Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: achtung on April 03, 2013, 03:20:35 pm
-
HAPPENING (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gpuimXzka5inwGnL0c9vZsbQ54fw?docId=CNG.4eb43e27607cb9d4be6b952b88ddefeb.01)
Let's celebrate! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJNBfBr-OGU)
South Korean workers have also been banned from entering Kaesong.
-
I'm having a hard time deciding how seriously to take this and it's really damaging my calm
-
yep
as I was saying to a mate on FB when this got going, its a case of kiddo wants to fill daddy's shoes and dont know the rules yet, give it a few years of "oh shut the **** up" from the US, Russia and China and he will start behaving as like his dad he actually has no power atm to actually DO anything beyond sabre rattle. In real terms all it is doing is making good TV and radio for his people.
-
Come on North Korea, today's April 3rd.
-
Come on North Korea, today's April 3rd.
lol
-
I trough young Kim would been much better than his father but seems like a total craziness is on family. I just hope they don't do anything they would just hurt their own people
-
The moment of explosion is approaching fast.
:lol:
-
To be honest, as pathological a bunch of fruitballs as the family may be, this probably isn't the doing of Kim Jong Un any more than previous actions were the actions of Kim Jong Il, give them shiny baubles to look at and it'll keep them quiet for hours. No, the problem in North Korea, I feel, is the military itself. I think that Kim Il Sung had the military firmly in his grasp, but since that point, the descendents of that family have become little more than puppets for a military junta.
THAT is the situation North Korea faces, the only way the military can justify its huge power and influence is to convince the rest of the country that they live permanently under threat of invasion and war, if things are going to get even tougher, then much better to create a spectre of military intervention and blame it on those 'damn foreigners'.
-
I don't know of any sane way to resolve this, but there has to be some means of putting that whackjob administration out of the world's collective misery.
-
I don't know of any sane way to resolve this, but there has to be some means of putting that whackjob administration out of the world's collective misery.
It's tricky to find an avenue that does not lead to massive suffering on the part of North Korea's (and probably South Korea's) people.
-
I don't know of any sane way to resolve this, but there has to be some means of putting that whackjob administration out of the world's collective misery.
short of a sea launched cruise missile during some public military parade should ensure he is in a predictable location. Then I would say no.
As to why that is a bad idea see General Battuta's post as such a strike would probably cripple government services which would be really bad.
-
nuke 'em!
-
While this is almost certainly more sabre-rattling, the sheer terror associated with nuclear weapons makes these threats dangerous nonetheless. There's always a chance somebody'll do something stupid.
I don't know of any sane way to resolve this, but there has to be some means of putting that whackjob administration out of the world's collective misery.
North Korea's government long ago forfeited their right to rule that country, but I don't see any safe way to get rid of them. They do have nuclear weapons, after all.
-
This is the sort of thing that in 1970 would have triggered the end of the ****ing world.
Today, it's mildly alarming to most of it.
I suppose that's progress...
-
This is the sort of thing that in 1970 would have triggered the end of the ****ing world.
Today, it's mildly alarming to most of it.
I suppose that's progress...
it helps that north Korea's strike range is fairly limited without a major effort to set up a orbital scale rocket, which while I believe they have demonstrated the capacity to build such a device, the results have been less than impressive.
-
This is the sort of thing that in 1970 would have triggered the end of the ****ing world.
Today, it's mildly alarming to most of it.
I suppose that's progress...
In one sense, yes. But it's still dangerous and irresponsible for any nation to make empty threats about nuclear war.
TBH though, North Korea doesn't terrify me nearly as much as Pakistan. Why? The latter contains far more religious fanatics.
-
It's probably just bad translation :P
-
I don't know of any sane way to resolve this, but there has to be some means of putting that whackjob administration out of the world's collective misery.
It's tricky to find an avenue that does not lead to massive suffering on the part of North Korea's (and probably South Korea's) people.
Yeah, that's the ***** of it. Any strike at the leadership probably dooms the North Korean populace to even more suffering than they're already undergoing, and Seoul has so much weaponry pointed its way that they'd be royally screwed too. And that pretty much leaves us stuck.
-
I don't know of any sane way to resolve this, but there has to be some means of putting that whackjob administration out of the world's collective misery.
It's tricky to find an avenue that does not lead to massive suffering on the part of North Korea's (and probably South Korea's) people.
Yeah, that's the ***** of it. Any strike at the leadership probably dooms the North Korean populace to even more suffering than they're already undergoing, and Seoul has so much weaponry pointed its way that they'd be royally screwed too. And that pretty much leaves us stuck.
Things must fall apart before they can be put back together.
-
I don't know of any sane way to resolve this, but there has to be some means of putting that whackjob administration out of the world's collective misery.
It's tricky to find an avenue that does not lead to massive suffering on the part of North Korea's (and probably South Korea's) people.
Yeah, that's the ***** of it. Any strike at the leadership probably dooms the North Korean populace to even more suffering than they're already undergoing, and Seoul has so much weaponry pointed its way that they'd be royally screwed too. And that pretty much leaves us stuck.
Things must fall apart before they can be put back together.
Demonstrably incorrect - smooth regime changes have been pulled off before and we've been rewarded with enduring allies. And sticking to this line of thought, that 'things must fall apart', leads to inadequate post-collapse planning and debacles like Iraq.
-
You guys nuked Japan, then made it into your
***** ally.
Do the same to north korea!
-
I don't know of any sane way to resolve this, but there has to be some means of putting that whackjob administration out of the world's collective misery.
It's tricky to find an avenue that does not lead to massive suffering on the part of North Korea's (and probably South Korea's) people.
Yeah, that's the ***** of it. Any strike at the leadership probably dooms the North Korean populace to even more suffering than they're already undergoing, and Seoul has so much weaponry pointed its way that they'd be royally screwed too. And that pretty much leaves us stuck.
Things must fall apart before they can be put back together.
True but I think the world would prefer a self contained implosion than the region altering explosion this could develop into. There are several schools of thought as to what needs to be done.
A. Ignore it as the saber rattling that it is and hope that North Korea will grow up a little bit when they don't get the attention they are seeking.
B. Take it seriously and prepare to swat the annoyance once and for all.
C. Accept that Kim Jong Un has painted himself into a corner and must increase his rhetoric in order to stay in control of his own country by offering him a way out that saves face.
-
You guys nuked Japan, then made it into your ***** ally.
Do the same to north korea!
Those were significantly less potent nuclear weapons
The ones these days would wipe N.K. off the map
-
There's tactical nukes nowadays. Obligatory -> Tactical nuke incoming! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OhdN5Cm6TE)
-
I don't know of any sane way to resolve this, but there has to be some means of putting that whackjob administration out of the world's collective misery.
It's tricky to find an avenue that does not lead to massive suffering on the part of North Korea's (and probably South Korea's) people.
Yeah, that's the ***** of it. Any strike at the leadership probably dooms the North Korean populace to even more suffering than they're already undergoing, and Seoul has so much weaponry pointed its way that they'd be royally screwed too. And that pretty much leaves us stuck.
Things must fall apart before they can be put back together.
Demonstrably incorrect - smooth regime changes have been pulled off before and we've been rewarded with enduring allies. And sticking to this line of thought, that 'things must fall apart', leads to inadequate post-collapse planning and debacles like Iraq.
The Korean situation is a bit more tense than the kind of thing I think you're referring to.
-
nuke 'em!
from orbit, they currently lack anti satellite weapons!
-
nuke 'em!
from orbit, they currently lack anti satellite weapons!
nah just send in some sk kids with laser designators.
-
I don't know of any sane way to resolve this, but there has to be some means of putting that whackjob administration out of the world's collective misery.
