You are not logged in. Please register or login.

James
 Rep: 664 

Re: North Korea threatens nuclear retaliation on U.S.

James wrote:

North Korea on Saturday threatened to use a "powerful nuclear deterrence" in response to a South Korea-US joint naval exercise, state media said.

North Korea was prepared for a "retaliatory sacred war", the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said, quoting Pyongyang's National Defence Commission.

The United States and South Korea have announced joint naval exercises, beginning on Sunday, in what they said is a bid to deter North Korea's "aggressive" behaviour.

"All these war manoeuvres are nothing but outright provocations aimed to stifle the Democratic People's Republic of Korea by force of arms to all intents and purposes," KCNA said, using North Korea's official name.

"The army and people of the DPRK will legitimately counter with their powerful nuclear deterrence the largest-ever nuclear war exercises to be staged by the US and the South Korean puppet forces."


http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/793438 … etaliation

James
 Rep: 664 

Re: North Korea threatens nuclear retaliation on U.S.

James wrote:

This country has got to be a pain in the neck for every president the past twenty years. Probably longer, but the saber rattling just seems to never end. You feel like not taking him seriously, but since we have about 30k troops near the DMZ that are nothing more than a sacrificial lamb sitting on the trip wire, we have to take his comments seriously.

A war in Korea is probably one of the scariest war scenarios. We can obviously destroy them when push comes to shove, but it would be at a very high cost. Also, wars don't always turn out like they are planned. I think Flagg would even admit that under certain circumstances NK would actually have the upper hand in the first few hours of the war. I've seen the various war scenarios here over the years and its not pretty. All US troops and potentially millions of South Koreans dead in the first day of combat. They would also gain territory so not only would we have to bomb NK into oblivion, you gotta retake sections of the south.

If Obama even has a minor hunch that Kim is seriously planning something, he better get an armada ready that makes the first Gulf War look like a Mayberry picnic.

Flagg, I know the general rule is "you cant win a war without boots on the ground", but do you think it would be feasible in this case? Is there a way(without complete nuclear annihilation) to knock that regime out and most of their ground troops with very limited U.S. casualties? Like my example above, could we pull of a "Desert Storm" type surprise attack?

I've never understood the purpose of that tripwire. Its symbolic in nature. It's not enough to withstand an invasion. The troop levels should either be increased there or they should be pulled out and just have missiles in place.

polluxlm
 Rep: 221 

Re: North Korea threatens nuclear retaliation on U.S.

polluxlm wrote:

To cool things down that article isn't completely honest. NK didn't promise to retaliate in response to the exercise, they did so "if necessary". It means they're covering their asses for when the inevitable non-response comes. It's just political warfare. The writer has pieced together and sensationalized two bits of articles originally published by Reuters.

While I don't weep for the North Korean leadership, I do like this message. Ultimately the U.S. wants them to submit to the socio-economic system of the west. If push comes to shove both governments know the outcome. NK's response to this reality is; Well, that might be so, but we're still not going to yield, and if you force our hand it will cost you.

This puts the U.S. in a peculiar situation. They know the North are probabaly not going to carry out their threats, but they can't know for sure. NKs nuclear arsenal likely doesn't consist of more than a handful of bombs, if any, but even one of those weapons hitting troops and military installations or metropolitan areas would create a very unfortunate situation to deal with. This secures that the U.S. will thread carefully in their relations to a declared and inferior enemy. It's one of the strongest bids from the North Korean government to attain a sovereign role in world politics and gain fearful respect from the international community. It's a clever strategy.

There is of course a chance this could escalate, but church, family dinner and nuclear war on Sunday is a bit much even for me to imagine.

James
 Rep: 664 

Re: North Korea threatens nuclear retaliation on U.S.

James wrote:

While I am not a huge advocate of "regime change", if there's one place in the world that deserves it, it's North Korea. I know you're not a fan of the U.S. imposing its ideals on the world, but these people eat dirt. They rot in chicken coops. This may sound like propaganda but it does occur. Having said that, North Korea is a mystery. While we have glimpses of what goes on there, we do not know very much.

Is preventing them from eating dirt and other inhumane acts worth the lives of 30k+ American troops? No. Should we be ready to take this guy out and destroy their military at the drop of a hat? Absolutely.

The fact there are so many mysteries surrounding North Korea really works to Kim's advantage. How indoctrinated are these people? If the U.S. had to invade, are they gonna celebrate with rations raining down like manna from heaven or are the troops gonna have to shoot little kids carrying machine guns and suicide bombs?

While I doubt China would get too involved, you gotta wonder how they would feel about a US vassal state on their border.

IF we ever have to pull the trigger, I think priority number one after the smoke clears is just clearing the DMZ, unifying the country in an instant, and NOT occupying the territory. Obviously that is best case scenario but if it happened(or something resembling it) I doubt there would be much resistance to it from the major powers.

One of the things so fascinating about this region is that its like it's in a time capsule. The Cold War never ended there.

Axlin16
 Rep: 768 

Re: North Korea threatens nuclear retaliation on U.S.

Axlin16 wrote:

Who gives a fuck. They bluff every other week.

Shit or get off the goddamn pot.

If you're gonna retaliate - DO IT. And stop pulling our dicks. WE'VE WANTED A NUCLEAR WAR WITH NORTH KOREA SINCE TRUMAN.

Give us exactly what we want, so we can turn that toilet into the biggest smoldering hole in the Far East.

-Jack-
 Rep: 40 

Re: North Korea threatens nuclear retaliation on U.S.

-Jack- wrote:

Yeah Axlin08 sounds great, I'm sure China would have no problem with that..

Axlin16
 Rep: 768 

Re: North Korea threatens nuclear retaliation on U.S.

Axlin16 wrote:

Depends on how much they want to lose. They've been bluffing for years on their military strength. They're just another Soviet Union, without NEAR the size or resources.

misterID
 Rep: 476 

Re: North Korea threatens nuclear retaliation on U.S.

misterID wrote:

China really couldn't do shit against us, seeing that they have a serious vested interest in America not being nuked 16

Plus, with Japan and South Korea joining on our side in any fight, I doubt they'd do anything other than protest.

buzzsaw
 Rep: 423 

Re: North Korea threatens nuclear retaliation on U.S.

buzzsaw wrote:

Nobody with any real power is going to nuke anybody.  The only threat is from the people that think they have nothing to lose.  That group is more likely to include terrorists than any actual country.  Anybody with actual land boundaries knows that nobody wins a nuclear war, especially small countries like NK. 

How many nukes would it take to wipe out NK?  Exactly.

freak
 Rep: 4 

Re: North Korea threatens nuclear retaliation on U.S.

freak wrote:

^^^20-25 would be sufficient. In the 21st Century shouldn't starvation be considered a Crime Against Humanity???
Fuck the Kim regime! Those assholes never signed a treaty, and they have violated the armistice that was signed in '53 numerous times. That, in and of itself is reason to resume operations on the peninsula. Sorry Flag, but that is how I see it.

Back in '70, that regime attacked the USS Pueblo. The attack resulted in the death of a US sailor, and the brutal incarceration of 83 other US personel.

Later that year, the Il Sung Kim(deliberate) regime shot down a P3 over international waters that resulted in the loss of over 20 airmen.

Those actions should have warranted a response. But Soviet intentions probably prevented us thumping that cock sucker.

Then, there are reports of kidnapping nationals of nations that we have signed to defend. To me, the answer is clear.

Back in 03, I was hoping that SW Asia was a faint, and that the real target was SE Asia... oh well, I guess that Americans can't stomach more jungle shit... perhaps, we wanted to try out some new toys.

Be that is it may, it is past time that the brutal regime of the Kim's is resigned to the books.

As much as one likes it, or not, war with that piece of shit is inevitable.

And, that is why I have long thought the the capitol should be remove to Taejon. While the KPA might have an initial advantage, they won't make it past Seoul.

I must ask, what is 36k tubes worth? Not much against the US Air Force.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB