarding nuclear usage.

Because the C3 is reliable and secure, it is linked directly to the POTUS and CnC/NCA and I am not sure if there is even a technical capability for a general or a group of generals to sabotage it.

Because C3 is fast, it cuts out other civilian authorities (ie US lawmakers) and precludes any military authority from questioning the orders (after you got drilled for years, you just verify formalities and, like a machine, do your job).

Jimbuna

11-20-17, 05:45 AM

Just a pity the same doctrine and safeguards aren't in place over in NK.

Mr Quatro

11-20-17, 06:15 AM

Just a pity the same doctrine and safeguards aren't in place over in NK.

:up: Good thought :yep:

mapuc

11-20-17, 01:21 PM

A good question

If KJU order a nuke strike somewhere will his officer obey without hesitation or will we see a military riots among his officer ?

Markus

Jimbuna

11-20-17, 04:00 PM

A good question

If KJU order a nuke strike somewhere will his officer obey without hesitation or will we see a military riots among his officer ?

Markus

Instant obedience without question I should imagine.

vienna

11-20-17, 08:37 PM

Some weeks ago I saw an issue on our News channel, where some historian to US politics said something about

Nixon's last day in office. Another person(can't remember who) made a deal with some at NORAD-If Nixon order a nuclear strike they should call this person to get either a confirmation or a non-confirmation

Markus
You are referring to the Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Kissinger was approached by some officials in the Pentagon and the State Department who were concerned about Nixon's increasingly erratic behavior, fueled by an increase in Nixon's alcohol consumption. There had been a reported case where Nixon apparently tried to put the country at DEFCON 1 and there was concern Nixon might go, ahem, 'ballistic'. It was then, several weeks before Nixon resigned, that Kissinger, quietly and without Nixon's knowledge, put into effect an order that no heavy military measures ordered by the President were to be undertaken without explicit, written co-authorization of the Secretary of State. IIRC, it was shortly after Nixon left that the protocols were revised to make it even harder for a President to initiate a first strike...

<O>

ikalugin

11-21-17, 03:53 AM

http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2017/11/Launch-Authority.pdf
This document mentions Nixon, but amongst others from that organisation and FAS states that there are no checks and balances in the US C3 system for nuclear use.

Which incidentally leads to suggestions such as this:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DPI5O5HWkAAu2BC.jpg:large
https://www.lawfareblog.com/safeguarding-nuclear-launch-procedures-proposal

Delgard

11-21-17, 08:20 AM

Things can change rather quickly with leadership changes. Passive or aggressive positions by a leader are built into the system so that nothing extreme occurs in either direction.

The past, up until this moment, teaches us that crisis management is...managed.

Rather a general statement, but experience does teach us. We just don't always hear about those management steps that occur. The STRATCOM CDR statement is a rare public exposure to a small corner of the management program involved.

I expect that the General, in question, will be reviewed and appropriately managed as his seniors see fit. Like all things about the management program involved it probably will not be as public as some will want; good or bad.

ikalugin

11-21-17, 08:33 AM

I think that improving the C3 and/or moving to 2nd strike only policy would be a good policy for US, considering US conventional superiority.

Delgard

11-21-17, 08:41 AM

I assume you are referring to an encounter with N.K.

The U.S. has really started making use of the meanings for collective, combined, and coalition.

ikalugin

11-21-17, 09:47 AM

I was talking about how it is not a part of official US policy to prohibit first use of nuclear weapons in a conflict, atleast on paper.

Doing that and shifting from a 1 man decision making system to a 2-3 man decision making system (with relevant infrastructure) in my opinion would be the way to go.

vienna

11-21-17, 05:47 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_hM-vimf10

<O>

u crank

11-21-17, 06:37 PM

^

Well that was informative. Good to know and something I suspected all along. Not that easy to push the button. :up:

Mr Quatro

11-21-17, 07:13 PM

Thank you vienna for the video, but it boils down to what James Clapper thinks voicing his opinion and
without saying so is pointing to his thoughts are simply this, that President Trump can't make the right
decision when it comes to launching nuclear weapons.

In my opinion God is in charge of when, where and how this country would respond using nuclear weapons.

The God that moved Moses across the Red Sea and the God that won WWII and the God that has restored the state of Israel.

Reece

11-21-17, 07:20 PM

:up:

Buddahaid

11-21-17, 09:59 PM

Leave God, or gods out of it. That's just an excuse for bad behaviour like we are lemmings without sense.

Jimbuna

11-22-17, 05:39 AM

I remember this was reported on UK news about a week ago.

North Korea defection: Footage of moment soldier flees

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-42075986/north-korea-defection-footage-of-moment-soldier-flees

Rockstar

11-22-17, 05:53 PM

I guess the defector wasn't aware Trump was in office. Had he do you think he would have risked his life to flee from the North Korean Paradise created by the godmanun

Jimbuna

11-23-17, 08:24 AM

Probably heard there was food in the army barracks across the border.

mapuc

11-24-17, 04:19 PM

Found this report through a Danish news paper

http://www.ecfr.eu/publications/summary/pre_empting_defeat_in_search_of_north_koreas_nucle ar_doctrine?utm_content=buffer1beb3&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Markus

STEED

11-26-17, 08:16 AM

Can US generals say 'no' to Trump if he orders a nuclear strike?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42065714

Delgard

11-26-17, 09:50 AM

Steed, I think that whole issue of Trump getting angry, probably from Twitter, and unilaterally firing a nuke at NK was debunked a page or so ago.

There are processes. The American procedures are very well thought out and will cover all possible situations. It is a very developed system that is flexible, yet well managed by many inputs.

Someone saying otherwise is less informed or if citing a source, citing a less informed one.

It is the nature of any "news" outlet to create drama to get readers. They all do it to varying degrees. There is actually a very developed skill in misinformation that many, many countries use. Mostly through news manipulation.

Jimbuna

11-26-17, 09:57 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42065714

Already been posted but no inclination to search for it.

kilerkg

11-27-17, 04:51 AM

Apparently South Korea are now using loud speakers to taunt North Korea over the soldier that defected. Very unnecessary in my opinion, provoking an already tense situation but hey-ho :k_confused:

Mr Quatro

11-27-17, 09:53 AM

Apparently South Korea are now using loud speakers to taunt North Korea over the soldier that defected. Very unnecessary in my opinion, provoking an already tense situation but hey-ho :k_confused:

Like in a football game where they fight and fuss (like Oakland and Denver yesterday) they are still of the same ink chiding each other. but your right might it come back to bite them.

Jimbuna

11-27-17, 04:01 PM

Delgard

11-27-17, 04:10 PM

It has been going on for 60 years. NK continued, but SK stopped as a bargaining chip. SK was deemed to effective.

What is good for the goose is also good for the gander.

SK should have restarted as soon as NK said no to further negotiations. Conflict is not pretty.

vienna

11-27-17, 05:03 PM

Another article on the 'duty to disobey' an illegal nuke order:

The Duty To Disobey A Nuclear Launch Order --

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-duty-to-disobey-a-nuclear-launch-order_us_5a1c2141e4b0250a107c0130

For those inclined to look further into the legalities of war, here is a link to the DoD field manual, referenced in the above article, FM-22-10 (2015), Law Of War:

https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/law_war_manual15.pdf

Its a light read at over 1200 pages...

