The north korea thread

[Schoeler 0]

Oh shit, I knew things were getting worse over there. This just confirms that the Bush Administration fucked up this one. Where are they going to get the troops to fight this war?

Perry Warns of Drift Toward War.

Quote[/b] ]Former defense secretary William Perry warned that the United States and North Korea are drifting toward war, perhaps as early as this year, in an increasingly dangerous standoff that also could result in terrorists being able to purchase a North Korean nuclear device and plant it in a U.S. city.

Quote[/b] ]“I THINK WE are losing control†of the situation, said Perry, who believes North Korea soon will have enough nuclear warheads to begin exploding them in tests and exporting them to terrorists and other U.S. adversaries. “The nuclear program now underway in North Korea poses an imminent danger of nuclear weapons being detonated in American cities,†he said in an interview.

Perry added that he reached his conclusions after extensive conversations with senior Bush administration officials, South Korean President Roh Moo Hyun and senior officials in China.

Quote[/b] ] Only last winter Perry publicly argued that the North Korea problem was controllable. Now, he said, he has grown to doubt that. “It was manageable six months ago if we did the right things,†he said. “But we haven’t done the right things.â€

He added: “I have held off public criticism to this point because I had hoped that the administration was going to act on this problem, and that public criticism might be counterproductive. But time is running out, and each month the problem gets more dangerous.â€

Quote[/b] ] The administration policy toward North Korea, however, has been characterized by fierce disputes among senior policymakers, which officials privately acknowledge have hampered the administration’s response. “There is an ongoing search for consensus within the administration itself,†said Nicholas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute. “The lack of a consensus to a significant extent has prevented U.S. policy from unfolding.â€

In a two-hour interview in his office at Stanford University, Perry said that after conversations with several senior administration officials from different areas of the government, he is persuaded that the Korea policy is in disarray. Showing some emotion, the usually reserved Perry said at one point, “I’m damned if I can figure out what the policy is.â€

Nor, having had extensive contacts with Asian leaders, does Perry believe that the multilateral diplomatic approach is working. “I see no evidence of that,†he said. “The diplomatic track, as nearly as I can discern, is inconsequential.â€

From his discussions, Perry has concluded the president simply won’t enter into genuine talks with Pyongyang’s Stalinist government. “My theory is the reason we don’t have a policy on this, and we aren’t negotiating, is the president himself,†Perry said. “I think he has come to the conclusion that Kim Jong Il is evil and loathsome and it is immoral to negotiate with him.â€

Bush is an ass.

[theavonlady 2]

This just in:

NK tells US it made bomb grade plutonium.

[Tovarish 0]

Quote[/b] ]"Now this is something that we are evaluating. As you know North Korea has made a lot of claims in the past and it's not something at this time that we can confirm the accuracy of,"

LOL hilarious. So positive that Iraq had WMDs, but when NK comes out and flat out tells them, they don't want to believe it .

[Schoeler 0]

Quote[/b] ]"Now this is something that we are evaluating. As you know North Korea has made a lot of claims in the past and it's not something at this time that we can confirm the accuracy of,"

LOL hilarious. So positive that Iraq had WMDs, but when NK comes out and flat out tells them, they don't want to believe it .

I think this is what pisses me off the most.  Saddam denies he has any weapons and the world's best experts can't seem to find any, and yet we roll over Iraq.

Korea proudly claims it has weapons and gives the U.S. the finger, even non-experts can see something is obviously brewing, and Bush ignores them entirely.

Now North Korea is giving us the finger with both hands and shouting out to the entire world, "Fuck you!, Ha Ha, Fuck you!" and we still sit on our hands.  What has to happen?  Do they have to light off a nuke in dowtown Washington to wake Bush up?

[mr. Duck 0]

Quote[/b] ]"Now this is something that we are evaluating. As you know North Korea has made a lot of claims in the past and it's not something at this time that we can confirm the accuracy of,"

LOL hilarious. So positive that Iraq had WMDs, but when NK comes out and flat out tells them, they don't want to believe it .

I think this is what pisses me off the most.  Saddam denies he has any weapons and the world's best experts can't seem to find any, and yet we roll over Iraq.

Korea proudly claims it has weapons and gives the U.S. the finger, even non-experts can see something is obviously brewing, and Bush ignores them entirely.

Now North Korea is giving us the finger with both hands and shouting out to the entire world, "Fuck you!, Ha Ha, Fuck you!" and we still sit on our hands.  What has to happen?  Do they have to light off a nuke in dowtown Washington to wake Bush up?

Maybe they are waiting for "little kim" to make a first move? I mean, wouldn't China get involved if The US+other countries that might participate invaded them first?

