PDA

View Full Version : North Korea


e-varmint
05-26-2010, 08:15 AM
Tensions are mounting between the Koreas, and I am starting to suspect that North Korea, not domestic engineering, may well end up being Obama's defining issue.

If you were suddenly to find yourself the President of the United States of America, what would you do to try and prevent a legacy-destroying war from breaking out? You don't have to be an American citizen to answer this, by the way. This is a magical-fantasy-thread where anyone, anywhere, could be suddenly transmogrified into the President.

Ztalker
05-26-2010, 10:02 AM
I talked with my students (10-12 year olds) about North Korea.
They couldn't imagine people in there don't know about the world and we don't know about them.

One of them jokingly said they could all be driving replica Ferrari's behind that big barb-wired border.

But seriously, it's insane what's going on there.
I feel so sorry for that people in there. Although they won't understand why. They won't even know we exist.
We need more North Korean members here.

Kim-Jung Ill skin for Kotor 2...

Sabretooth
05-26-2010, 10:27 AM
I would accuse North Korea of harbouring weapons of mass destruction and launch an invasion to bring the fruits of democracy and liberation to the North Korean people.

Actually scratch that, they really have WMDs, and not quite as much oil.

mimartin
05-26-2010, 11:44 AM
If you were suddenly to find yourself the President of the United States of America, what would you do to try and prevent a legacy-destroying war from breaking out?I would do just as my fellow "Texan" did when he was President, I would cover my eyes, plug my ears and ignore North Korea completely. Perhaps I’d invade some third world county with an inferior military to take the media’s attention off the real threats.

Jae Onasi
05-26-2010, 11:46 AM
Well, we have some naval vessels doing 'training maneuvers' off the coast of N. Korea right now. It's a dangerous game of brinksmanship, and N. Korea has, fortunately for the rest of us, backed down in the past.

Samnmax221
05-26-2010, 02:11 PM
If they didn't have thousands of artillery pieces pointed at Seoul we'd have done away with them a long time ago. Not to mention the refuge crisis that will occur.

I say we steal the USS Pueblo back and let those ****ers have John Anthony Walker, after letting me break all his extremities first of course.

urluckyday
05-26-2010, 02:24 PM
This is where I wish covert ops like we see in Splinter Cell were real...Sam Fisher taking out Kim Jong Il would be good for the world.

Totenkopf
05-26-2010, 02:46 PM
China remains the real problem here. As long as it allows NK to hide behind its skirt, KJI will continue to get away with this type of thing. Perhaps this administration can try its 16+ month MO and apologize to KJI in hopes that he'll relent and behave. :rolleyes: W/o the PRC, NK would likely go down in flames over some stupid miscalculation. Even when they had the actual advantage of arms and surprise in 1950, they strill lost w/in ~6 months, till the PRC ultimately pulled its arse out of the crapper. Maybe when Crazy Kim kicks off things might settle down. Then again....

Darth Avlectus
05-26-2010, 03:41 PM
I wish someone would pull a Vlad Tepes Dracula on Kim Jong-Iil and display it publicly. I am ****in' sick of N. Korea pulling this BS time and time again.

What will probably happen is we will continue to do nothing regardless who is in office. They will chip away at us in an attrition strategy, spitting on efforts of diplomatic talk, and wait until we can't do anything. Then they will make aggressive moves and hurt somebody, take over S. Korea, and China will just sit and gloat the whole time.

And here we'll be with our head still up our own ass.

machievelli
05-26-2010, 03:44 PM
With Uncle Kim and his father telling their people for the last almost 50 years that we are the cause of all their discomforts, brinksmanship is just another way of saying someone on either side will do something stupid. Sinking a South Korean warship was down right stupid if they wanted things to calm down. As for China, we don't have Truman in office to restrain our generals this time, but we don't have Doug MacArthur to kick their behinds either. If we get into a war with them, we've already lost. The Press is so slanted that war is bad, that they could take the Pueblo again and all we'd do is sit there and take it. Maybe if they took the Ronald Reagan...

ChAiNz.2da
05-26-2010, 03:59 PM
nullify, repeal, revoke, or terminate EO 11905, 12036 & 12333.
Problem Solved. ;)

e-varmint
05-26-2010, 05:59 PM
What will probably happen is we will continue to do nothing regardless who is in office. They will chip away at us in an attrition strategy, spitting on efforts of diplomatic talk, and wait until we can't do anything. Then they will make aggressive moves and hurt somebody, take over S. Korea, and China will just sit and gloat the whole time.



I certainly see an element of "testing the limits" in their latest actions. I wonder how a strategic "leak" from the White House revealing "plans" to reactivate the Draft would work? Perhaps a few Tropical Island Reality Shows with lots of jungle combat? Spike TV replaces Star Wars Saturday with Apocalypse Now Saturday. Oh, and green-light the M-8 in desert AND jungle models.

ForeverNight
05-26-2010, 06:19 PM
I'm with Chainz here, just black bag it and let an 'unconnected' group take out Kim. But, in all seriousness, something needs to be done. I don't know what, since there's nothing diplomatic that can really deter them.

Maybe we could convince the PRC to stay away... unlikely but we can dream, right?

Blix
05-26-2010, 06:46 PM
It's hard to say for me really, because I don't watch the news or pay much attention to what the past two presidents (yea I know but I'm just like that). I guess if it were at all possible I try to keep the situation as diplomatic as possible and try to prevent a war from breaking out, if they did have WMDs and showed them off on satellite TV or something well I don't know...I guess I would try to negotiate with them to pick a target away from the US...one of Jupiter's moons maybe?

Lord of Hunger
05-26-2010, 07:02 PM
Prevent a war with NK? As long as we can avoid it extending into a war with China, I'd blast NK's military into oblivion and hand the country over to SK so the two can be one happy nation. I'd probably have to pull some troops out of Iraq to compensate, but that country is far more stable now so no sweat.

Darth Avlectus
05-26-2010, 07:09 PM
I certainly see an element of "testing the limits" in their latest actions. I wonder how a strategic "leak" from the White House revealing "plans" to reactivate the Draft would work? Perhaps a few Tropical Island Reality Shows with lots of jungle combat? Spike TV replaces Star Wars Saturday with Apocalypse Now Saturday. Oh, and green-light the M-8 in desert AND jungle models.

Yeah they've been saber rattling for a while now at least. However I think our current status of retracting from the wars abroad means they are either just trying to make themselves look tougher and fly in our face and/or are getting seriously bolder on all fronts. They'd laugh for the time being like "yahright" in response to our strategy 'leak'. I have my doubts about anyone lifting a finger on our side until after something happened, and even after the fact I think it'd be lackadaisical in response. Regardless what admin or party is in power.

What next? Chavez and Jong-Iil becoming best buddies?

Oh and I miss spike and scifi. :(

Ping
05-26-2010, 07:53 PM
I think China is only supporting the PDRK because they don't want a NATO allied country right on their borders. China's relations with North Korea have been a bit strained after NK unveiled the missiles, IIRC.

I would handle the situation in the following way: I would simply tell NK to screw off, possibly even introduce tough sanctions. If they continued to be aggressive, I would resume the Korean War, but only as a last resort, or if they seem serious about an attack.

Honestlly, I just think NK is bulls****ing everyone, since they're all talk. If they wanted to, and I'm sure they really do, they could conquer S. Korea. They're just afraid to go to war with us.

machievelli
05-26-2010, 08:39 PM
I think China is only supporting the PDRK because they don't want a NATO allied country right on their borders. China's relations with North Korea have been a bit strained after NK unveiled the missiles, IIRC.

I would handle the situation in the following way: I would simply tell NK to screw off, possibly even introduce tough sanctions. If they continued to be aggressive, I would resume the Korean War, but only as a last resort, or if they seem serious about an attack.

Honestlly, I just think NK is bulls****ing everyone, since they're all talk. If they wanted to, and I'm sure they really do, they could conquer S. Korea. They're just afraid to go to war with us.

Actually if you look at the military comparisons, the NK and SK armies are almost the same sizes. The NK have almost everything the Russians would have deployed until about 15 years ago, and the only problem they would have is supply, since they do not have enough in storage to maintain a war lasting much more than a month, so winning? Possible, but unlikely.

Threatening the world with Nukes is contra-indicated, because as I pointed out a couple of years ago, firing them off at Us or Japan would be like a street gang doing a drive by on a police station, very exciting for all the time it takes for us (And not just us) to nuke them into the stone age.

Samnmax221
05-26-2010, 11:21 PM
This is the only ****ing way to deal with North Koreans. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paul_Bunyan#Operation_Paul_Bunyan)

JediAthos
05-27-2010, 12:47 AM
By itself the North Korean army would be no match for the combined forces of South Korea and the United States.

That said, the U.S. militarily speaking, is said by some to be overextended as it is right now and can't afford another hot spot to ignite particularly if the Chinese were to back an aggressive attack by the North directly on the South (i.e coming across the border).

On the other hand I did read somewhere (and I really can't remember where) that even with the situation currently in Iraq and Afghanistan the U.S. would still have no trouble supporting South Korea should the need arise.

I hope things don't degenerate to shooting in that area because it could get very ugly very quickly. Maybe the Chinese will pimp slap Kim Jong Il and put him in his place

Dr. Makaveli
05-27-2010, 03:14 AM
Well, the way this noob sees it is thus:

Nuclear weapons are out for them, because that would draw the whole world down on them-political and literal suicide.

China militarily supporting a North Korean invasion? I don't think that's likely. I think they just support them because of the proxy game, you know? The cold war on a smaller scale.

From all I can see, South Korea's got a pretty tough military with a defensive mindset, and I think it would be quite hard for the NK's to conduct a surprise attack to temporarily neutralise the balance.

Their invasion of South Korea would be a declaration of war against us. True, our army is rather occupied. But we do have a fairly significant presence in country and in the Pacific. (ie: Okinawa/Guam)
If it got urgent, maybe we could redeploy from Iraq? :S

But what we can hold over them is our carrier fleets (and our land based air).

There is no (reasonable) way they could win an war versus South Korea.
Even if they did, I'm fairly confident we (and our international allies) would not give up. They're one of our closest allies. I'd probably be able to report from the front lines if that happened, though.

All of this assumes that the leaders of North Korea are, you know, somewhat reasonable. A major assumption, that is.

Getting back to the original question, I would stay the course we are on. Remain an unwavering ally of South Korea. Keep troops and planes in country so they don't get ideas. Draw a hard, but not militaristic, line on North Korea and continue to lean on their allies like we are.

Totenkopf
05-27-2010, 06:22 AM
This is the only ****ing way to deal with North Koreans. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paul_Bunyan#Operation_Paul_Bunyan)

This administration just doesn't have the stones to do something like that.

mimartin
05-27-2010, 11:29 AM
At least this administration, unlike the last, has the brain power to know that if you are attacked by “B” you don’t invade “C.” Personally I like the idea of the Executive Branch using their brains and not letting their “stones” do all the thinking. ;)

machievelli
05-27-2010, 01:38 PM
Well, the way this noob sees it is thus:

Nuclear weapons are out for them, because that would draw the whole world down on them-political and literal suicide.

China militarily supporting a North Korean invasion? I don't think that's likely. I think they just support them because of the proxy game, you know? The cold war on a smaller scale.

From all I can see, South Korea's got a pretty tough military with a defensive mindset, and I think it would be quite hard for the NK's to conduct a surprise attack to temporarily neutralise the balance.

Their invasion of South Korea would be a declaration of war against us. True, our army is rather occupied. But we do have a fairly significant presence in country and in the Pacific. (ie: Okinawa/Guam)
If it got urgent, maybe we could redeploy from Iraq? :S

But what we can hold over them is our carrier fleets (and our land based air).

There is no (reasonable) way they could win an war versus South Korea.
Even if they did, I'm fairly confident we (and our international allies) would not give up. They're one of our closest allies. I'd probably be able to report from the front lines if that happened, though.

All of this assumes that the leaders of North Korea are, you know, somewhat reasonable. A major assumption, that is.

Getting back to the original question, I would stay the course we are on. Remain an unwavering ally of South Korea. Keep troops and planes in country so they don't get ideas. Draw a hard, but not militaristic, line on North Korea and continue to lean on their allies like we are.

The other major assumption you made is that it would not go nuclear. The problem is the Chinese Doctrine which in this follows the old Soviet doctrine is that a nuclear weapon is a weapon, and can be deployed. That was why the Russians had an entire command structure for what was euphemistically called 2nd Artillery, or ballistic and battlefield missiles. This is the same doctrine the NK military is using.

When all else fails, look at the doctrine for how to handle something.

Once the NK start losing, too much of Uncle Kim's face with the world would be tied up in that loss. His father survived it because he was able to flee into China and run a government in exile until the Chinese army stabilized the situation, then puit him back on his throne.

For the same reason, China cannot pull a rabbit out of their hat this time by coming to their aid as directly. In 1950 China did not have nukes, and we did. The only thing that restrained us from nuking the peninsula was Truman wasn't willng to go all apocalyptic on them. If China jumped in physically again, since they have their own nuclear arsenal, the gloves would come off very quickly if NK fired one off thinking China would back that play. Because we would automatically assume that Chine knew about it before the launch.

By itself the North Korean army would be no match for the combined forces of South Korea and the United States.

That said, the U.S. militarily speaking, is said by some to be overextended as it is right now and can't afford another hot spot to ignite particularly if the Chinese were to back an aggressive attack by the North directly on the South (i.e coming across the border).

On the other hand I did read somewhere (and I really can't remember where) that even with the situation currently in Iraq and Afghanistan the U.S. would still have no trouble supporting South Korea should the need arise.

I hope things don't degenerate to shooting in that area because it could get very ugly very quickly. Maybe the Chinese will pimp slap Kim Jong Il and put him in his place

NK has been resistant to pressure even from the Chinese since this whole nuclear mess started. Unless they are willing to actively assist us in disarming them, the NK nukes will be there when I die of old age.

Totenkopf
05-27-2010, 03:30 PM
At least this administration, unlike the last, has the brain power to know that if you are attacked by “B” you don’t invade “C.” Personally I like the idea of the Executive Branch using their brains and not letting their “stones” do all the thinking. ;)

Much like they have the brain power to ignore the problem at the border and employ sophistry to avoid doing their duty and then call it nuance (vs the last one that was apparently too dumb to know it was failing. :xp: ). Clinton was purportedly more intelligent than Bush, but all we got from him was an $80+ million rock busting plan in afghanistan and a smoking pill factory in Africa. But hell, in his case, all his blood was probably going to his little head. ;)

NK has been resistant to pressure even from the Chinese since this whole nuclear mess started. Unless they are willing to actively assist us in disarming them, the NK nukes will be there when I die of old age.

Maybe by then the Japanese and SK will have some too. The PRC isn't going to do anything substantial to NK, if only b/c it keeps the US and others somewhat off balance. The NK know this and use it to their advantage. I guess NK will play brinksmanship games for as long as they can get away with it to extort from the "west".

mimartin
05-27-2010, 03:58 PM
What border problem, the guy thinking with his stones fixed that. :xp:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPA75H5uVIo

Totenkopf
05-27-2010, 04:22 PM
That was ironically funny. But, since I didn't give Bush any credit for fixing the problem.. ;)

machievelli
05-27-2010, 06:36 PM
Maybe by then the Japanese and SK will have some too. The PRC isn't going to do anything substantial to NK, if only b/c it keeps the US and others somewhat off balance. The NK know this and use it to their advantage. I guess NK will play brinksmanship games for as long as they can get away with it to extort from the "west".

I know South Korea has yet to set aside the nonproliferation pact, but that is because they have us behind them with enough nukes to crackle glaze a quarter of the planet. As for Japan they have an advantage no other country has, two areas of their own where nukes were used. They are so phobic that American warships that can or will carry nuclear weapons are usually refused entry to their harbors.

You have to remember that with the technology to build nuclear powered merchant ships and warships, they built exactly one (The name for the merchant ship escapes me) which was immediately docked and dismantled because of public outcry. Having almost 200,000 of your citizens reduced to superheated plasma will do that to you.

Totenkopf
05-27-2010, 11:10 PM
I know South Korea has yet to set aside the nonproliferation pact, but that is because they have us behind them with enough nukes to crackle glaze a quarter of the planet. As for Japan they have an advantage no other country has, two areas of their own where nukes were used. They are so phobic that American warships that can or will carry nuclear weapons are usually refused entry to their harbors.

You have to remember that with the technology to build nuclear powered merchant ships and warships, they built exactly one (The name for the merchant ship escapes me) which was immediately docked and dismantled because of public outcry. Having almost 200,000 of your citizens reduced to superheated plasma will do that to you.

Not sure I see having two formerly nuked cities as an advantage (except for maybe the no-nukes crowd). However, the Japanese have two basic choices before them: be cowed by the PRC as America's influence wanes in that part of the world or build their own deterrent to the PRC. It is estimated that they can start making bombs in 3-6 months. Don't see it happening anytime soon (say next 15-25 years), but things change. Non-proliferation is mostly a lip-serviced ideal and nations will ultimately revoke treaties if they are perceived as putting themselves at a disadvantage. Let's just hope that this "outburst" doesn't lead to something worse down the road (afterall, this is NK's MO when they want something) via miscalculation. Maybe one of their subs could have an accident.......

Nedak
05-27-2010, 11:31 PM
All I know is that before we do anything (invasion is impossible against a brainwashed masses) we need to get permission from the UN and most importantly...China.

JediAthos
05-28-2010, 12:57 AM
All I know is that before we do anything (invasion is impossible against a brainwashed masses) we need to get permission from the UN and most importantly...China.


The U.S. is not going to take any military action against North Korea except in retaliation for an overt attack on the South. (i.e. the North's military crossing the border.)

Astor
05-28-2010, 07:30 AM
Beijing will not protect S. Korea Ship attackers, PM says. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia_pacific/10181527.stm)

Of course, that might not mean anything.

Darth Avlectus
05-28-2010, 07:42 PM
Somehow that doesn't surprise me. I knew it--they're getting phat off all this stuff going down b/c they will come out on top. :dozey:

GODKING
12-21-2010, 05:01 PM
Woops i just started a thread about this and i didnt know they already had one. srry