<O>

Delgard

11-27-17, 09:50 PM

Jimbuna

11-28-17, 01:38 PM

North Korea has fired a ballistic missile, South Korean media say, quoting military officials.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-42160227

Mr Quatro

11-28-17, 02:38 PM

The Huffington Post is not a self-developing news agency. They accept bloggers and news from other agencies. The owners and programmers look for news that fits their agenda.

I never use them for anything.

I learned my lesson the hard way when I got rebuked for using them too ... they are in the news business for the click bait money.

North Korea has fired a ballistic missile, South Korean media say, quoting military officials.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-42160227

The news was reporting a possible nuclear test too with activity at it nuclear test site ... that was before this happened that spells they are not backing down. Trump is not a paper tiger ...

This former seal team man has the right answer: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/former-navy-seal-commander-solution-172753217.html

People ask me if I'm worried about the threat, a nuclear threat from North Korea, and I think it is something you have to be concerned about. Obviously, they have the weapons. They have the technology. It may not be perfect, but it doesn't have to be perfect for them to do some real damage. So it’s something we have to be very cautious of — we have to pay attention to. And we need to be careful.

One of my most popular tweets that I have put out was, surprisingly — it was a remark that I made about someone asked me about what to do in North Korea. I replied that the thing to do would be to drop 25 million iPhones into North Korea and then give them free Wi-Fi satellite coverage. And of course, you know, some people came back and said, “Well, how would they get power for the phones?” And people broke down the strategic plan.

vienna

11-28-17, 04:22 PM

The Huffington Post is not a self-developing news agency. They accept bloggers and news from other agencies. The owners and programmers look for news that fits their agenda.

I never use them for anything.

They may not necessarily be "self-developing" ('Polaroid news'?), but that does not diminish the sources they use; for the most part, the sources are major, reputable news agencies. This is a practice used by many of the other news outlets such as when they cite, say, the AP as a source. THP also provides links to the sources in the text of their news articles, so the provenance of the reportage is traceable; they are not passing off other's reportage as being from their own "whole cloth'; THP is often a place where one can read about a news subject and find, in an article, links to further info instead of having to plow through a slew of same-same reportage. In the case of the link I posted, it is not a straight news article, but, rather, a sort of op-ed piece (the author is a law professor with knowledge of and experience with war morality issues) and is intended to be so taken. There are a number of posts based on opinion in this thread and I posted that one as either another view or clarification of previous views.

As far as the owners and programmers looking for news that fits their agenda, the same can be said of any of the "owners and programmers" of any other news outlets; it is up to the reader(s) to look beyond the "owners and programmers"'s narrowness and seek the actual truth of the facts...

BTW, I would be interested if you had any info on any news outlet(s) that is/are unflinchingly fair and unbiased and do not have 'an axe to grind'...

<O>

Mr Quatro

11-28-17, 05:18 PM

They may not necessarily be "self-developing" ('Polaroid news'?), but that does not diminish the sources they use; for the most part, the sources are major, reputable news agencies. This is a practice used by many of the other news outlets such as when they cite, say, the AP as a source. THP also provides links to the sources in the text of their news articles, so the provenance of the reportage is traceable; they are not passing off other's reportage as being from their own "whole cloth'; THP is often a place where one can read about a news subject and find, in an article, links to further info instead of having to plow through a slew of same-same reportage. In the case of the link I posted, it is not a straight news article, but, rather, a sort of op-ed piece (the author is a law professor with knowledge of and experience with war morality issues) and is intended to be so taken. There are a number of posts based on opinion in this thread and I posted that one as either another view or clarification of previous views.

As far as the owners and programmers looking for news that fits their agenda, the same can be said of any of the "owners and programmers" of any other news outlets; it is up to the reader(s) to look beyond the "owners and programmers"'s narrowness and seek the actual truth of the facts...

BTW, I would be interested if you had any info on any news outlet(s) that is/are unflinchingly fair and unbiased and do not have 'an axe to grind'...

<O>

they are in the news business for the click bait money plus why are they always near the top when researching the news? Payola :o?

Mr Quatro

11-28-17, 05:24 PM

North Korea has fired a ballistic missile, South Korean media say, quoting military officials.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-42160227

http://abcnews.go.com/International/north-korea-fires-1st-missile-months-south-korean/story?id=51437178

Trump later addressed the launch in an appearance before reporters at the White House, pledging: "We will take care of it... it is a situation that we will handle."

mapuc

11-28-17, 06:44 PM

I guess it will be another liftet finger towards KJU.

I hardly doubt we will wake up to the news US strike on North Korea.

Markus

Mr Quatro

11-30-17, 05:30 PM

I think Putin and Trump are getting along with each other more than the news reports: https://www.yahoo.com/news/russian-military-deploys-marines-north-112001189.html

Russian marines have practiced landing operations at its border with North Korea, following Pyongyang’s controversial missile launch test this week, the military said. Russian naval infantry servicemen and the crews of Russia’s Pacific Fleet ships Admiral Nevelskoy and Peresvet, carried out a swift, amphibious charge on a beachhead in the Primorye region, Russia’s only one to border North Korea.

The rest of the article leads me to believe that the Russians want a piece of whatever is going to happen to North Korea.

vienna

11-30-17, 06:05 PM

Well, Russia (then the USSR) started buddy-buddy relations almost since the inception of NK as a country; the USSR was the principal backer and main trade partner of NK from the beginning until the fall of the USSR. For the USSR, cozying up to NK accomplished having their mutual border stretch secured and was a thumbing of the nose to Red China during the Cold War; the only reason China moved into NK during the Korean Was was China's fear NK would fall and China would have a unified, US-backed Korea right on its border; China went in, made their point, and moved out once the ceasefire was in place, leaving the USSR to resume theri sponsorship of NK...

A lot of people seem to believe China has a great deal of influence with NK and nothing could be further than the truth. There is no love lost between China nad NK and that has been a fact throughout the long history of Asia. Just because the various nations are all Asian does not mean there is any ethnic closeness between them. The people of NK hate China almost as much as they hate the US and the Japanese. The Chinese have a great deal of disdain, if not outright hatred of NK. Its like the situation in SE Asia: the people of Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. have long-standing disdain for each other and tend to view their particular cultures as somewhat superior to the each other. It is somewhat analogous to the sort of patronizing attitude of US citizens towards the country of Canada, but with the added baggage of centuries of historical conflict the US/Canada don't have; another analogy would be South and Central America: a common language (exception: Brazil), common foods, common general religion, even a somewhat equivalent cultural genesis, but the nations in SA/CA have a general animus toward each other...

China might move into NK if it appears the end result of a US-NK conflict were to be a pro-US government on their southern border, something they would be loathe to have happen. But, other than that, China has a very strong border security setup to keep North Koreans out of China and would not welcome any refugees if there was a war; China only cares about what happens to NK only inasmuch as it affects their own interests; they are not inclined to spend Chinese blood or resources to blithely defend what they have historically consider an inferior nation...

<O>

ikalugin

12-01-17, 04:27 AM

The rest of the article leads me to believe that the Russians want a piece of whatever is going to happen to North Korea.
Actually buisness as usual, that is where Russian Naval Infantry regional unit is stationed and where their normal training area is.

Mr Quatro

12-01-17, 08:22 PM

Actually buisness as usual, that is where Russian Naval Infantry regional unit is stationed and where their normal training area is.

Here's another clue: https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-preparing-north-korea-war-115055861.html

Russia Is Preparing for North Korea War as Tensions Rise, Says Putin's Top Security Adviser
Damien Sharkov,Newsweek 13 hours ago

Russia is making preparations in case the diplomatic crisis around North Korea’s nuclear testing escalates into
a fully fledged armed conflict, the head of Moscow’s Security Council said on Friday.

North Korea and the U.S. have threatened one another with war over Pyongyang’s decision to defy international
appeals and continue developing nuclear weapons. Russia and China, who have provided
trade lifelines to a globally isolated regime in North Korea, have also opposed its weapons programme
but have been reluctant to back either side in the war posturing.

ikalugin

12-02-17, 05:26 AM

Yet the RIA original (https://ria.ru/world/20171201/1509978423.html), referenced in that story as a source tells a different story.

That narrative (based on the quotes) being that Russia is prepared for eventualities of 3rd parties invading DPRK and thus generating a threat to Russia because DPRK is on Russian border.

Morever, that sort of resolution is viewed as undesirable, when compated to a political or a diplomatical one.

So now DPRK has a full size ICBM, capable of delivering proper sized nuclear weapons to CONUS. What a time to live in.

Reece

12-02-17, 05:48 AM

What a time to live in or die in!!:oops:

ikalugin

12-02-17, 08:17 AM

https://rg.ru/2017/12/02/ekspert-kndr-vospolzovalas-raspadom-sssr-pri-sozdanii-raketnoj-programmy.html?tgm
More on the DPRK ICBM tech story.

In short, a Russian expert (head desighner of SLBMs/ICBMs) talks about Ukrainian tech transfer to DPRK.

ikalugin

12-02-17, 09:05 AM

On exercises, Far East is the major area of operations, with a major joint command (ОСК Восток) and as a part of it the Pacific Fleet.

This leads to all sorts of interesting exercises being conducted in the area next to Russia/DPRK border, such as this sub on sub one:
https://function.mil.ru/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12142335@egNews
(Akula-II vs Delta-III, 3 practical torps launched, Akula-II "won")

Gerald

12-04-17, 05:35 AM

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles/south-korea-u-s-launch-air-drills-amid-north-korean-warnings-of-nuclear-war-idUSKBN1DY0QX

ikalugin

12-04-17, 08:14 AM

May be of interest in the ABM context:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/04/world/middleeast/saudi-missile-defense.html

Rockstar

12-07-17, 05:54 PM

Newly Revealed Experiment Shows How F-35 Could Help Intercept ICBMs

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2017/12/newly-revealed-experiment-shows-how-f-35-could-help-intercept-icbms/144365/

Jimbuna

12-08-17, 07:01 AM

I certainly would like to think so but am hoping even more so that we never need to find out definitively.

Mr Quatro

12-08-17, 12:57 PM

Newly Revealed Experiment Shows How F-35 Could Help Intercept ICBMs

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2017/12/newly-revealed-experiment-shows-how-f-35-could-help-intercept-icbms/144365/

I certainly would like to think so but am hoping even more so that we never need to find out definitively.

I wish we knew for sure how many missiles the US would have to shoot down if war did ignite ...
not so much nuclear warheads, also nasty chemical warheads aimed a bit closer to our troops.

In all of this fear spreading, the media has started, I see very little information on what artillery shell with mass destruction numbers
could do to our side in Seoul, Korea. :yep:

I did find this interesting:

Could North Korea Annihilate Seoul with Its Artillery? | The National ...
nationalinterest.org/blog/the.../could-north-korea-annihilate-seoul-its-artillery-20345
Apr 25, 2017 - During the Cold War, North Korea built up an oversized army—and artillery corps—as part of its goal of re-invading South Korea. ..... ever 2 minute (that's the norm fire rate for a M110 versus Max which is 3 every 2) puts each one delivering 8 shells down range before we even get a plane off the ground.

mapuc

12-08-17, 01:09 PM

After having read one of the lastest statement from KJU where he say a war is inevitable

I got a insight-What if KJU is 110 % sure that Trump is going to attack him and his country. Due to this he have given his forces order to step up the manufactoring of these ICBM and when he seems to have enough, he will make a preemptive strike.

It could also be the other way-Trump is 110 % sure that KJU is going fire all ICBM he has, as soon he has enough of them.

Markus

Mr Quatro

12-08-17, 01:18 PM

ikalugin

12-08-17, 03:37 PM

From what I remember the US IC estimate was that DPRK would be able to build more bombs in 5 or so years than US has ICBM capable interceptors for the Homeland.

They only need simple decoys and stack 3 non independetly targeted RVs on 16 or so ICBMs to get there, stock R36 style:
https://testpilot.ru/espace/bibl/kb-ujn/160.jpg

Jimbuna

12-09-17, 05:36 AM

I wish we knew for sure how many missiles the US would have to shoot down if war did ignite ...
not so much nuclear warheads, also nasty chemical warheads aimed a bit closer to our troops.

In all of this fear spreading, the media has started, I see very little information on what artillery shell with mass destruction numbers
could do to our side in Seoul, Korea. :yep:

I did find this interesting:

Could North Korea Annihilate Seoul with Its Artillery? | The National ...
nationalinterest.org/blog/the.../could-north-korea-annihilate-seoul-its-artillery-20345

What I find extremely concerning is the fact that something must be done before it's too late but exactly what is the most worrying thing.

Platapus

12-09-17, 07:49 AM

What I find extremely concerning is the fact that something must be done before it's too late but exactly what is the most worrying thing.

Something must be done? Why?

How about we do nothing and therefore give KJU no reason to commit suicide because he feels his country/regime is threatened?

We could give that a try.

Posturing and sabre rattling has not worked much for the past 60+ years

ikalugin

12-09-17, 07:51 AM

Ideology and exceptionalism maybe?

Catfish

12-09-17, 10:23 AM

[...]Posturing and sabre rattling has not worked much for the past 60+ years

It has "worked" for a lot of western empires countries, at least they think it has. Pride and patriotism and threats, and invasions, and colonies. And some million deaths, but who cares if you "win".

Jimbuna

12-09-17, 10:52 AM

Something must be done? Why?

How about we do nothing and therefore give KJU no reason to commit suicide because he feels his country/regime is threatened?

We could give that a try.

Posturing and sabre rattling has not worked much for the past 60+ years

I'm talking about the next step beyond posturing and sabre rattling.

The guy is intent on creating weapons of mass destruction and vowed to use them.

Sitting back and doing nothing may well send the wrong message and be interpreted as a sign of weakness.

I believe Trump has stacked a lot of chips on US credibility here and sooner or later push is going to turn into shove.

Delgard

12-09-17, 11:07 AM

This is no longer a peninsula issue. The U.N. and it's members would then be required to uphold the treaty. It is a US/NK issue in the mind of NK. Maybe rightly so...looking at history.

But, what are the "red" lines for the U.S.? I say that because NK is going to continue developing their ICBMS and warhead technologies.

The U.S. is looking to implement every sanction possible. I heard the other day that NK was open to back-channel discussions but, for me, that is just a stall tactic.

It won't be long before NK will have more missiles than the ABM defenses can handle. Then it will be remove all sanctions unless...

So...what is next for the U.S.?

Jimbuna

12-09-17, 11:31 AM

I'd say a tactical pre-emptive strike of conventional means as a possibly starter.

Delgard

12-09-17, 12:54 PM

Actually, I thought of that in the past, but had lost track of that.

I thought of nuke processing plants. But, I imagine that and assembly facilities are far underground.

But, that would be taKen rather seriously. Trump better have a good case when he stands before the media.