But China wouldn't help if kim dick ill invaded the South right?    (correct me if I'm wrong here)

Besides some people need to learn the hard way...

[ralphwiggum 6]

NK said a lot of shit that no one beleives, so you need a ton of salt to take their claims.

but Schoeler makes a good point. While Hussein may not have been the biggest threat, instability in SE asian region would hurt US, especially in economic terms.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

I love it- caught an interview with Secretary Von Rumsfeld a couple days back, and it went a little like this:

Rummy: North Korea is the world's largest proliferator of ballistic missile systems, they have nukes, and they are active in the drug trade.

Interviewer: so they're more dangerous than Sadddam Hussein.

Rummy: I wouldn't say that.

*Laughtrack* (At least, there would've been one if I'd been the producer)

Interviewer: ...But they've got nuclear bombs.

Rummy: They're, uhh, different. Look, Iraq violated a bunch of UN resolutions, and they have oil- I mean, Saddam gassed his own people! He's eeeeeeeeeeeeeevil!!!

[denoir 0]

I think this is what pisses me off the most.  Saddam denies he has any weapons and the world's best experts can't seem to find any, and yet we roll over Iraq.

Korea proudly claims it has weapons and gives the U.S. the finger, even non-experts can see something is obviously brewing, and Bush ignores them entirely.

Now North Korea is giving us the finger with both hands and shouting out to the entire world, "Fuck you!, Ha Ha, Fuck you!" and we still sit on our hands.  What has to happen?  Do they have to light off a nuke in dowtown Washington to wake Bush up?

Since they possibly have means of really hurting USA (ballistic missile capabilities + nuclear weapons make a dangerous combination) it is dealt with very carefully. Saddam on the other hand had no real means of hurting USA so it was safe to attack Iraq. Which of course brings up the question of alterior motives for Iraq. But that's another discussion.

North Korea is a very serious issue. I would not trust Kim Jong-Il with a pea gun, much less with nuclear weapons. Unlike Saddam he has also made numerous threats against USA. With the means to do serious harm I'd say one could without a doubt call him a clear and present danger.

I don't think he would initiate a nuclear strike against the US. However having the capability makes it a nasty wild card. Can you rely on his sanity?

While probably yes, it's a dangerous assumption.

What I cannot understand is why he has not been put under more pressure. It's quite possible that a real threat of war would have forced him to disarm. The more nuclear weapons he gets the less likely it is that he will cooperate.

Are we looking at another cold war?

[ran 0]

oooh he was cute in his small uniform

[mr. Duck 0]

oooh he was cute in his small uniform

Could be, but he's a moron now. I hope I will get a chance to pee on one of his statues someday...

[theavonlady 2]

oooh he was cute in his small uniform

Looks like that pic was taken when his daddy let him call out "fire" at a mass firing squad execution in a dark forest somewhere in NK.

[Tamme 0]

oooh he was cute in his small uniform

Looks like that pic was taken when his daddy let him call out "fire" at a mass firing squad execution in a dark forest somewhere in NK.

It is important for a healthy father and son relationship, that they have common interests.

[Pukko 0]

While I possibly could support war with North Korea, there is one thing that scares me here:

The Bush administration will lose alot of support if Iraq and Afganistan continues to 'develop in the wrong direction', and the justifications start falling apart. TBA have to gain support again...

Well, why not push North Korea to do something that justifies a war against them, and puts USA in a extraorinary shiny knicket armour. What TBA needs is another 9/11, maybe they can get Kim and his pal's to give it to them. Maybe the claim of a single ICBM shot down in the Pacific ocean would do?? Hell, I mean: it seems like TBA gets away with any claim, and who is gonna prove them wrong in the deep ocean. And TBA could maybe even get the security council on their side again.

After that TBA gets another period, and starts some new tasty wars. Indeed the US forces are too low in numbers to be able to handle too many wars. But if 1 out of 10 wars gets controllable in the long run, lets just move the soldiers from hopeless situations to new fresh warzones. I'm sure TBA could come up with a selling argument for it; maybe they get dear friends with UN all of a sudden - but only to use them to clean up while TBA continues the war tour.

Lets just hope that TBA really do their best to solve the situation with North Korea, and not just use it to their advantage. Or rather try to use it to their advantage, its quite likely that they once again make a miscalculation, and the ICBM's start flying. A miscalculation like the one Perry mntiones in Schoelers article:

Quote[/b] ]Perry argued that an interdiction strategy “would be provocative, but it would not be effective†in preventing the sale of nuclear material. “You don’t need a ship to transport a core of plutonium that is smaller than a basketball,†he said.

x

[Schoeler 0]

Well, the first Korean war was a U.N. action, and that never officially ended, so any further action on the Korean peninsula would be multilateral and not the U.S. alone.

The problem is that the U.S., Japan, China and South Korea have already stated that a nuclear North Korea cannot be tolerated, so war is inevitable if diplomacy fails.

The other factor one must consider is that good old Kim is insane. He's already shown the world that he is more than willing to export his weapons technology to the highest bidder, and given the state of his economy and that there is no love lost between North Korea and the western world, what's to stop him?

Rumsfeld can play duck and cover all he wants to right now, but when the shots start flying, we are going to have to shoot back.

[denoir 0]

Would it be possible at all for the US to wage war on NK today? It is a serious military challange and the major part of the US forces are already tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Schoeler 0]

Supposedly we have the capability of fighting in two major theatres of warfare, but that's a theory that has never been tested. Can we fight the war? Of course, we have the industrial strength and manpower to do so, but it would require a large buildup and reinstituting a draft. It would take two years at least to ramp up for that type of sustained combat.

[ralphwiggum 6]

we already have 2 wars - Iraq and Afghanistan. i think 'Win-Win' scenario only had military action in mind. in that case, we already have enough forces spread around in both countries.

[The Frenchman 0]

oooh he was cute in his small uniform

Looks like that pic was taken when his daddy let him call out "fire" at a mass firing squad execution in a dark forest somewhere in NK.

Couldn't be, there is a fence behind him.

[denoir 0]

we already have 2 wars - Iraq and Afghanistan. i think 'Win-Win' scenario only had military action in mind. in that case, we already have enough forces spread around in both countries.

It's not just a question about available man power. You have to have the logistics in place. Also, if I remember right, the troops that are currently in Iraq are whining about going home - how would they feel and function if they were dragged off to another more dangerous conflict across the world?

I agree with Schoeler. It's possible in theory, but a solid buildup would be required as well as possibly reinstituting a draft.

[ralphwiggum 6]

It's not just a question about available man power. You have to have the logistics in place. Also, if I remember right, the troops that are currently in Iraq are whining about going home - how would they feel and function if they were dragged off to another more dangerous conflict across the world?

I agree with Schoeler. It's possible in theory, but a solid buildup would be required as well as possibly reinstituting a draft.

a war requires man power and logistics. so techinically we are still at war on both fronts. which means we can do win-win situation, but one more and we are putting ourselves in to overdrive.

the 3rd Mech. Inf. Div. story is the most talked about one. the soldiers thought they could beat Hussein's boys and go home, but finding that they have indefinite stay and can't see their loved ones for a long time, the morale is bound to be affected.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Shit, no way in hell we could take on North Korea in our current situation. Right now we have less than 10 full-strength combat divisions in the US Army, and Darth Rumsfeld wants to reduce that number to between 6 and 8 divisions. Even after we committed elements of no less than 6 of those divisions to the Iraq war (which also involved a Coalition and a substantial portion of the Marine Corps). The logistics aren't as big a problem as the manpower. We simply do not have the set-piece combat strength that we did circa 1985. We may have more firepower per capita now, but in a conflict no amount of whiz-bang technology can replace the old fashioned line-doggie to defend and occupy ground, which would be the main operation in a Korean conflict.

[Schoeler 0]

Tex, you better vote then in the next election or your draft status could be 1-A by then. We have the resources to fight the North Koreans, but only in their raw state. There are plenty of young men who could be drafted, and lots of facotries that could be geared up for producing arms and munitions. Two years and we could be ready. But who want to fight, when all Bush has to do is actually try diplomacy?

[Tex -USMC- 0]

We have the resources to fight the North Koreans, but only in their raw state.  There are plenty of young men who could be drafted, and lots of facotries that could be geared up for producing arms and munitions.  Two years and we could be ready.  

Hmm, sounds like a good way to get Seoul reduced to a radioactive ghost town. At any rate, it seems like the best way to keep us from attacking North Korea is to keep the current administration in place- they're only interested in countrie's with oil

[denoir 0]

CNN:

Quote[/b] ]BREAKING NEWS South and North Korean soliders have exchanged fire along their border. No casualties reported. More soon.

[Tovarish 0]

CNN:

Quote[/b] ]BREAKING NEWS South and North Korean soliders have exchanged fire along their border. No casualties reported. More soon.  

Shit

This could be incredibly bad. Not only is NK the only communist regime out there that hasn't renounced Stalin's brand of communism, they're still following his model. Man, and I thought I was past the days of worrying about the cold war going hot.