It's tricky to find an avenue that does not lead to massive suffering on the part of North Korea's (and probably South Korea's) people.
Yeah, that's the ***** of it. Any strike at the leadership probably dooms the North Korean populace to even more suffering than they're already undergoing, and Seoul has so much weaponry pointed its way that they'd be royally screwed too. And that pretty much leaves us stuck.
Things must fall apart before they can be put back together.
Demonstrably incorrect - smooth regime changes have been pulled off before and we've been rewarded with enduring allies. And sticking to this line of thought, that 'things must fall apart', leads to inadequate post-collapse planning and debacles like Iraq.
The Korean situation is a bit more tense than the kind of thing I think you're referring to.
Not in the eyes of the people who matter. The US has been rather nervously checking out its readiness to provide support for a post-collapse North Korea in the past while.
-
North Korea seen moving mid-range missile to east coast: reports (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/04/us-korea-north-missile-idUSBRE93301S20130404)
-
I don't know why you guys are even panicking. Before I thought it was pretty stupid how people kept going 'OHNOTHEYGUNNANUKEUS' even though it was quite clearly internal propaganda by NK meant for the consumption of it's 'citizens', not outsiders. I'm not gonna lie about this though - I think NK is cracking somewhat inside. They're not stupid - they managed to last this long, so it's clear they're competent in regards to staying in power, otherwise they would've collapsed by now.
But I think the other people in charge doubt Kim-Jong un: This is unusually aggressive for NK, while they'd make the usual threats, they wouldn't actually mobilize. I'd say this is some kind of test by NK's military to see whether Kim responds to things the way they want or not.
Like I said, they're not stupid. They've managed to uphold a ****ty regime this far.
-
panicking, no. wanking, uhmm :nervous:
-
I'm not panicking, I just find it interesting.
#BREAKING: North Korea tells all South Koreans to quit Kaesong joint industrial complex by April 10: Yonhap
-
South Korea is denying that last one about the industrial plant, FYI - looks like one of the media outlets reported it without citing sources, and it got garbled a bit along the way. Apparently they wanted a list of people due to return by April 10 is all.
-
Y THERE NO STARCRAFT DERAIL YET?
-
i tried but it didnt work.
-
Should have mentioned South Korea's psychic commandos then. :P
-
East Germany wasn't ruled by psychopathic sadistic criminals, they had a mandate from Moscow which weren't also psychopaths (at least since Stalin died), and when Gorbachev went into power, the transition became inevitable and "smooth". The events of 89 were allowed by the commies because they saw they were inflicting unnecessary suffering to their population, and there was a better way. IOW, they were human people trying their best.
Can we say anything remotely ... ahhh... no. No we can't. Kim's family is composed of fanatics that do not believe in their leadership themselves, unless they maintain their population under extreme oppression and psychological tension. They believe (rightly) that if the pop actually learned the truth about the world and how this family has kept them suffering so much for so long, they would be butchered. So they escalate the oppression and the psychological tension.
Will they actually start a war just to keep the illusion and the power, or to save face or something? That's probably what is freaking out some minds.
-
Can I just get this straight: the Chinese hate North Korea too by now, right?
-
They should.
-
China don't want the inevitable refugees any war would cause. Nor do they want a state sympathetic to the US right on their borders. But in no way do they seem to actually like NK.
-
Does anyone want a place sympathetic to the United States anywhere near their borders?
Should have mentioned South Korea's psychic commandos then. :P
Ha!
-
Does anyone want a place sympathetic to the United States anywhere near their borders?
The United States does?
-
Does anyone want a place sympathetic to the United States anywhere near their borders?
wat. Brain melting from eye contact to this comment. arrg
-
I wouldn't be overly concerned about anything nuclear leaving the Korean coastline; a couple of Arleigh-Burke-class missile destroyers are permanently stationed in Japan and have been deployed to Korea, at least according to a friend of mine who served on one until very recently.
-
I wouldn't be overly concerned about anything nuclear leaving the Korean coastline; a couple of Arleigh-Burke-class missile destroyers are permanently stationed in Japan and have been deployed to Korea, at least according to a friend of mine who served on one until very recently.
The couple hundred artillery pieces aimed on SK would be a bigger concern... Especially if some of them are loaded with biological/chemical ammo.
-
Does anyone want a place sympathetic to the United States anywhere near their borders?
Europe.
-
Does anyone want a place sympathetic to the United States anywhere near their borders?
Europe.
Not sympathetic per say, just look at us in the UK during Blair's prime ministership :doubt: believe me it's more trouble than it's worth. It is on the other hand useful to be friendly with the US, from a safe distance.
-
By the same token would you want someplace that's viewed as an irritating thorn to the United States on your border?
-
china might be better off being next to a unified korea with a sane government than it would be next to nk as it is or the radioactive slag pit it will be if they keep stroking their nuclear phallus.
-
Hopefully, the whole situation is just a flash in the pan. NK doesn't really have missiles capable of reaching US. Last time they tried to test one (Taepodong-2) it exploded 40 seconds after launch, and it wasn't shot down, either. They could target Guam or maybe Okinawa (there's an USMC base there), but US military has already taken steps against that. Not to mention I think they'd be wiped out the second after launch if the actually dared to try that. In Poland, we call that sort of thing "going against the sun with a hoe".
-
As has been mentioned earlier, the big problem is what will happen to South Korea.
--
What are the weather patterns like around there? I'm curious where any fallout would end up.
-
I'm having a hard time deciding how seriously to take this and it's really damaging my calm
I second this thought. If anything should be taken seriously, it should be threats made by a Nation regarding deployment of their nukes. The simple fact that my first thought was to make fun of NK and their resolve to actually use them, disconcerts me.
Sure the chances are slim that anyone would be insane enough to actually do it, but still...I can't shake the feeling that it's all playing out like some twisted version of "The Boy Who Cried 'Wolf!'", where they get ignored right up until an SK city gets turned into a lake and the **** hits the fan in a massive way.
Where's Big Boss Solid Snake Grey Fox Raiden a healthy dose of FOXDIE when you need it.
-
So according to the latest news broadcast I just finished watching. NK is sabre-rattling not to cause a fight, but because they feel insecure and want a formal peace treaty with SK so they don't get attacked etc. To protect NK they are making all the offensive noise they can.
Regardless, a damn well dangerous line to take either way.
-
Because nothing says "Let's be friends, I don't Really want to blow you up." like "See all these guns pointed at your city? And this missile that glows in the dark? Yeah, we will use them on you."
-
What are the weather patterns like around there? I'm curious where any fallout would end up.
Winds are southerly. Basically the entire central valley of South Korea would probably end up contaminated by chemical or nuclear stuff.
-
So according to the latest news broadcast I just finished watching. NK is sabre-rattling not to cause a fight, but because they feel insecure and want a formal peace treaty with SK so they don't get attacked etc. To protect NK they are making all the offensive noise they can.
Regardless, a damn well dangerous line to take either way.
If they succeed in making a peace treaty this way, the regime can tell its people 'that the imperial dogs were so afraid of the north korean might, they ran to the great leader to beg for peace'. The peons will eat it up.
-
Not saying I believe that, but it's another 'opinion' that I havent heard about the entire situation before.
Might fit the thinking though, as you (Spoon) pointed out.
-
If they succeed in making a peace treaty this way, the regime can tell its people 'that the imperial dogs were so afraid of the north korean might, they ran to the great leader to beg for peace'. The peons will eat it up.
But without the constant thread of an invasion from the South the people of North Korea might starting to question the "military first" policy. That would be a serious thread to the Kim Family and all of their supporters.
Keeping the conflict boiling at a low temperature could avoid this thread.
-
If they succeed in making a peace treaty this way, the regime can tell its people 'that the imperial dogs were so afraid of the north korean might, they ran to the great leader to beg for peace'. The peons will eat it up.
But without the constant thread of an invasion from the South the people of North Korea might starting to question the "military first" policy. That would be a serious thread to the Kim Family and all of their supporters.
Keeping the conflict boiling at a low temperature could avoid this thread.
nothing to stop the heathens from banging the war drums later
-
Look, all you need to know about NK has been written in its adopted manifesto when NK was founded in 1948, best known as "1984".
-
Look, all you need to know about NK has been written in its adopted manifesto when NK was founded in 1948, best known as "1984".
Man I don't think NK is NEARLY that clever.
-
Thing is, it IS easy to look on NK as the kid thowing his standard tantrum he always throws when he can't get his own way.
The difference this time is China, for the first time NK has been left totally on its own, with even China voting for sanctions against them for their behaviour. NK is used to throwing all these insults from behind China where they feel safe, and now they feel more vulnerable the rhetoric is getting even more insane.
The problem is, without the weight of China behind them NK looks somewhat.. silly.. for making all these threats and gestures, and I think they are aware of that, but it makes them even more angry.
-
Look, all you need to know about NK has been written in its adopted manifesto when NK was founded in 1948, best known as "1984".
Man I don't think NK is NEARLY that clever.
They mostly achieved all the purposes written in the manifesto. They are always at a state of war and non-war with SK, they control the thoughts and emotions of their population, they have their two minutes of rage against the big satan in the news, they empoverish so much their population that they can never really pose any threat to the government, etc. The quote of the boot standing on the face of the human forever seems quite the apt description of NK.
-
Look, all you need to know about NK has been written in its adopted manifesto when NK was founded in 1948, best known as "1984".
Man I don't think NK is NEARLY that clever.
They mostly achieved all the purposes written in the manifesto. They are always at a state of war and non-war with SK, they control the thoughts and emotions of their population, they have their two minutes of rage against the big satan in the news, they empoverish so much their population that they can never really pose any threat to the government, etc. The quote of the boot standing on the face of the human forever seems quite the apt description of NK.
Well, in one respect I hope you're dead on with the comparison: even IngSoc eventually fell.
-
Nothing lasts forever. There's zero risk of that regime surviving. The problem is how it will fall, not if, and how many corpses will it drag with itself to hell.
-
Look, all you need to know about NK has been written in its adopted manifesto when NK was founded in 1948, best known as "1984".
Man I don't think NK is NEARLY that clever.
They mostly achieved all the purposes written in the manifesto. They are always at a state of war and non-war with SK, they control the thoughts and emotions of their population, they have their two minutes of rage against the big satan in the news, they empoverish so much their population that they can never really pose any threat to the government, etc. The quote of the boot standing on the face of the human forever seems quite the apt description of NK.
Well, in one respect I hope you're dead on with the comparison: even IngSoc eventually fell.
Wait, when did that happen?
-
The problem is how it will fall, not if, and how many corpses will it drag with itself to hell.
for the people of nk, that might be an improvement.
-
Well, in one respect I hope you're dead on with the comparison: even IngSoc eventually fell.
Wait, when did that happen?
The appendix explaining the principles of Newspeak is written in the past tense and in plain English.
-
Oh, of course. (Wait, might that not just be a narrative convention?)
-
Thing is, it IS easy to look on NK as the kid thowing his standard tantrum he always throws when he can't get his own way.
The difference this time is China, for the first time NK has been left totally on its own, with even China voting for sanctions against them for their behaviour. NK is used to throwing all these insults from behind China where they feel safe, and now they feel more vulnerable the rhetoric is getting even more insane.
The problem is, without the weight of China behind them NK looks somewhat.. silly.. for making all these threats and gestures, and I think they are aware of that, but it makes them even more angry.
There are some interetsing analyses coming out about China's involvement, but a large part of the problem with NK is they are quite proud and believe themselves to be independent. Even though everyone knows NK is utterly dependent on China, they refuse to acknowledge that which limit's Chinese options (e.g. they have to follow through on their threats).
-
The thing is about China is the question of why did they vote in favour of those sanctions in the first place? Normally China will side with NK for both territorial reasons as well as 'pissing off the West' in general. I'm assuming either there has been an invisible souring of relations between the two countries since the death of Jong Il, or that China mas made that subtle move from viewing NK as a noisy, neighbour who can be an idiot but is, at least, on their side, to a genuine risk to National Security. If either of those are true, NK leadership probably is in full panic mode at the moment.
-
Oh, of course. (Wait, might that not just be a narrative convention?)
Its a good bet that the IngSoc was already heading towards a collapse. With the majority of the population nothing more than a stagnant caste of semi literate proles eventually there wouldn't be enough specialists left to keep the infrastructure in place. You can already see things are in a state of decay in the book.
-
The thing is about China is the question of why did they vote in favour of those sanctions in the first place? Normally China will side with NK for both territorial reasons as well as 'pissing off the West' in general. I'm assuming either there has been an invisible souring of relations between the two countries since the death of Jong Il, or that China mas made that subtle move from viewing NK as a noisy, neighbour who can be an idiot but is, at least, on their side, to a genuine risk to National Security. If either of those are true, NK leadership probably is in full panic mode at the moment.
Economics most likely.
-
The thing is about China is the question of why did they vote in favour of those sanctions in the first place? Normally China will side with NK for both territorial reasons as well as 'pissing off the West' in general. I'm assuming either there has been an invisible souring of relations between the two countries since the death of Jong Il, or that China mas made that subtle move from viewing NK as a noisy, neighbour who can be an idiot but is, at least, on their side, to a genuine risk to National Security. If either of those are true, NK leadership probably is in full panic mode at the moment.
Economics most likely.
Possibly, it's not like NK is a financial hotbed, if there's one reason China didn't press sanctions before, it certainly wasn't because of loss of profits. Maybe China stand to gain more than they lose by saying Yes to the sanctions this time round.
-
China has actively discouraged NK's nuclear ambitions for years. Personally, I suspect supporting sanctions this time around is a statement of "enough is enough" - China supplies something like 80-90% of the food and economic productivity of North Korea. They want NK to start focussing on feedings its people and improving its economics and quit pouring money into nuclear weaponry.
-
The thing is about China is the question of why did they vote in favour of those sanctions in the first place?
A number of reasons.
First, China views North Korea as a client buffer state and demands some level of controllablity. North Korea has gone against their wishes quite openly and publicly of late.
Second, China has a number of ongoing feuds with Japan and regards them as the greatest regional threat. North Korea's Theater Ballistic Missile Madness: Nodong And Musudan Edition gives Japan an issue in which they can not only find common ground with other nations of the region, but even help them defend themselves. North Korea's posturing comes at an inopportune time and is generally unwelcome as it strengthens Japan's position. (An additional worry is that another missile test will result in Japan deciding it's had enough of North Korea's **** and shooting down the test launch in the Sea of Japan as threat to their shipping or territory. Japan threatened to destroy any North Korean rocket they believe will cross their territory during the last round of missile tests. This would pose grave risks to the perceived validity of China's own strategic deterrent and might cause North Korea to react violently.)
Third, actual war would result in a huge humanitarian disaster on China's doorstep and tens of thousands of North Korean refugees. If China opts to play Russia to North Korea's Poland and South Korea's Germany, they might preserve their buffer state. But they might not. If they don't, then it is very likely that twenty years on they will face a unified, capitalist, democratic Korean Peninsula sitting right next door, with a soaring standard of living compared to their own and huge economic and military muscle. They regard this outcome as a nightmare scenario for their longterm strategic planning. North Korea slinging provocations is generally unwelcome because somebody might take them serious and the next thing you know it's the German Reunification all over again. Their current level of "this would get any other country in the world whacked" provocation to the US and South Korea is something out of Chinese nightmares.
-
Here's what I think is causing all of this crap:
(http://www.stuffistumbledupon.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/history-channel-aliens-meme-ancient-aliens-meme.jpg)
But in all seriousness, is it naive of me to think that governments should be working to the benefit of their people and not to further consolidate their power?
-
Depends on the type of Government
-
I don't think it's naive, since that is the purpose of a government in theory, Firespawn. Of course, in reality...
People are supposed to put governments into power. And remove and replace them if they don't perform to the standard expected of them. Even Kings have been removed from the throne by the people. But sometimes governments put themselves into power, and/or remove the people's power so they can stay there. Then they can do whatever they want.
-
http://gizmodo.com/5993715/how-far-can-north-koreas-missiles-actually-reach
Heh
So Alaska beware
-
governments ... working to the benefit of their people ...
:wakka::wakka::wakka:
-
laughing at idealism makes me grown-up right
-
Finland should invade North Korea and install a functioning government
-
governments ... working to the benefit of their people ...
:wakka::wakka::wakka:
:(
-
http://gizmodo.com/5993715/how-far-can-north-koreas-missiles-actually-reach
Heh
So Alaska beware
go ahead, throw your nukes away.
-
http://gizmodo.com/5993715/how-far-can-north-koreas-missiles-actually-reach
Heh
So Alaska beware
go ahead, throw your nukes away.
Russia and / or China would flip their collective **** if NK sent warheads over their territories.
-
Finland should invade North Korea and install a functioning government
i keep telling you guys you should invade sweden first
-
send ALL the finnish metal bands to the DMZ and point the biggest speakers on the planet north. and then lordi leads the charge.
it'll be like that scene from back to the future with the van halen tape x1000. they will **** their pants.
-
Finland should invade North Korea and install a functioning government
i keep telling you guys you should invade sweden first
And Poland. Better hurry up with this one though, our government is still trying to replace Zloty with Euro. :)
http://gizmodo.com/5993715/how-far-can-north-koreas-missiles-actually-reach
Heh
So Alaska beware
Except the missile listed as being able to reach Alaska is Taepodong-2. Which flew only once, for 40 seconds. It's far from actually being operational.
-
i love how the name of their missile contains "dong"
-
No-Dong 1
-
(http://i.imgur.com/TSRh0qL.jpg)
-
no no no, send him to disney land. never hurt anyone amiright?
-
Very funny, Jeff Vader :D
I wonder if Kim has ever cracked a smile, he seems like just the surliest guy all the time no matter what he's doing...
-
U.S, please give this guy few tippers of rice and he should calm down :D
-
You can't reason with the guy. He's so far into his head if flew straight into LEO.
(http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/457/765/ee7.gif)
-
damn that's one tricked-out orbit
-
U.S, please give this guy few tippers of rice and he should calm down :D
That don't be enough rice. You'd need a whole flotilla of them.
-
Well that's quite impossible now because a lot of charity organisations refused to help when they found out that their food was sent to the army instead of being eaten by common people.
But seriously, in my opinion this country should be wiped out from the map. The last relict of Stalinist-style <burn in hell you red pig> regime. The situation in Korea cannot be changed in a diplomatic way :/
-
With that I can agree. If nobody brings it down it'll collapse be itself. IMHO, the former possibility would be preferable, since if it collapses by itself, nobody will know when or be able to exert any sort of control over it, which could lead to a disaster (possibly a nuclear one).
-
With that I can agree. If nobody brings it down it'll collapse be itself. IMHO, the former possibility would be preferable, since if it collapses by itself, nobody will know when or be able to exert any sort of control over it, which could lead to a disaster (possibly a nuclear one).
Unfortunately, I don't see any way to accomplish that. China might still back them up, and Seoul would be devastated by artillery fire.
-
NK recently pissed off China, so perhaps something could be worked out in cooperation with them. Artillery remains a problem, but I think that if the attack was swift and accurate enough, it could be taken out before it does too much damage. At this point, I think that tactical nuclear strikes could be a valid option (if it wasn't for political implications, that is).
-
not to mention the effects on the civilian population and the medical emergency that will follow
-
What would be the purpose of a nuclear strike on North Korea? There's nothing of consequence there that conventional munitions couldn't deal with. And as has been stated repeatedly before, there isn't any sort of preemptive strike on the North that could avoid significant civilian casualties in both the North and South.
-
NK recently pissed off China, so perhaps something could be worked out in cooperation with them. Artillery remains a problem, but I think that if the attack was swift and accurate enough, it could be taken out before it does too much damage. At this point, I think that tactical nuclear strikes could be a valid option (if it wasn't for political implications, that is).
The problem is that China doesn't want a US-friendly, American troop-filled capitalist nation on its doorstep. They would (perhaps justifiably) consider it a huge risk to national security.
The potential repercussions of a nuclear strike are far, far too severe for that to be on the table. That leaves us with the prospect of fighting their army with conventional weaponry. I have no doubt we could defeat them, but we'd have to take out their howitzers extremely quickly or risk the destruction of Seoul.
I sympathize with your desire to take down North Korea's government. Sadly, there are huge issues that make that plan unfeasible.
not to mention the effects on the civilian population and the medical emergency that will follow
oh yeah and that too.
-
Finland should invade North Korea and install a functioning government
"Functioning", as in the one we have now?
Oh, and this. (http://www.buzzfeed.com/bennyjohnson/the-internet-is-really-not-afraid-of-kim-jong-un)
EDIT: How do I keep missing stuff like this?
i keep telling you guys you should invade sweden first
No, then we wouldn't have any place where we could run to when first bullets are fired. At the rate of **** ups the current government is pulling of, you won't find a conscript who would like to defend them ;)
-
NK recently pissed off China, so perhaps something could be worked out in cooperation with them. Artillery remains a problem, but I think that if the attack was swift and accurate enough, it could be taken out before it does too much damage. At this point, I think that tactical nuclear strikes could be a valid option (if it wasn't for political implications, that is).
The problem is that China doesn't want a US-friendly, American troop-filled capitalist nation on its doorstep. They would (perhaps justifiably) consider it a huge risk to national security.
They also don't want nuke-toting psychopaths on their doorstep (they never supported NK's nuclear ambitions). The question is, which one they consider worse. An US-friendly state right by their borders would be a security risk for China, but so would nuke happy NK. So far, NK has been worth the trouble for China, but when it stops to be (and it seems to be going this way), all bets are off.
What would be the purpose of a nuclear strike on North Korea? There's nothing of consequence there that conventional munitions couldn't deal with. And as has been stated repeatedly before, there isn't any sort of preemptive strike on the North that could avoid significant civilian casualties in both the North and South.
The NK artillery batteries are most likely well hidden in forests and would be hard to find and hit with precision-guided munitions. With a tactical nuke, I think it'd be possible to thin them out quickly enough that Seoul isn't too badly hit. Of course, it'd be preferable to take them out with precision weapons, but we're talking howitzers, I don't think that'd be possible. NK most likely has a lot of them, and they're very small and easy to camouflage.
Of course, any attack on NK, especially a nuclear one, would result in massive causalities. The question is, wouldn't refraining from an attack cause even more deaths? Nobody knows how many people starve to death in NK every day, and if the regime collapsed uncontrollably, the final death toll could be higher than even that of a nuclear attack. At this point, I'm afraid that it's a matter of choosing a solution resulting in the least amount of victims.
-
NK recently pissed off China, so perhaps something could be worked out in cooperation with them. Artillery remains a problem, but I think that if the attack was swift and accurate enough, it could be taken out before it does too much damage. At this point, I think that tactical nuclear strikes could be a valid option (if it wasn't for political implications, that is).
The fallout would hit South Korea. And, quite frankly, they hate The U.S. enough as it is.
-
NK recently pissed off China, so perhaps something could be worked out in cooperation with them. Artillery remains a problem, but I think that if the attack was swift and accurate enough, it could be taken out before it does too much damage. At this point, I think that tactical nuclear strikes could be a valid option (if it wasn't for political implications, that is).
The problem is that China doesn't want a US-friendly, American troop-filled capitalist nation on its doorstep. They would (perhaps justifiably) consider it a huge risk to national security.
They also don't want nuke-toting psychopaths on their doorstep (they never supported NK's nuclear ambitions). The question is, which one they consider worse. An US-friendly state right by their borders would be a security risk for China, but so would nuke happy NK. So far, NK has been worth the trouble for China, but when it stops to be (and it seems to be going this way), all bets are off.
The thing is, North Korea doesn't really intend to nuke anybody. They're trying to scare us into giving them food, direct their populace's anger at an external "threat", or both. China understands this, and while they are (as far as we know) annoyed I doubt they'd be willing to let us remove their buffer state.
What would be the purpose of a nuclear strike on North Korea? There's nothing of consequence there that conventional munitions couldn't deal with. And as has been stated repeatedly before, there isn't any sort of preemptive strike on the North that could avoid significant civilian casualties in both the North and South.
The NK artillery batteries are most likely well hidden in forests and would be hard to find and hit with precision-guided munitions. With a tactical nuke, I think it'd be possible to thin them out quickly enough that Seoul isn't too badly hit. Of course, it'd be preferable to take them out with precision weapons, but we're talking howitzers, I don't think that'd be possible. NK most likely has a lot of them, and they're very small and easy to camouflage.
Of course, any attack on NK, especially a nuclear one, would result in massive causalities. The question is, wouldn't refraining from an attack cause even more deaths? Nobody knows how many people starve to death in NK every day, and if the regime collapsed uncontrollably, the final death toll could be higher than even that of a nuclear attack. At this point, I'm afraid that it's a matter of choosing a solution resulting in the least amount of victims.
You could argue that, although the long-term radiation and fallout from nuke would kill many people. The bigger issue is the effect a nuke would have on the world stage. North Korea's ally China has a large nuclear arsenal, and if you want to nuke the former you better make damn sure the latter (and all the other nuclear states) fully support it. The problem is this would require quite a large amount of preplanning, allowing China to warn North Korea or in the worst case scenario even nuke the USA (unlikely, but who knows).
Oh, and let's not forget that the fallout would hit South Korea and Japan, our allies.
-
The NK artillery batteries are most likely well hidden in forests and would be hard to find and hit with precision-guided munitions.
Most of their long range artillery is thought to be in bunkers, actually. Like this one (http://i.imgur.com/qyLkCoD.jpg).
-
Oh, and this. (http://www.buzzfeed.com/bennyjohnson/the-internet-is-really-not-afraid-of-kim-jong-un)
How does one recognize a military dictatorship? People wear medals on their trousers! :lol:
EDIT: Interesting piece here (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/05/what_would_korea_war_mean_tech/), from someone who's actually dealt with high-ups in the NK military - seems at least some of them actually believe that they can take on the rest of the world and emerge victorious... Some of the comments are also interesting, a few more eyewitness reports of people who went there.
-
Medals you say xD? I was thinking that they were presenting some new type of scale armour :D
-
i assumed some kind of exotic codpiece.
-
You could argue that, although the long-term radiation and fallout from nuke would kill many people.
Fallout from tactical nukes is less of an issue than most people imagine. A small thermonuclear warhead like B61 shouldn't produce that much fallout if dropped in right weather conditions. Though if their artillery is indeed hidden in bunkers, that point is kind of moot. If those bunkers can be pinpointed, they could probably be destroyed with conventional munitions.
The bigger issue is the effect a nuke would have on the world stage. North Korea's ally China has a large nuclear arsenal, and if you want to nuke the former you better make damn sure the latter (and all the other nuclear states) fully support it. The problem is this would require quite a large amount of preplanning, allowing China to warn North Korea or in the worst case scenario even nuke the USA (unlikely, but who knows).
Yes, the biggest problem with nuke deployment are politics surrounding it. Though really, any action against NK would require convincing China that they're more trouble than they're worth. At least an agreement from them would be needed, and at best, active cooperation. At present, this seems unlikely, but this could change given the recent events.
The thing is, North Korea doesn't really intend to nuke anybody.
I'm starting to doubt that. Some North Korean officials seem to believe their own propaganda. FSF posted a link to an article that further reinforces this. NK leader isn't exactly the paragon of mental health, so it's hard to say for certain what they'll do. That's the main issue. If we knew those are just ineffectual attempts at bullying, there wouldn't be a problem. But if anybody is dumb enough to start a nuclear war in present day, it's North Korea.
-
Well, according to recent intel , NK appears to be at the very least pretending to prepare its Nuclear test site for another test.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22061377
Not sure how the nearby countries are going to react to this, but it's another example of how blatantly self-destructive they are becoming. What worries me most is that, given NK's obvious lack of technical skills, how long is it going to be before one of these things goes up in their faces, especially if they decide that 'proving a point' is more important than following safety procedures. Every time North Korea has rushed something through in an effort to impress, it has failed spectacularly.
-
Accidentally detonating a nuke is pretty-low-order-of-probability event. Even for one that's designed to go off and not safe itself. They're not simple to blow up, so they're not simple to blow up, which has been the problem.
Even North Korea can't magically accidentally nuke themselves.
-
The risks of Nuclear testing go some way beyond a simple premature detonation though. Probably shouldn't have used to the term 'goes up in their faces' in hindsight, I meant it in a different form to the way it comes across.
-
it doesn't even have to be an accidental detonation. it can be something stupid. like that one nuclear test we did where we were expecting 5 megatons and got 15 instead.
-
Someone sneak the Tsar Bomba into their testing schedule
-
Oh, and this. (http://www.buzzfeed.com/bennyjohnson/the-internet-is-really-not-afraid-of-kim-jong-un)
How does one recognize a military dictatorship? People wear medals on their trousers! :lol:
EDIT: Interesting piece here (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/05/what_would_korea_war_mean_tech/), from someone who's actually dealt with high-ups in the NK military - seems at least some of them actually believe that they can take on the rest of the world and emerge victorious... Some of the comments are also interesting, a few more eyewitness reports of people who went there.
Nice one FSF. That was a rather interesting (and scary) read.
-
Fallout from tactical nukes is less of an issue than most people imagine. A small thermonuclear warhead like B61 shouldn't produce that much fallout if dropped in right weather conditions.
I imagine NK's nukes aren't exactly thermonuclear. They are fission nukes.
The bigger issue is the effect a nuke would have on the world stage. North Korea's ally China has a large nuclear arsenal, and if you want to nuke the former you better make damn sure the latter (and all the other nuclear states) fully support it. The problem is this would require quite a large amount of preplanning, allowing China to warn North Korea or in the worst case scenario even nuke the USA (unlikely, but who knows).
The scenario where the US nukes NK is silly, IMHO. There's no need for that. Conventional high tech weaponry from the US military would destroy their illusions fairly quickly.
As I see it, the US nuking NK would be completely counter-productive, regardless of the latter using nukes or not. By not using them you would show the world that even the States won't use nukes in such a dire straights, and thus stopping any desires from random nations to nuclearize themselves. You'd show that you can solve a problem without nukes. You'd also not start a very big geopolitical panic against the US. Ýou'd also allow yourself to raze NK's army without radiating their country. The nukes themselves are also completely useless against NK, since the leaders of it clearly have no regards for their own population's well being ("ah, they razed Pyongyang, who cares, less mouths to not feed ahahahah!").
-
Seems like North korea don't like money
http://www.businessinsider.com/north-korea-calls-for-total-evacuation-and-suspension-of-kaesong-industrial-zone-2013-4?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+businessinsider+%28Business+Insider%29
-
So is this an indicator that the NK's
Overlords Overseers Idiots leadership is seriously considering attacking?
-
As I see it, the US nuking NK would be completely counter-productive, regardless of the latter using nukes or not. By not using them you would show the world that even the States won't use nukes in such a dire straights, and thus stopping any desires from random nations to nuclearize themselves. You'd show that you can solve a problem without nukes. You'd also not start a very big geopolitical panic against the US. Ýou'd also allow yourself to raze NK's army without radiating their country. The nukes themselves are also completely useless against NK, since the leaders of it clearly have no regards for their own population's well being ("ah, they razed Pyongyang, who cares, less mouths to not feed ahahahah!").
Indeed. The probability of nuclear weapons being operationally-used by anyone on the Korean peninsula is exceedingly low, and virtually non-existent by anyone other than North Korea.
Given the arsenals of the United States, South Korea, China, Japan, Russia, etc, North Korea could be leveled in short order by conventional weapons alone - and probably would be. It's one scenario where you could probably see all the veto-holding members of the UN Security Council committing forces immediately, because nobody wants to give NK the chance to set off one nuclear weapon, nevermind more.
Again, the primary threat in all of this is artillery raining down on Seoul. That - unfortunately - is really not that far outside the realm of reasonable possibility.
-
So is this an indicator that the NK's Overlords Overseers Idiots leadership is seriously considering attacking?
No. It's more foot-stamping and temper tantrum, at the moment. If there's one thing that should be abundantly clear to any observer, it's that the Kim regime doesn't really care about the well-being of ordinary North Koreans. If they were about to launch pre-emptive attacks, they would not be announcing it by evacuating civilian areas.
Frightening as the events in the Koreas right now are, we haven't seen resurgence of MAD-era-type-thinking and game theory along these lines since the collapse of the Soviet Union. As a purely academic exercise, it's quite fascinating to watch - and then you remember that the consequences of what happens there have the potential to affect hundreds of millions of lives.
-
If they attack, then what will happen?
Will the UN start military actions? or China, US maybe?
-
If they attack, then what will happen?
Will the UN start military actions? or China, US maybe?
Early first response would come from South Korea and the American forces stationed in the region, targeting NK's ability to fire upon South Korea and implement denial of territory strikes on the DMZ. Japan would probably be pulled into the fray quickly. China is unlikely the immediately begin military action and more likely the continue to pressure NK to smarten up. What happens militarily from there largely depends on what NK does - if it reflects past patterns, they would stick to a single incident. Should they ramp up and attempt to cross the border or use a full-scale artillery barrage and missile strikes on South Korea, it's really anyone's guess how things would play out initially. The US has a great deal invested in the defence of South Korea.
Diplomatically, you can expect a UN Security Council resolution calling for the cessation of hostilities immediately, with enforcement by the US and most likely NATO (because we all like to get involved in everything, after all). This scenario is quite interesting, because its one of few where you could actually see Russian and Chinese cooperation with NATO forces to swiftly end hostilities, and China might actually be pissed off enough right now to deploy forces into North Korea to end it quickly.
As NGTM-1R wrote earlier, the very last thing China wants is a unified, capitalist, progressive Korea with strong ties to the West right on its borders. It is in their best interest to see any conflict resolved as quickly as possible with as little change to national borders as possible.
-
I'm pretty sure Kim boy is getting calls from China HQ 24/7 reminding him how his ****ty fat ass could get spanked hard if he doesn't behave.
-
I'm pretty sure Kim boy is getting calls from China HQ 24/7 reminding him how his ****ty fat ass could get spanked hard if he doesn't behave.
The problem is that North Korean culture has this illusion that it is self-reliant. Kim doesn't listen to China nearly as much as he should. The Chinese government is actually worried about NK this time around.
-
The Chinese public certainly have little respect for Fatty Kim as they call him. :p
-
@MP, while your posts regarding all of this are dead on and I consider you a very very rational and intelligent poster, I'l also share with you the obvious fact that you (and me) have no zilch of an idea of what goes on on Kim's head. It is still possible he listens to them *very well*, but sees no alternative but threading this line.
e: http://www.theverge.com/2013/4/8/4190656/what-north-koreas-threats-seem-like-to-a-south-korean-college-student
"What North Koreas threats seem like to a South Korean college student"
-
I was referring to some rumblings among former diplomats speaking to their counterparts in China, who have basically been saying "they just don't listen, we don't know what to do about these guys."
There've been a few comments along these lines in some pieces carried by AP and Reuters, but I'll be damned if I can now find the one I was looking for in particular to show you. However, the public statements by China's officials have been less than friendly to NK.
-
One of our comedians over here put it best:
"I really understand him, I was the same at that age: All insecure and angsty and always playing with my... rocket" :)
-
I wouldn't actually mind seeing war break out
Seeing how a modern war would carry out would certainly be interesting to see. All this Guerrilla stuff we've been dealing with for the past decade is just boring
-
I wouldn't actually mind seeing war break out
Seeing how a modern war would carry out would certainly be interesting to see. All this Guerrilla stuff we've been dealing with for the past decade is just boring
Dude, not cool. :nono:
Edit:
http://qkme.me/3ts12e
-
I wouldn't actually mind seeing war break out
Seeing how a modern war would carry out would certainly be interesting to see. All this Guerrilla stuff we've been dealing with for the past decade is just boring
You are living up to your name.
I thought you were better than this.
-
I wouldn't actually mind seeing war break out
Seeing how a modern war would carry out would certainly be interesting to see. All this Guerrilla stuff we've been dealing with for the past decade is just boring
A war isn't pretty to watch and war Between N-korea-S-korea, would mean that millions of people could die not just soldiers but innocent people, entire families would be killed, millions would lose homes economy would be ruins.
-
This reminds me of a song, Vicarious by Tool. You can find it easily enough on Youtube, but the lyrics are what I'm talking about, which I'll post here:
"Eye on the TV
'cause tragedy thrills me
Whatever flavour
It happens to be like;
Killed by the husband
Drowned by the ocean
Shot by his own son
She used the poison in his tea
And kissed him goodbye
That's my kind of story
It's no fun 'til someone dies
Don't look at me like
I am a monster
Frown out your one face
But with the other
Stare like a junkie
Into the TV
Stare like a zombie
While the mother
Holds her child
Watches him die
Hands to the sky crying
Why, oh why?
'cause I need to watch things die
From a distance
Vicariously I, live while the whole world dies
You all need it too, don't lie
Why can't we just admit it?
Why can't we just admit it?
We won't give pause until the blood is flowing
Neither the brave nor bold
The writers of stories sold
We won't give pause until the blood is flowing
I need to watch things die
From a good safe distance
Vicariously I, live while the whole world dies
You all feel the same so
Why can't we just admit it?
Blood like rain come down
Drawn on grave and ground
Part vampire
Part warrior
Carnivore and voyeur
Stare at the transmittal
Sing to the death rattle
La, la, la, la, la, la, la-lie
Credulous at best, your desire to believe in angels in the hearts of men.
Pull your head on out your hippy haze and give a listen.
Shouldn't have to say it all again.
The universe is hostile. so Impersonal. devour to survive.
So it is. So it's always been.
We all feed on tragedy
It's like blood to a vampire
Vicariously I, live while the whole world dies
Much better you than I"
-
Lay off deathfun. He's legitimately pointing out (perhaps tactlessly) that from historical and educational perspectives, war on the Korean peninsula would be quite a departure from the military conflicts of the last 40 or so years and therefore fascinating to observe.
Tragic for all concerned, no doubt, but on a purely intellectual level, fascinating. I doubt he actually means that he wants to see war break out, but he can correct me if I'm wrong.
-
It would be a brief and ultimately one-sided exercise in the application of 'cool' military tactics and maneuvers, followed by a prolonged and not at all photogenic humanitarian crisis of enormous proportions.
-
Lay off deathfun. He's legitimately pointing out (perhaps tactlessly) that from historical and educational perspectives, war on the Korean peninsula would be quite a departure from the military conflicts of the last 40 or so years and therefore fascinating to observe.
Tragic for all concerned, no doubt, but on a purely intellectual level, fascinating. I doubt he actually means that he wants to see war break out, but he can correct me if I'm wrong.
I hope you are right, Deathfun has seemed a nice person to me so far, and the possibility did enter my mind that it was just badly written. But it's saying that he wouldn't mind seeing it and the guerrila stuff today is boring that rang the alarm bells for me.
I saw your post above where you talked about it being fascinating as an academic exercise. I've found myself in a similar position before on this and other things, where my mind starts wandering to the possibilites and I can get pretty intellectually stimulated. Right up until the point I remember it involves people suffering, then I check myself and don't like that I was feeling that way.
-
I wouldn't actually mind seeing war break out
Seeing how a modern war would carry out would certainly be interesting to see. All this Guerrilla stuff we've been dealing with for the past decade is just boring
You are living up to your name.
I thought you were better than this.
i think hes been taking nuke lessons.
-
It would be a brief and ultimately one-sided exercise in the application of 'cool' military tactics and maneuvers, followed by a prolonged and not at all photogenic humanitarian crisis of enormous proportions.
also quotin myself to say that if you want war porn there's a disgusting* amount of material from Syria just a Google search away. It's a war so thoroughly YouTubed that you can actually find videos from the rebel and loyalist sides of the same battle.
*i watch everything that involves tanks exploding
-
I wouldn't actually mind seeing war break out
Seeing how a modern war would carry out would certainly be interesting to see. All this Guerrilla stuff we've been dealing with for the past decade is just boring
So... you're too young to have watched Desert Storm on TV I take it? Because that's the same 'modern war' that would happen if there was a conventional fight on the Korean peninsula. Except there is no way it would stay non-nuclear/chemical. NK has the same antique hardware and doctrines that failed against their western counterparts then.
-
Ok this is getting creepy.
As it probably should...
-
not to mention it wouldnt be a modern war. Given my understanding of NK's weapons and probably tactics, it would be more like iraq/afgan just with enough numbers on the low tech side to actually be a threat
-
It would be a brief and ultimately one-sided exercise in the application of 'cool' military tactics and maneuvers, followed by a prolonged and not at all photogenic humanitarian crisis of enormous proportions.
also quotin myself to say that if you want war porn there's a disgusting* amount of material from Syria just a Google search away. It's a war so thoroughly YouTubed that you can actually find videos from the rebel and loyalist sides of the same battle.
*i watch everything that involves tanks exploding
war porn <3
-
I wouldn't actually mind seeing war break out
Seeing how a modern war would carry out would certainly be interesting to see. All this Guerrilla stuff we've been dealing with for the past decade is just boring
So... you're too young to have watched Desert Storm on TV I take it? Because that's the same 'modern war' that would happen if there was a conventional fight on the Korean peninsula. Except there is no way it would stay non-nuclear/chemical. NK has the same antique hardware and doctrines that failed against their western counterparts then.
i cant really call the mad strategy a failure. it likely prevented the regular use of nuclear weapons since the end of ww2. as for the rest of their military hardware (there fizzlebombs too), lol.
i wouldn't put it beyond them to counter a conventional attack with nuclear response, provided they still had that capability. which if we fall back to mad, means a large north korean sized crater. continuing with conventional warfare risks further nuclear responses. a north korean first strike would need to be nuclear, a conventional attack would be totally ineffective against military targets. they can hit civilians i suppose but then the military hardware you didnt hit hits back twice as hard.
-
It would be a brief and ultimately one-sided exercise in the application of 'cool' military tactics and maneuvers, followed by a prolonged and not at all photogenic humanitarian crisis of enormous proportions.
To be fair, North Korea is already a humanitarian crisis of enormous proportions. The results of a significant military conflict would just be that much worse.
-
It would be a brief and ultimately one-sided exercise in the application of 'cool' military tactics and maneuvers, followed by a prolonged and not at all photogenic humanitarian crisis of enormous proportions.
also quotin myself to say that if you want war porn there's a disgusting* amount of material from Syria just a Google search away. It's a war so thoroughly YouTubed that you can actually find videos from the rebel and loyalist sides of the same battle.
*i watch everything that involves tanks exploding
Been there
And yes I was too young to have seen Desert Storm from any live perspective. I was born in '92.
To elaborate: We've got all these advances in war technology (from Russia's largest conventional bomb to VTOL F35s to stealth tanks) that were all designed with a level playing field in mind. Seeing them actually used in a scenario other than a test or regular flight would be a sight to behold.
Headdie does have a point though :P
Sidenote: People suffer and die as is
-
So... you're too young to have watched Desert Storm on TV I take it? Because that's the same 'modern war' that would happen if there was a conventional fight on the Korean peninsula. Except there is no way it would stay non-nuclear/chemical. NK has the same antique hardware and doctrines that failed against their western counterparts then.
not to mention it wouldnt be a modern war. Given my understanding of NK's weapons and probably tactics, it would be more like iraq/afgan just with enough numbers on the low tech side to actually be a threat
The situation on the Korean Peninsula is not comparable to the Middle East. NK is armed with Cold War era devices, but has the benefits of Cold War-era Russian and Chinese military training and doctrine. They also have chemical/biological/nuclear weaponry and *might* actually be crazy enough to use them in a conflict, unlike Iraq in the 90s and Afghanistan/Iraq in 2001-2003.
In short, I was being quite serious when I said a conflict in the Koreas would be unlike anything we've seen in about four decades, and even then not all that comparable to Vietnam. It's historically uncharted, truly.
-
i cant really call the mad strategy a failure. it likely prevented the regular use of nuclear weapons since the end of ww2. as for the rest of their military hardware (there fizzlebombs too), lol.
i wouldn't put it beyond them to counter a conventional attack with nuclear response, provided they still had that capability. which if we fall back to mad, means a large north korean sized crater. continuing with conventional warfare risks further nuclear responses. a north korean first strike would need to be nuclear, a conventional attack would be totally ineffective against military targets. they can hit civilians i suppose but then the military hardware you didnt hit hits back twice as hard.
Frankly, I think most observers can predict with a fair degree of confidence that unless North Korea deployed its nuclear options within the first minutes of engagement, they would cease to exist in short order. Even then, a successful launch is exceedingly unlikely. Beyond that, there is no need for anyone else to deploy non-conventional weaponry in the Koreas - MAD doctrine does not strictly-speaking apply to North Korea (though there are certainly lessons we can draw from MAD that do).
-
i cant really call the mad strategy a failure. it likely prevented the regular use of nuclear weapons since the end of ww2. as for the rest of their military hardware (there fizzlebombs too), lol.
i wouldn't put it beyond them to counter a conventional attack with nuclear response, provided they still had that capability. which if we fall back to mad, means a large north korean sized crater. continuing with conventional warfare risks further nuclear responses. a north korean first strike would need to be nuclear, a conventional attack would be totally ineffective against military targets. they can hit civilians i suppose but then the military hardware you didnt hit hits back twice as hard.
Who said it was? I meant 'doctrines' in relation to the (Soviet-style) inflexibility and training, etc. (which probably would be much less of a factor than the only-used-in-three-wars tanks.)
-
the best thing the nk has is its large numbers of soldiers, but without mechanized support i can see it degrade into guerrilla warfare pretty quick, assuming they still have the will to fight. aircraft and ground vehicles wont last long at all.
i cant really call the mad strategy a failure. it likely prevented the regular use of nuclear weapons since the end of ww2. as for the rest of their military hardware (there fizzlebombs too), lol.
i wouldn't put it beyond them to counter a conventional attack with nuclear response, provided they still had that capability. which if we fall back to mad, means a large north korean sized crater. continuing with conventional warfare risks further nuclear responses. a north korean first strike would need to be nuclear, a conventional attack would be totally ineffective against military targets. they can hit civilians i suppose but then the military hardware you didnt hit hits back twice as hard.
Frankly, I think most observers can predict with a fair degree of confidence that unless North Korea deployed its nuclear options within the first minutes of engagement, they would cease to exist in short order. Even then, a successful launch is exceedingly unlikely. Beyond that, there is no need for anyone else to deploy non-conventional weaponry in the Koreas - MAD doctrine does not strictly-speaking apply to North Korea (though there are certainly lessons we can draw from MAD that do).
our conventional weapons are sufficient for the job of knocking them on their ass. i would be somewhat concerned with them attempting to smuggle nuclear technology out of the country as a final act of spite.
-
The folks living in the DPRK probably have the been given the ****tiest end of the stick in all of ****land. It's one thing fighting a force that actually made something approximating an informed decision about the conflict. Curb stomping people who really don't know any better because they've lived in the Kim crazy regime for half a century would be tragic. Plus the folks in the South having their end of the peninsula plastered by tube arty and rockets, that's not really worth an experiment in modern NATO equipment vs three decades old Warsaw gear.
-
Remind me again why we bothered to build all of the Modern NATO equipment in the first place
It's not as though any of these million dollar expenses are ever going to get used to their full potential.
-
N.Korea's Asian Pacific Peace Committee tells South to make plans to evacuate foreigners from country, state-run TV says.
Just how many more threats they can make?
-
N.Korea's Asian Pacific Peace Committee
lol
-
Just how many more threats they can make?
Hundreds.
-
Just how many more threats they can make?
Hundreds.
ALL Of THEM.
SIMULTANIOUSLY.
-
Remind me again why we bothered to build all of the Modern NATO equipment in the first place
It's not as though any of these million dollar expenses are ever going to get used to their full potential.
somehow they find an excuse for everything.
-
N.Korea's Asian Pacific Peace Committee
lol
A minipax statement delivered by the minitrue.
-
N.Korea's Asian Pacific Peace Committee
lol
Holy ****
-
They say Kim-Jong-Un is gonna make the first strike himself:
(http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/webdr03/2013/4/5/11/anigif_enhanced-buzz-2790-1365175865-9.gif)
-
N.Korea's Asian Pacific Peace Committee
lol
Holy ****
Told you, you didn't wanna believe me :D
-
:bump:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/
This has got to be the work of the onion!
:wakka:
-
:lol: Well, serves them right I suppose. What makes it even funnier is that Win 8 is essentially a system designed for idiots. And they managed to mess it up. Come on, do something right for once and declare war on MS. That's something I'd like to see.
-
You are assuming that those news were actual, real news. They're not. Which is made clear if you scroll down and read the other reports there.
-
Indeed, it's a humor blog, and a pretty good one at that IMO.
A couple other posts that are relevant to the topic of this thread:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/04/kim-jong-un-moves-transformers-collection-to-border.html
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/04/citing-exhaustion-kim-jong-un-to-stop-threatening-world-on-weekends.html
-
damn if only it was true. after all anyone can expect win8 to fail epicly at any time :lol:
-
Did you seriously think Norks would be able to afford Windows, let alone know how to use it?
Oh wait, if they use non-free software, they have certainly pirated it.
-
You are assuming that those news were actual, real news. They're not. Which is made clear if you scroll down and read the other reports there.
You're right, though it does a darn good job at looking legit, and the article sounded convincing enough, Win8 and NK being what they are (I was in a hurry, so I didn't pay much attention to other articles). :) The name of the site didn't help, "The Onion" and "The Duffel Blog" sound strange enough that you can tell they're a joke at a glance, while "Newyorker" sounds like an actual newspaper name.
-
You have to be rather gullible to fall for that (Not to mention pretty prejudiced against a certain operating system).
-
As I said, I read it quickly and didn't give it much thought. Let's face it, systems sometimes fail (I recall there being an US destroyer crippled by a Win NT bug, though it was quite some time ago). New systems fail a bit more, and Win8 is quite recent. NK isn't exactly known for technical minds, and Kim threatening to declare war on Microsoft sounded rather in-character to me (it did strike me as odd, but I thought it was just another of his antics). I wasn't thinking about such details as there being no reason for NK to actually use Win8 in a missile system (or even to have it at all), or the fact NK wouldn't announce it to the world like that. Let's just say that this was the kind of news I come to expect from them, sort of like Valathil's April Fool (unbelievable, but coming from a guy who done unbelievable things before).
-
I was going to mention something about compatibility issues stemming from a jump between Windows 95 and Windows 8 being not completely unreasonable, but Dragon beat me to it (of course I thought it was bunkum, anyway).
-
You know your regime is crazy when the clearly fake news spoof sounds reasonable :)
-
You know your regime is crazy when the clearly fake news spoof sounds reasonable :)
I've seen that happen with Saudi Arabia spoof stories too.
-
You know your regime is crazy when the clearly fake news spoof sounds reasonable :)
My point exactly. If this continues, soon nobody will be able to write a good spoof news article about NK, since actual news would beat even the best humorists out there. Extremists and fundamentalists in general often provide good laughs if you're not being ruled by them, and Kim is an extreme example of an extremist (not to mention completely off his rocker). :)
-
You have to be rather gullible to fall for that (Not to mention pretty prejudiced against a certain operating system).
Yep (http://shanghaiist.com/2013/04/13/21st_century_business_herald_taken_in_by_satirical_article_again.php).
-
I think this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f37K0hIv3zk&list=SPuKg-WhduhklQR2uqYCE_aSZgfJLsy4fx) is relevant to this discussion.
-
1. That video is full of win.
2. Why did the chicken cross the road? To escape North Korea's long range missiles.
-
It still feels like when they said no world-leader could possibly be more insane than Kim Jong-Il, Kim Jong-Un saw this and thought.... CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!
-
I think this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f37K0hIv3zk&list=SPuKg-WhduhklQR2uqYCE_aSZgfJLsy4fx) is relevant to this discussion.
Wow, that's imaginative and hilarious! :lol:
And Golden Axe ending music in there too! :D
Thanks for sharing! :)
-
Since we're on a less serious note, has anyone ever played the now rather appropriately named Nuclear Strike?
Stage 4, DMZ strike!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLOOpptTXUM
-
Whelp.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/16/north-korea-sledgehammer-blows-south
http://abcnews.go.com/International/north-korea-demands-apology-south-hostile-acts/story?id=18966485
Looks like NK is mad.
-
"Sledgehammer blows", huh? So I guess we know what they're going to arm their infantry with. :) They'll soon find out Red Faction: Guerilla and reality have little in common on that matter.
-
As long as they aren't using the Ostrich Hammer, it's okay.
-
Real issues aside, I love that they're playing Time Crisis in that one shot. :D
-
Pyongyang did not hold a military parade as was expected, but instead featured music concerts, outdoor dances, and sports events. Citizens lined up at giant bronze statues of Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il to pay respect with artificial flowers throughout the day.
Interesting.