Mr Quatro

12-09-17, 01:16 PM

I'd say a tactical pre-emptive strike of conventional means as a possibly starter.

:yep:

Platapus

12-09-17, 03:09 PM

The guy is intent on creating weapons of mass destruction and vowed to use them.

He has vowed to use them in a retaliatory manner IF the US attacks his country.

Jimbuna

12-10-17, 08:16 AM

I'm no supporter of Trump but I've a lot more confidence in the checks and balances he is subject to than that little fella over in NK.

u crank

12-10-17, 08:48 AM

He has vowed to use them in a retaliatory manner IF the US attacks his country.

I would have to ask, at what point does that change? If he is allowed to improve his capabilities there may be a time when he feels, in his twisted way of thinking that striking first is his best option. He has shown a reckless disregard in testing missiles. He may have the same reckless attitude in using them. Lets hope not.

Rockstar

12-10-17, 09:40 AM

From what I've read the North Korean conventional armed forces aren't as devoted to the regime as it once was in decades past. Maybe the build up of a nuclear arsenal has very little to do with the propaganda fed to their public concerning threats of imminent invasion. Maybe instead as the group of devoted dwindle they see the only way to remain in control of their own wealth is by holding the keys to a nuclear arsenal. I just don't think their build up of nukes has jack squat to with any noble cause of defending their country and citizenry against invasion. Which makes them having nukes all the more dangerous

Mr Quatro

12-10-17, 09:55 AM

North Korea uses fear to rule their country keeping the people off of the internet to hide the rest of the world from them and by using the threat of nuclear weapons ...

they wish to extend that fear to South Korea and Japan and the USA to leave their country alone.

They don't want freedom of religion, they don't want anyone to worship anything or anyone except Kim Jong-un

Supreme leader

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Kim_Jong-Un_Photorealistic-Sketch.jpg/220px-Kim_Jong-Un_Photorealistic-Sketch.jpg

Jimbuna

12-10-17, 10:45 AM

'Time is of the essence,' UN official says after North Korea visit

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/12/10/asia/north-korea-united-nations/index.html

An interesting video on the issue.

Platapus

12-10-17, 04:37 PM

He has shown a reckless disregard in testing missiles. He may have the same reckless attitude in using them. Lets hope not.

Can you give me an example of how North Korea has been reckless in testing their missiles? North Korea has a disregard to UNSC resolution 1718, but to be honest, I don't blame North Korea. It is an unreasonable resolution. We would not stand for any remotely close to this resolution levied against the US, claiming it is a violation of our sovereignty.

It is true that North Korea does not always issue NOTAMS and similar warnings when testing missiles in international waters and that is bad. But there is no indication that North Korea does not clear the entry area.

But to date, North Korea has not violated anyone's airspace and a lot of their flight paths seem to minimize the time over Japan.

u crank

12-10-17, 06:58 PM

Can you give me an example of how North Korea has been reckless in testing their missiles?

On August 29, 2017, at 5:57 am KST, North Korea launched a Hwasong-12 ballistic missile that passed over Hokkaido, the second largest island of Japan.

Japanese citizens living beneath the missile’s flight path received a J-Alert message on their cellphones at 6:02 a.m., just four minutes after the projectile was launched, rousing some from sleep.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe called this test "a reckless act of launching a missile that flies over our country is an unprecedented, serious and important threat."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_North_Korean_missile_tests

Platapus

12-11-17, 04:34 PM

what was reckless about it, other than someone in Japan said it was reckless.

u crank

12-11-17, 05:33 PM

what was reckless about it, other than someone in Japan said it was reckless.

Really? It was a test. There was the distinct possibility that it may have failed. It could have landed in Japan. There was the possibility that Japan would interpret that as an attack. Anyway you slice it, it was reckless.

Reece

12-11-17, 06:08 PM

I don't think it's right to fly ICBM's over another country, they could atleast have informed Japan of the test.:hmmm:

Jimbuna

12-12-17, 05:58 AM

Charles Jenkins, a US soldier who defected to North Korea and later married a Japanese victim of the regime’s cold war abductions, has died in Japan aged 77.

Jenkins, a native of North Carolina, became an unlikely celebrity in Japan after his wife, Hitomi Soga, was freed by North Korea in 2002 and returned to her native country. Two years later, he and the couple’s two daughters, Mika and Brinda, joined Soga and settled in her hometown on the remote Sea of Japan island of Sado.

North Korea fortifies part of border where defector escaped
Read more
In the US, however, some regarded Jenkins as a traitor after details emerged of his defection to the communist North in 1965, at the height of the cold war.

He was accused of deserting his unit while on patrol in South Korea and fleeing to North Korea, where he taught English and occasionally played sinister Americans in propaganda films.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/12/charles-jenkins-us-soldier-north-korea-defected-dies

Probably big news in the US at the time but I'd never heard of this.

Jimbuna

12-12-17, 06:01 AM

China is planning to build refugee camps on its border with North Korea in what is being seen as an indication that Beijing is preparing for a potential conflict.

Five locations in China’s north-eastern Jilin province have been identified as potential sites for refugees.

The sites were listed in a document that was apparently leaked from China’s biggest telecommunications company, China Mobile, and then posted on social media.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/12/china-build-refugee-camps-border-north-korea-amid-fears-nuclear/

Are the Chinese better informed than the western media? :hmmm:

Skybird

12-12-17, 06:27 AM

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/12/charles-jenkins-us-soldier-north-korea-defected-dies

Probably big news in the US at the time but I'd never heard of this.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42319115

In 1965, while stationed with the US Army in South Korea by the Demilitarised Zone (DMZ), Mr Jenkins decided to abandon his unit and defect to the North, fearing he would be killed in patrols or sent to fight in the Vietnam War.

He said he thought that once in North Korea, he could seek asylum with the Russian embassy, and eventually return to the US in a prisoner swap.

"Thinking back now, I was a fool." (...) said Mr. Jenkins in a 2005 interview...
A deserter. Only his foolishness in assuming he would be swapped after seeking asylum in Russia can be attributed to his youth then.

Did they have drafting in the US back then? Or did it come later in the Vietnam war?

u crank

12-12-17, 06:58 AM

Did they have drafting in the US back then? Or did it come later in the Vietnam war?

At the time of his desertion, yes, the Viet Nam war was in full swing.

According to his Wikipedia page Jenkins was not drafted, but..

He joined the regular army in 1958 and was assigned to the 1st Cavalry Division. He served in South Korea from 1960 to 1961, in West Germany from 1962 to 1964, and in South Korea again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Robert_Jenkins

Skybird

12-12-17, 07:31 AM

ikalugin

12-12-17, 07:56 AM

I think draft is defendable if we assume that people have the freedom to vote against it at the ballot box or by leaving the country.

Skybird

12-12-17, 10:40 AM

And a crime done by a cirminal is legal because viticms have the freedom to evade, to flee, to try to escape?

You forget one thing here, I call it the criterion of first aggression, or "Verursacherprinzip". The one aggresisvbely imposing the consequences of his deeds on others is responsible, not the victims of these consequences. You break it - you mend it. The othe rmust not work around your breaking act - YOU have to either not breaking it, or if oyu did, YOU have to mend it.

It is not morally okay to demand somebody to join the military if he doe snot want. However, if you rtefuse to do your share in case the society you live in gets attacked, you have no longer any claim towards that society. If you do not give, you lose rights to take. Its not just rights, but also duties (moral imperatives, in this case). If you refuse help to defend of what you live, you lose the right that this context/system/society must care about your well-being. Give and take, take and give.

The origin of the ancient Greek word we know as "citizen", refers to small groups of armed men. Warrior, soldiers, in other words. Citizens are warriors. One of the reasons why females were no citizens in ancient Greece, since females were not allowed to carry arms. Smae for slaves, servants, subordinates, unfree, non-welathy people - none of them was a citizen. In fact the overwhelming part of the population in ancient Greek cities were not considered to be citizens with citizen rights. Only 1-3 in twenty were "citizens". - In modern time, only fascism has reminded of this implication, and then abused it, of course. Because, on the other hand and oppposite to modenr Italy and the Duce, the city state of Sparta, often accused to have been the first fascist state there was (an idiotic claim), Being a warrior not necessarily makes you hungry for war and aggression, it only means you are ready for what war brings, if need arises. When Alexander called the Greek to gather around him for his cause to conqueer the known world, the Spartans were the only ones who refused to follow, and stayed home. And while being met with scorn and mockery, they nevertheless came to the rescue of Greek homelands when foreign aggressors threatened the Greek.

Citizens are warriors/soldiers.

And from here you could indeed argue that as a citizen you have a duty to serve. Seems I just managed to bite my own tail. LOL :D

I just have a big problem to let just miserable politicians decide whether I have to fight and shoot at other people and try to kill them and risk my life. I leave this decision to nobody else than to myself, and my conscience. And not before I decide for myself that here ius a valdi need or a valid reason to fight, I accept to then take cokmands by some military officers and generals that tell me to shgoot these guys and to bomb those houses. But the base decision that coems first - is it worth the fight for my conscience criteria - is first, and that oen is mine, and mine alone. I do not allow politicians - or anyone else - to order me on that decision already, I am not their slave-by-birth.

Catfish

12-12-17, 10:44 AM

So he volunteered, but then wanted to cherry-pick his assignments and wars. That is deserting, plain and simple.

With a draft in place one could always argue that while the army does and cannot make a difference between men joining voluntarily and men who get "kidnapped" and forced against their will to serve, avoiding service and fleeing from the official kidnapping is no deserting, but morally perfectly legitimate self-defence. Lets face it, a draft system is injust and morally not defendable.

But he volunteered. All the above was thus not valid for him.

The US had 'draft' in all major conflicts, also on the Korean and Vietnam war.
"avoiding service and fleeing from the official kidnapping is no deserting, but morally perfectly legitimate self-defence"
This reminds me of someone :hmmm::03:

On the other hand when you deserted the Wehrmacht back then you would be a hero. Or maybe not.

mapuc

12-12-17, 12:58 PM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/12/china-build-refugee-camps-border-north-korea-amid-fears-nuclear/

Are the Chinese better informed than the western media? :hmmm:

I guess it also could mean China are planning to take on their little brother by them self then letting some outside doing it.

Markus

Delgard

12-12-17, 01:13 PM

They are looking ahead. Setting up basic infrastructure that can used for different contingences.

Also, the troops that were moved closer to the border did not have established facilities.

Once the facilities start taking shape, characteristics will designate intended purpose.

What is in the press is just one....

Jimbuna

12-12-17, 02:50 PM

RUSSIA and China practiced blasting ballistic missiles out of the sky today in a drill aimed at intimidating North Korea into submission.
Six days of military exercises intended to prepare the two superpowers for war with North Korea kicked off in Beijing on Monday.
Russian and Chinese soldiers practiced shooting down ballistic missiles today in the face of the nuclear threat from the communist nation.

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/666571/ww3-russia-china-shoot-down-missiles-military-drills-north-korea-news-latest

LATEST North Korea plot? Kim Jong-un gathers top officials amid World War 3 threat

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/891452/North-Korea-news-World-War-3-Donald-Trump-Kim-Jong-un

It would appear the temperature may well be rising :hmmm:

Mr Quatro

12-12-17, 03:42 PM

China cares ... just think of all of the cheap Christmas toys they won't be able to sell if they oppose a conflict between the USA and NK ... :D

Jimbuna

12-12-17, 03:57 PM

Future trade whilst being a factor of consideration is surely not top of the list, is it? :hmmm:

Mr Quatro

12-12-17, 04:00 PM

I bet they talk about it from the top down and not the bottom up ... China now has a world wide stock market to protect ...

billions of whatever they think their currency is valued at is at stake :yep:

ikalugin

12-13-17, 01:11 AM

Skybird, I look it from another direction.

Laws limit your freedom of action or inaction. And laws can limit any freedoms as long as the society agrees to them except the freedom to change the laws themselves.

Thus I do not see how draft is an issue if you as a citizen can vote against it.

And yes, if you disagree with the laws and cannot democratically change them, you are free to leave and move to another country.

Skybird

12-13-17, 06:51 AM

I must stand up against your view, completely. It violates most profound rights, even human rights, from a libertarian point of view, and is in conformity with collectivistic society structure like there have been traditonally in Sovjet and socialist regimes.

My view on the usefulness of elections and what you can achieve - or better: cannot achieve - by them, also is absolutely opposing yours. I will always refuse to mingle the guilt of the culprit with the options, or non-options, of the victim. If I satart to slap you in the face, it is not legit to demand from you that yiou should fall back. The right thing is to confront me and to demand from me that I stop hitting you. Becasue my right to beat you does not overrule your interest to not get beaten. I am the perpetrator, you are the victim. That I beat you in order to make you do what I demand you to do, does not change this.

kraznyi_oktjabr

12-13-17, 03:07 PM

In China's point of view scenario where U.S. defeats North Korea and either imposes regime of their choice or merge it to their ally South Korea is highly undesirable as it brings U.S. troops into their border. In this sense its plausible that China may choose to sort this issue themselves if it becomes propable enough that Trump administration is not bluffing with their war rhetorics.

What comes to these "refugee camps" I'm not sure should I buy it as marketed or not. These "refugee camps" may aswell be cover for building support infrastructure for future military intervention.

kraznyi_oktjabr

12-13-17, 03:17 PM

I think draft is defendable if we assume that people have the freedom to vote against it at the ballot box or by leaving the country.Problem with voting option is that in modern democracies people are rarely entrusted to make this kind of decisions. In normal circumstances you cast vote for your preferred liar and then hope that 1) your candidate gets elected, 2) that your representative does what he or she promised and 3) that large enough majority of representatives share his or her objectives.

In my opinion expectation that person should move abroad to avoid draft is unreasonable. That "choice" would include leaving behind your family and friends (not everyone may want or be able to leave with you) and no foreign country has obligation A) to allow you to stay and B) to allow you to work.

I personally can accept conscription and draft when they are strictly restricted to defence of homeland. Any other wars abroad must be waged with volunteers.

Skybird

12-13-17, 05:14 PM

Voting has two preconditions, and both are not given: voters need to be competent on matters, vioters need to be willing to deciude raitonally for the grater good, not their own selfish interest, voters must be given votings on every single issue there is, not onb packs of issues ot eb deicded that are arvbitrairly put together and even onclude issues that att he time the package was voted on even wre not even on the horizon.

Consider tzhere is a party wanting to abandon nulcear power, but keeping the draft. The other party wants to get rid of the draft, but keep nuclear power. Now, you want to get rid of both, or want to keep both - what do you vote for?

Most people are clueless and uncaring Hobbits. A few less are noisy, bullying hooligans. Only a very small handful are mindful, knowing and reasonable Vulcans (terminology introduced by Jason Brennan).

STEED

12-13-17, 06:03 PM

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un vowed to develop more nuclear weapons on Tuesday while personally decorating scientists and officials who contributed to the development of Pyongyang's most advanced intercontinental ballistic missile, the Hwasong-15.https://www.yahoo.com/news/north-koreas-kim-jong-un-fetes-rocket-scientists-005934324.html

Another dangerous step towards...:hmmm:

Jimbuna

12-14-17, 09:01 AM

Has North Korean leader Kim Jong-un executed one of his top aides?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/north-korean-leader-kim-jong-032424844.html

A history of executions - family, allies and rivals.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/11/kim-jong-un-cutting-back-public-executions-fear-growing-unrest/

vienna

12-14-17, 07:22 PM

Bet Omorosa is glad she got off easy...

<O>

Delgard

12-18-17, 10:55 PM

I read that N. Korea was deemed responsible for the "WannaCry" virus of last June-ish.

It was Ransomware that for those that paid the ransom, their files were never unlocked.

Made me wonder what the response to that would be. A $2B (estimated) terror attack does deserve something. Cyber-Warfare, Electronic Warfare are the new ways.

I hope the good guys catch-up.

ikalugin

12-19-17, 12:22 AM

I am not sure if robberies should be called terror attacks.

Catfish

12-19-17, 04:16 AM

Quote from a US citizen in the Aerodrome forum:

"Unlike the US, North Korea and Kim Jong-un are currently bombing no one, surrounding no nation with their military bases, invading and occupying no other countries and have never nuked anyone.

“The Libyan crisis is teaching the international community a grave lesson,” which was that Libya’s decision to abandon its weapons programs in 2003, had been “an invasion tactic to disarm the country” according to North Korea’s Foreign Ministry.
Ghaddafi accepted Bush's deal to give up their nuclear program and a few years later he was dead after a US-backed coup in Libya. Why would North Korea be so stupid as to do the same thing?

If you are the leader of a small oil or mineral bearing nation and you have NOT yet started your own nuclear program, you are an incompetent idiot failing to serve your people and protect them from US aggression."

Also: https://www.thedailybeast.com/americas-secret-libya-war-us-spent-dollar1-billion-on-covert-ops-helping-nato

:hmmm:

kraznyi_oktjabr

12-19-17, 07:56 AM

I am not sure if robberies should be called terror attacks.Agreed. In my opinion ransomware attack would only count as terrorism if target was hospital or similar institution AND information or system affected was vital for health or safety.

Platapus

12-19-17, 06:18 PM

Having a hard time disagreeing with this.

A bit harsh, but pretty accurate. I am sure that a lot of nations watched what happened in Libya.

This is why it will be very hard to convince KJU that possessing nuclear weapons is not in his best interest, when it is pretty clear that it IS in his best interests.

Quote from a US citizen in the Aerodrome forum:

"Unlike the US, North Korea and Kim Jong-un are currently bombing no one, surrounding no nation with their military bases, invading and occupying no other countries and have never nuked anyone.

“The Libyan crisis is teaching the international community a grave lesson,” which was that Libya’s decision to abandon its weapons programs in 2003, had been “an invasion tactic to disarm the country” according to North Korea’s Foreign Ministry.
Ghaddafi accepted Bush's deal to give up their nuclear program and a few years later he was dead after a US-backed coup in Libya. Why would North Korea be so stupid as to do the same thing?

If you are the leader of a small oil or mineral bearing nation and you have NOT yet started your own nuclear program, you are an incompetent idiot failing to serve your people and protect them from US aggression."

Also: https://www.thedailybeast.com/americas-secret-libya-war-us-spent-dollar1-billion-on-covert-ops-helping-nato

:hmmm:

Rockstar

12-19-17, 07:21 PM

Oh cry me a river. To think they are some poor innocent misunderstood nation just looking out for the welfare of their citizens and defending their peace loving ways is absolute crap. If you want and build nuclear weapons in thus day and age then on top of that make blatent threats of using them. You had better be prepared to have your chain jerked real hard.

Jimbuna

12-20-17, 06:14 AM

This is one worrying possibility.

Is Russia and China teaming up to prevent Trump invasion?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/894570/North-Korea-news-Donald-Trump-World-War-3-Kim-Jong-un-Russia-China

Delgard

12-20-17, 07:42 AM

It was mentioned that there was correlation between Libya and NK and I thought that the two had un-equal patrons. Libya also had a location much closer to NATO that made it easy for many countries to quickly support the problem.

NK is much different in that China and Russia have multiple reasons to work against the U.S. from further getting involved in their stated area of influence. It would be very easy for those two countries to simply cross their border, and they probably will, and confront what United Nations forces gathered to change the government or the practices of NK.

It was also mentioned that NK conducts no terrorism or conventional attacks. They simply conduct it in a different way. In the "WannaCry" cyber attack, hospitals, infrastructure, banking, and schools, to name just a few were all directly effected by the attack. This may not have had a significant affect on U.S.-protected facilities but it did do significant damage that helped to focus U.S. policies on better defense against cyber terrorism. Damage estimates exceeded $2b and, also, showed where weaknesses were for further attacks if needed.

North Korea has also demonstrated use of chemical/biological weapons. This may not appear as surrounding and bombing a foreign country, but they are demonstrating that they will conduct such attacks.

There will always be a need for occupation (boots on the ground) but much of the warfare will not be conducted that way. It will be in Cyberspace or by small cells that long before have infiltrated to "bomb" their targets in the enemy's homeland. Because of easier and continued immigration over time, South Korea, Japan, and the U.S. are all vulnerable to heavy damage.

Anything is vulnerable, if you have the planning and preparation time.

Catfish

12-20-17, 11:08 AM

While anyone can stage a cyber attack and blame it on whoever, afaik the "Wannacry" virus has been linked to China, not North Korea. :hmmm:

Delgard

12-20-17, 11:46 AM

North Korea has a university-type "training facility" in China that permits the use of Chinese ISPs.

I also read aways back that NK was wanting to run a cable across the border into Russia to bypass sanctions. I think I saw that via Yonhap.

Anyway, it was put out by the USG yesterday and confirmed by the Brits. I am not sure which country determined it first, though.

I mentioned earlier about warfare moving away from traditional battlefields and this is an example.

Be nice to know the response from Trump, etc.

ikalugin

12-21-17, 03:42 AM

Yea, we have been working on providing comunications services to DPRK, though those are comercial and legal (not sanctioned) as far as I am aware.

But then the cable was laid back in 2008 or so, so this is nothing new, except for western reporting which for some reason found out about this link only after their nuclear tests.
https://regnum.ru/news/1040647.html

Mr Quatro

12-21-17, 11:40 AM

ikalugin

12-21-17, 04:47 PM

A 25 year old quasi-NEET who is trying to get through his 4th attempt of graduating from university and has more free time than he should.

That and links to the russian telecom industry.

Jimbuna

12-22-17, 08:14 AM

Ratchet things up another level.

Despot leader Kim Jong-un has warned North Korea poses a 'substantial' nuclear threat to the US - as his regime branded tough new sanctions against the country 'criminal'.

New measures proposed by US President Donald Trump and designed to strangle Kim's hold on the secretive state have been described as a 'criminal document' by defiant regime chiefs.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/north-korea-makes-fresh-nuclear-11737526

Rockstar

12-22-17, 11:38 PM

U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley said after the vote that "the unity this council has shown in leveling these unprecedented sanctions is a reflection of the international outrage at the Kim regime's actions."
The Security Council has stood united for the 10th time "against a North Korean regime that rejects the pursuit of peace," she said.

https://hosted.ap.org/article/388347a443644baf93fe42ff8279c777/un-security-council-vote-new-north-korea-sanctions

Mattis: ‘Storm clouds gathering’ over Korean Peninsula

https://apnews.com/4009aed26e5e47a981b08837b591939c/Mattis:-'Storm-clouds-gathering'-over-Korean-Peninsula

Platapus

12-23-17, 10:59 AM

So when the UN agrees with us it is unity but when the UN disagrees with us it is an attack.

Got it

Jimbuna

12-23-17, 11:33 AM

Either way I suppose but sanctions have not prevented the bugga of nearing his ultimate goal.

Mr Quatro

12-23-17, 12:19 PM

It boils down to one conclusion that we can't do a darn thing about it ... :o

Trump is Trump and Kim Jong-un is Kim Jong-un

What will be will be ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZbKHDPPrrc&list=PLBC3DCBDEB169F044

vienna

12-23-17, 03:07 PM

So when the UN agrees with us it is unity but when the UN disagrees with us it is an attack.

Got it

Well, its about time... :haha:

<O>

mapuc

12-23-17, 03:33 PM

It boils down to one conclusion that we can't do a darn thing about it ... :o

Trump is Trump and Kim Jong-un is Kim Jong-un

I do not know these two personally

I don't know if one of them are a gambler

Because if one of them is-He, however it is, will do a darn thing about it

And we can only hope he will come to his senses and listen to what his staff tells him, before he gives the order.

Markus

Mr Quatro

12-24-17, 12:22 PM

I really really think this is the right way to go ... I hope the USA does more of this kind of thing. Where is the Army tricks department anyway?

Don't they have a budget? :o

https://www.yahoo.com/news/north-korea-flooded-illicit-information-184235020.html

North Korean defectors are ramping up a campaign to covertly flood their former homeland with flashdrives and balloons full of news bulletins and documentaries to counter state propaganda as tensions escalate with the US over Pyongyang’s nuclear and missiles programmes.

Assisted by the US-based, and privately funded, Human Right Foundation (HSF) their ultimate aim is to bring down the pariah regime from within, by engaging directly with North Koreans, providing illicit information that will influence mindsets and fuel dissatisfaction.

Up to 10,000 flashdrives were successfully smuggled into North Korea as Pyongyang’s relations sharply deteriorated over the past year, said Alex Gladstein, HSF’s chief strategy officer.

But with traditional military and diplomatic strategies apparently failing to temper the threat of nuclear conflict, activists are now working furiously to reach a target of 100,000 by mid-2018.

Delgard

12-24-17, 01:03 PM

Mr.Quatro, I went there and felt like it was a fast URL maker. But, they kept my picture. I could not find a place to log-in or a place to go to and just view MY pictures that are up-loaded.

I am not looking for much. Also, it all seemed Google-based and I have Windows.

Still a little confused.

Mr Quatro

12-24-17, 01:43 PM

I used google and it works fine, plus yahoo is sometimes cranky ...

also IE11 has been having reported problems today ...

do google search :yep:

Jimbuna

12-26-17, 07:26 AM

'Rocket Man' lands in Seoul

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-42428718/rocket-man-lands-in-seoul

Jimbuna

12-29-17, 07:37 AM

South Korea has revealed it seized a Hong Kong-registered ship last month suspected of supplying oil to the North in breach of international sanctions.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-42510783

mapuc

12-29-17, 03:25 PM

Heard something about China giving/selling oil to NK some satellit photo should prove this. The source should be Fox News.

Trump had as usual Tweeted about this.

Markus

Jimbuna

12-30-17, 06:35 AM

North Korea warning: US must prepare for World War 3 with Kim's allies in China AND Russia

China was recently caught allowing oil to enter North Korea in spite of widely approved United Nations' sanctions forbidding oil trade with Pyongyang.
US President Donald Trump slammed China for its double-edged behaviour, saying he was "disappointed" by Bejing.

Mr Trump wrote on Twitter: "Caught RED HANDED - very disappointed that China is allowing oil to go into North Korea. There will never be a friendly resolution to the North Korean problem if this continues to happen!"

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/898075/North-Korea-news-latest-World-War-3-US-China-Russia-Donald-Trump-Kim-Jong-un-Bejing-video

Mr Quatro

12-30-17, 07:41 AM

Mr Trump wrote on Twitter: "Caught RED HANDED - very disappointed that China is allowing oil to go into North Korea. There will never be a friendly resolution to the North Korean problem if this continues to happen!"

What is this a threat to China? Not good. not good at all ... Fear means respect ... all the parties involved need to respect each other more.

We, meaning he USA, have never really understood the Oriental mind :oops:

Jimbuna

12-31-17, 07:04 AM

South Korea seizes second ship in oil supply row.

South Korean authorities have seized a second ship suspected of supplying oil to North Korea in violation of international sanctions, officials say.

The Panama-flagged tanker, which is named Koti, is being held at a port near the western city of Pyeongtaek.

South Korea has already impounded a Hong Kong-registered ship it suspects of secretly transferring 600 tonnes of refined oil to a North Korean vessel.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-42527294

This could get very ugly, very quickly.

STEED

01-01-18, 05:31 AM

Nuclear button to hit US is on my desk, Kim Jong Un warns

In his address, North Korea's leader said his country's nuclear forces are now a reality and not just a threat.

Mr Kim also proclaimed that the isolated state achieved the historic feat of "completing" its nuclear forces in 2017.https://news.sky.com/story/nuclear-button-to-hit-us-is-on-my-desk-kim-jong-un-warns-11191291

mapuc

01-01-18, 01:37 PM

If I understand some of our expert here in Denmark and Sweden

KJU has passed the ball to Trump, and Trump has only two options

1. Conduct a military strike to remove or increase NK's nuclear possibility
Or
2. Take a deep breath and recognize NK as a nuclear power.

I have a feeling there is a third option

Markus

Reece

01-01-18, 07:47 PM

Option 3. Wait for Kim Jong Un to lose his temper and press the button.
Option 4. Cleaning lady accidentally drops book on the button and starts WW3.

Jimbuna

01-02-18, 08:30 AM

Nuclear button to hit US is on my desk, Kim Jong Un warns

Then the band played 'Believe It If You Like'

Delgard

01-02-18, 08:46 AM

Possible "discussions" with SK takes a lot of wind out of the U.S. war-mongering sales. Also, SK will ease up on interdicting ocean oil transfers. AND, again, it gives NK time to further refine their missile technology.

SK was, no doubt, guided to where to interdict the oil transfer ships. If the U.S. does it, it puts them in the bullying seat. SK doing it just means they are following UN sanctions rules.

Nonetheless, KJU is a shrewd leader.

Jimbuna

01-02-18, 01:44 PM

NORTH KOREA is trying to lull "gullible Americans" into thinking diplomacy could help defuse risks of World War 3 with latest leader speech, former US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton warned.
And Mr Bolton said North Korea's recent offer to open diplomatic talks with Seoul is part of a strategy to falsely reassure the United States and South Korea.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/899260/North-Korea-news-World-War-3-Donald-Trump-latest-Kim-Jong-un-nuclear-video

STEED

01-04-18, 04:02 PM

In its relentless pursuit of nuclear strength, North Korea's first land target may have actually been itself. The Diplomat reported Wednesday that an intermediate range ballistic missile launched by the regime last spring accidentally hit the city of Tokchon, which has a population of more than 200,000.https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/north-korea-accidentally-hit-one-of-its-own-cities-with-a-missile-report-says/ar-BBHQOB5?OCID=ansmsnnews11

:hmmm:

vienna

01-04-18, 04:33 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6DVjw3PK4Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_7XDbgvyiM

<O>

ikalugin

01-05-18, 04:23 AM

Amusing to see people get triggered with trash talk.

u crank

01-05-18, 06:48 AM

Amusing to see people get triggered with trash talk.

Sad but that is the American MSM news cycle in a nutshell. Outrage is far more marketable than solid analysis.

Mr Quatro

01-05-18, 12:12 PM

Perhaps we should play along this time ... after all it's not Nixon's peace fire treaty now is it,

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/north-korea-talks-set-for-tuesday-in-push-for-olympics-truce/ar-BBHTdfu

Japan also expressed skepticism. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said only that he would pay “utmost attention” to the talks, while a senior Japanese diplomat reaffirmed the need to pressure Kim in a call with Joseph Yun, the U.S. representative on North Korea.

“What’s important is that this should not just be a meeting for the sake of a meeting, but should lead to a change in North Korean policy,” Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera told reporters in Tokyo on Friday.

By contrast, China welcomed the meeting, sending an envoy to Seoul for talks Friday and Saturday. Foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang urged all sides to “seize this positive momentum.”

“When the situation was complex and sensitive, China was the voice of calm and reason,” he said.

Officials in Beijing have sought to get the parties back to negotiations to reduce the risk of a U.S. military strike that could topple their longtime ally or draw them into a regional conflict.

Delgard

01-05-18, 06:20 PM

The Japanese have always had a bit of "samurai" in them. They also don't like nukes and they believe that NK is just stalling for time.

China wants nothing to happen so they go for the "slow" position. They have no worries.

What tone will SK take on the phone?

Good move by NK...they get a score.

Jimbuna

01-06-18, 10:08 AM

NORTH KOREA will sell its technology to “aspiring nuclear powers” if the United States do not act quickly, a defence expert said today.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/900925/North-Korea-news-World-War-3-Kim-Jong-un-United-States-Donald-Trump-US-China

Now this is the most worrying possibility of all.

Mr Quatro

01-06-18, 11:55 AM

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/900925/North-Korea-news-World-War-3-Kim-Jong-un-United-States-Donald-Trump-US-China

Now this is the most worrying possibility of all.

Yes it is :yep: If memory serves me right Iran offered nuclear power advancement to all of it's Arab neighbors a couple of years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons

Then I found this is why NK has nuclear weapons:https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Pakistan-sell-nuclear-technology-to-North-Korea

Why did Pakistan sell nuclear technology to North Korea?

There is no free Lunch.

Pakistan didn't sell the some sort of nuclear technology to North Korea just for money. If nuclear technology is available for money, Gulf Countries would have bought it. North Korea is very good in missile technology. Pakistan exchanged nuclear information for missile technology.

Delgard

01-06-18, 08:16 PM

Has anyone noticed NK subs putting to sea? Or Mother Ships deploying.

Just a question. I kind of doubt it, but it is indicative of intent...of something.

Jimbuna

01-06-18, 08:27 PM

Has anyone noticed NK subs putting to sea? Or Mother Ships deploying.

Just a question. I kind of doubt it, but it is indicative of intent...of something.

If they are considered a potential threat, I doubt their chances of survival would be very high.

Delgard

01-06-18, 10:42 PM

It shows intent to do something, whether good odds or not, it does show intent.

ikalugin

01-07-18, 05:24 AM

Intend to do what?

That is the issue - for example they could sortie if they forsee the american first strike and feel the need to take the measures they can to defend themselves.

Delgard

01-07-18, 05:41 AM

Depending on KJU's overall mission. Increased infiltrations, final destructive equipment/supplies. Just beefing up the unconventional warfare capability, maybe chem/bio materials.

What are the missions of infiltrators from the north. Determine the mission, determine the people/materials needed, that will determine the indicators to look for.

A sudden rise in reporting of specific activities are...indicators to be looked for.

...just musing...

Another question; would NK conduct any offensive mission in SK right now?

Delgard

01-07-18, 06:04 AM

From CNN--

US officials also noted that a North Korean Sang-O submarine was operating in the Yellow Sea and the length of its deployment was notable. Two Romeo submarines were detected in the waters off Japan -- each one operating in the area for about a week.

Hmmm

Jimbuna

01-17-18, 08:43 AM

Meanwhile.....

North and South Korea have agree to march together under a single "unified Korea" flag at next month's Winter Olympics in the South.

They also agreed to field a joint women's ice hockey team after rare talks at the truce village of Panmunjom.

These are the first high-level talks between the two Koreas in more than two years.

The Games will take place between 9-27 February in Pyeongchang in South Korea.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-42721417

Soooo, a 'charm offensive' or buying time?

Delgard

01-17-18, 08:54 AM

Both. The charm is buying time. There is an opinion that NK will have relational flexibility with the South's liberal government next year-ish when they can negotiate in a position of superior strength.

They will get a lot out of the South and KJU/North Korean peoples will enjoy the fruits of their victory over the South.

NK will isolate the Americans from influence on the peninsula. It is already started.

(KJU gets another score.) ...and the Chinese cheer.

Aktungbby

01-17-18, 02:09 PM

They also agreed to field a joint women's ice hockey team after rare talks at the truce village of Panmunjom.
U.S. WOMENS OLYMPIC HOCKEY ROSTER:
Goaltenders (3)
Nicole Hensley (Lakewood, Colo.)
Alex Rigsby (Delafield, Wis.)
Maddie Rooney (Andover, Minn.):up: Rooney made her national team debut at the 2017 world championships, earning a shutout against Russia.
Defensemen (8)
Kacey Bellamy (Westfield, Mass.)
Megan Bozek (Buffalo Grove, Ill.)
Kali Flanagan (Burlington, Mass.)
Megan Keller (Farmington, Mich.)
Monique Lamoureux-Morando (Grand Forks, N.D.)
Gigi Marvin (Warroad, Minn.):up: In the hunt for Olympic medal #3
Emily Pfalzer (Getzville, N.Y.)
Lee Stecklein (Roseville, Minn.):up:
Forwards (12)
Hannah Brandt (Vadnais Heights, Minn.):up:
Dani Cameranesi (Plymouth, Minn.):up:
Alex Carpenter (North Reading, Mass.)
Kendall Coyne (Palos Heights, Ill.)
Brianna Decker (Dousman, Wis.)
Meghan Duggan (Danvers, Mass.)
Amanda Kessel (Madison, Wis.)
Hilary Knight (Sun Valley, Idaho)
Jocelyne Lamoureux-Davidson (Grand Forks, N.D.)
Annie Pankowski (Laguna Hills, Calif.)
Kelly Pannek (Plymouth, Minn.):up:
Amanda Pelkey (Montpelier, Vt.) HEY 7 OUT OF 23 ARE FROM MINNESOTA! 'DIPLOMATICALLY' SPEAKING approx. 33% of the roster!!??....THAT'S MINNESOTA NICE BBY !:yeah: