What's your prediction about how this crisis over N.Korea will play out?
Feel free to chuck in a few predictions about related matters, like US-China trade etc.
I'm going to be so bold as to suggest a US lead decapitation* strike on N.Korea by months end, that's assuming the rhetoric doesn't spiral out of control first or a military incident/provocation leads to direct fighting.
* I can't see a US strike just limited to missile and nuclear technology targets, as I don't think you can disentangle the leadership from the weapons; under attack I think Kim would go all out to launch whatever he's got, even if he's only left with MRLs, 152mm and short-range tactical missiles, probably chemical weapons too.
Quote from: mongers on September 03, 2017, 03:34:13 PM
I'm going to be so bold as to suggest a US lead decapitation* strike on N.Korea by months end, that's assuming the rhetoric doesn't spiral out of control first or a military incident/provocation leads to direct fighting
I'd hope so, but I doubt it will happen, certainly not by the end of the month, In the end, we'll back down and do nothing*, and would give Kim what he wants, if we (or he) could figure out what that actually is. In the meantime, Trump will continue to ramp up the bellicose rhetoric, and then in the end claim that his diplomatic genius ended the crisis.
*Assuming the Norks don't do something really, really stupid, like firing a missile with a live warhead at Japan.
I think the furor dies down and we get another twenty years of this shit.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on September 03, 2017, 04:29:13 PM
I think the furor dies down and we get another twenty years of this shit.
Yeah that's my expectation too. I mean, I think the chance of shit going completely sideways has risen to like 5% or something and sometimes you do roll 1 on that d20 so it could happen - but I think lay it's mostly heard rhetoric and posturing.
I disagree, there will be a war in the next 12 months, or at least a 50/50 chance of that happening. Whatever happens, we're definitely reaching the endgame as far as North Korea is concerned.
Should have done this a few years ago. Don't see how it's a realistic option at this point. Trump might still do it of course. But we're at the point where Amrican cities will go up in smoke along with Korean and Japanese cities.
Don't see how a decapitatipn strike would work without using nuclear weapons. Not exactly a precedent we want to set. Also Russian early warning system is shit. They might think we're launching on them. Chinese probably isn't so good either.
How quickly would putting nuclear warheads on cruise missiles. Launch them from subs off shore.
Of course I'd rather this not happen. The likely hood of my dying or being poisoned by falloutbis high.
QuoteThe Economist
Red lines and bad choices
How a nuclear war in Korea could start, and how it might end
Everyone would lose
Aug 5th 2017
IT WAS March 2019. America and South Korea were conducting an annual large-scale military exercise, Foal Eagle, involving nearly 20,000 American troops and about 300,000 Korean counterparts. The drill was taking place against a backdrop of continuing missile tests by the North Koreans.
Over the previous two years, the regime of Kim Jong Un had successfully test-launched several intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). The most recent was another two-stage rocket that analysts reckoned could reach any city in America. It carried what appeared to be a credible re-entry vehicle to shield its nuclear warhead as it plummeted through the Earth's atmosphere towards its target and from which decoys could be fired to bamboozle missile defences.
A seventh nuclear test in January had confirmed that the warhead carried by the missile would in time be a thermonuclear one with the power to destroy all life within an area of 70 square kilometres. Some intelligence reports had suggested that the next test the North Koreans would conduct, likely to coincide with the climax of Foal Eagle, might include a high-altitude nuclear explosion of the kind that America and the Soviet Union had conducted until 1962 to test their weapons.
Whereas other new nuclear states, such as Pakistan and India, had been content to carry out all their testing underground, Mr Kim had boasted since the start of the year that he would soon provide final proof that would convince the world to respect North Korea's nuclear capability. If the North really carried out such a test, the electromagnetic pulse it would cause could take out satellites and damage power stations on the ground.
For Donald Trump, that would cross a red line. The moment was now or never. Responding to claims by Mr Kim at the outset of what was to become his troubled presidency that North Korea was in the final stages of developing an ICBM, he had declared on Twitter, "It won't happen!" In June 2017, a few days before North Korea conducted its first ICBM test, Mr Trump had stated that the "era of strategic patience" with Mr Kim was over.
Since then, America had tightened sanctions against the North Korean regime, including taking action against Chinese and Russian firms trading with it and cutting off sources of finance generated by Mr Kim's criminal networks overseas. But with China only willing to offer token help, it had proved too little and too late to slow the North's rapid development of nuclear missiles.
The president had thus far heeded the warnings of his defence secretary, Jim Mattis, and his national security adviser, H.R. McMaster. The risks of taking military action were too great, they had argued. But Mr Trump was no longer willing to listen. Mr Mattis was said to be on the brink of resignation, partly because he did not believe that Mr Kim was about to carry out an atmospheric test. Mr McMaster had been fired and replaced by John Bolton, a hawkish former ambassador to the UN who had been a prime mover for action to overthrow Saddam Hussein because of his supposed arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. Mr Bolton had told the president that a high-altitude test was imminent. He had long argued for doing whatever it would take to bring about regime change in North Korea.
Mr Trump did not necessarily want to go that far. China's leader, Xi Jinping, had warned him that there would be "serious consequences" if such a step was being considered. It was not clear whether China would step in to help North Korea as it had in the past (the view in Washington was that it would not). What was not in doubt was its hostility to anything that might bring American forces north of the 38th parallel and close to China's border.
South Korea's president, Moon Jae-in, had at first been strongly against any pre-emptive strike, as his country would bear the brunt of any subsequent miscalculation by either side. But after bullying from Washington, he had reluctantly withdrawn his opposition. Mr Trump felt very strongly that he needed to show his supporters at home that he could still make tough decisions.
To that end, he had asked his military advisers to come up with a plan that would show he meant business; powerful enough to make Mr Kim think twice before hitting back, but not so drastic as to trigger war. After all, Mr Kim would surely realise that to do so would risk entering a cycle of escalation that would lead inexorably to his defeat and the obliteration of his dynasty—the very thing his nuclear programme had been designed to prevent.
The preferred option would have been to have shot down the missile in its boost or ascent phase with interceptors fired from US Navy destroyers. But new SM3-Block2A interceptors, which might have been fast enough to do the job, were not yet ready for deployment. The plan the Pentagon had therefore come up with was to fire a salvo of cruise missiles from a submarine in the Sea of Japan, destroying the missile on the ground. Much would depend on getting prompt intelligence from surveillance satellites and high-flying drones to hit the launch site before the missile could be fired. Any subsequent tests, Mr Kim would be told, would get the same treatment. A belligerent response by Mr Kim would be met by an attack on his nuclear and missile facilities.
Mr Trump was warned, however, that although Mr Kim was thought to be rational, he faced political problems of his own and would have to react in some way. According to the most optimistic scenario, Mr Kim might feel that he could get away with a gesture, such as firing missiles at the outer islands, in an operation similar to the shelling of Yeonpyeong in 2010. He might also conclude that he could anyway stop testing for now, as he had credibly acquired the means to hit the continental United States.
The operation appeared at first to succeed. There was little unintended damage and not much indication whether the missile had been armed (nuclear weapons are designed to resist accidental explosion—the warhead is encased in a sturdy re-entry vehicle and detonation sequences have to be minutely timed). Despite the usual threats from Mr Kim to "wipe America off the face of the Earth" and to turn Seoul into a "sea of fire", nothing appeared to happen. Mr Trump's poll ratings spiked and he tweeted: "Fat Kim just got what he's been asking for. SAD!" Triumphantly, he berated "my generals" for their caution which had stopped him from doing something similar sooner.
But even as Mr Trump was bragging about the success of the strike, Mr Kim was ordering elite units from his 180,000-strong special operations force to carry out a series of hit-and-run attacks on targets in the South. Some would infiltrate by using a network of tunnels running beneath the demilitarised zone (DMZ); others would be inserted from the sea by mini-submarines or flown in by ancient hedge-hopping An-2 biplanes that were hard for modern radars to spot. Meanwhile, North Korea's navy had also begun laying mines in both the West and East seas in an effort to disrupt trade. A series of cyber-attacks on South Korea's critical infrastructure also appeared to be under way.
Holding their nerve gas
North Korea's aim was to stop short of actions, such as releasing nerve gas in the outskirts of Seoul, that would prompt an all-out response from the Americans and their ally, but to do just enough to generate a sense of panic and uncertainty among South Korean civilians. Mr Kim's advisers had told him that their analysis, based on their contacts in the South, was that this would generate huge pressure on the South Korean government to veto any further escalation that might lead to outright war.
That turned out to be a grave miscalculation. The allies could not be sure what Mr Kim planned next, so they had to prepare for the possibility that sabotage attacks were a prelude to a major offensive. With that in mind, the evacuation of foreign nationals, mainly from Seoul, had begun. These included some 150,000 American civilians, over 40,000 Japanese and up to 1m Chinese citizens. The evacuation was intended to send a strong message to the North that events were developing a momentum of their own.
American and South Korean commanders had recommended to their governments that they should prepare for the worst. The military exercises already under way were intended to practice OPLAN 5015, a classified scheme drawn up in response to the growing missile threat. The drill, they advised, could rapidly be turned into reality. Whereas previous war plans had been premised on the belief that a new conflict would be fought along similar lines to the first Korean war (with large units first deployed in defensive formations before counter-attacking into the North), the new plan called for precision strikes and special forces acting behind enemy lines.
The first requirement would be to suppress North Korea's surprisingly lethal integrated air-defence system, which fields, along with Soviet-era surface-to-air missiles, the indigenously produced and highly capable KN-06. With that out of the way, missiles, smart bombs and huge "bunker busters" would rain down on nuclear sites, missile launchers and command posts while South Korean special forces carried out "decapitation" raids to kill North Korea's leaders. The idea was that by striking pre-emptively, any war would be both limited and short.
The problem was that the commanders could only be moderately sure that their plan would work. Apart from the effort required to disable Mr Kim's air defences, an almost complete dearth of reliable human intelligence meant that there might be secret nuclear sites that were not on the target list. Add to that North Korea's extraordinarily mountainous terrain and its tunnelling skills, honed over the past 60 years, and there was a good chance that some nuclear facilities would remain intact. In addition, missiles on mobile launchers could be hidden deep in caves.
An air of superiority
Therefore, rather than press ahead with OPLAN 5015 immediately, American commanders decided that they should bring at least another 500 tactical aircraft into the theatre, both from carriers and from bases in America. They would be needed to maintain the sortie rate required to destroy North Korea's air defences and then hit all the other targets, including both the ones that were already identified and also others that would emerge. Although it might take a few weeks, it would signal to North Korea the seriousness of their intent and might persuade Mr Kim not to press ahead with a wider attack.
Mr Kim was aware that time was against him. At this stage, he too hoped to avoid an all-out war, which beneath his usual bombast he knew he might lose. But the build-up of forces in the South, especially the rapidly increasing airpower that would soon allow his adversary to launch a pre-emptive attack against his most important weapons, convinced him that he had to fire a powerful warning shot of his own.
With over 14,000 artillery pieces, about 1,000 of them positioned in caves and bunkers within range of Seoul, he could do a lot of damage quickly. But unleashing the kind of barrage that his regime had threatened in the past would take him rapidly past the point of no return. He also had to decide how much of his long-range artillery force of 170mm guns and both 240mm and 300mm multiple-rocket launchers he was prepared to expose at this stage to counter-battery fire from the South. He therefore opted for a limited salvo that would last under an hour before pulling back his artillery to positions where it would be less vulnerable.
His message to Mr Trump was that this was just a taste of what South Korea and its allies could expect if he continued with his aggressive war plans. It failed to have the effect that Mr Kim was hoping for. Despite hints that he might stop there, with several thousand civilian and military casualties already sustained, American and South Korean commanders had to take action in case this was just the prelude to an all-out artillery barrage.
Based on attempts to model the effects of such an attack, they believed that in just a few hours up to 100,000 people would be killed in Seoul and perhaps many more if they did not act fast. That meant putting OPLAN 5015 into action immediately and with it a warning directly from Mr Trump to Mr Kim that, if he launched a missile believed to be carrying a nuclear warhead, he could expect a swift and devastating nuclear response that would "remove him and his country from the map."
The ferocity of the initial assault stunned Mr Kim. Large parts of his massive but technologically crude military infrastructure started disappearing. Tank divisions he had ordered south were sitting ducks in the narrow valleys they were forced to pass through. Any artillery that had been left in the open was being systematically destroyed by witheringly accurate counter-battery fire. Missile launchers supposedly hidden in caves were being pulverised by huge bunker-busting bombs. Twice Mr Kim had narrowly avoided being blown apart himself, when bombs had hit command bunkers minutes after his departure.
Faced with the imminent destruction of his regime, Mr Kim decided to go down fighting. The artillery he had held back began its bombardment of Seoul. A number of the shells and rockets had chemical warheads. Special forces already in the South were ordered to release poison gas in populated areas. Rumours rapidly spread of the use of biological weapons.
Most fatefully, Mr Kim, realising that his time would soon be up, had made up his mind to launch what remained of his nuclear arsenal. He cared little about the consequences either for his enemies or his own long-suffering people. He lived just long enough to know that neither of his two ICBMs had left its launch pad and three Musudan intermediate-range missiles, aimed at Tokyo and the American base at Okinawa, had been shot down by Patriot batteries in Japan before they could reach their targets. The new THAAD system and Patriot interceptors in South Korea had taken care of several medium-range Pukguksong-2 missiles. But to his satisfaction, two short-range missiles, hidden like needles in haystacks among multiple salvoes of conventionally armed rockets, had got through to Seoul.
The price of defeat
The initial death toll was put at 300,000, but the effects of radiation would mean that many more would die in the months ahead, including large numbers of American civilians and service personnel. Mr Trump was advised that he had no option other than to retaliate with a nuclear strike on the North. The decision was taken to use America's latest nuclear bomb, the guided B61-12, dropped by a B2 stealth bomber. It was both highly accurate and could have its explosive power dialled down to reduce civilian casualties and fallout. At least that was the hope.
After four had been dropped, North Korea's war was over. Mr Kim and most of his high command had been vaporised in their bunkers, his missile force and nearly all his artillery had disappeared. Despite the use of relatively low-yield weapons, military casualties were in the hundreds of thousands. Over a million people were trying to leave Pyongyang, the capital, in case of further attack. With order breaking down and food supplies getting scarce, China found itself facing a humanitarian catastrophe on its border. It claimed that lethal radioactive material was being blown into Chinese cities by disrupted weather.
Nobody knew how an appalled President Xi would respond. The shock sent stockmarkets across the world reeling, foreshadowing a global recession to come. Mr Trump, however, was undaunted. He tweeted: "Nuke attack on Seoul by evil Kim was BAD! Had no choice but to nuke him back. But thanks to my actions, America is safe again!"
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 03, 2017, 05:30:18 PM
How quickly would putting nuclear warheads on cruise missiles. Launch them from subs off shore.
While I don't fully understand this line, surely US subs carry tactical nukes?
Quote from: The Brain on September 03, 2017, 06:16:47 PM
While I don't fully understand this line, surely US subs carry tactical nukes?
Not anymore.
My guess for the next couple of years is that there will be continuing pompous dialogue between the Dear Retards, but no real shooting war and nothing settled. But there are huge uncertainties, and war wouldn't surprise me.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 03, 2017, 06:19:56 PM
Quote from: The Brain on September 03, 2017, 06:16:47 PM
While I don't fully understand this line, surely US subs carry tactical nukes?
Not anymore.
Really? I knew the navy was gay but Jesus.
Jesus was gay too, always washing dudes' feet.
Quote from: mongers on September 03, 2017, 03:13:12 PM
What's your prediction about how this crisis over N.Korea will play out?
A lot of dead people.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on September 03, 2017, 06:37:45 PM
Jesus was gay too, always washing dudes' feet.
That's only a sexual act if you're Polish.
Quote from: The Brain on September 03, 2017, 06:20:40 PM
My guess for the next couple of years is that there will be continuing pompous dialogue between the Dear Retards, but no real shooting war and nothing settled. But there are huge uncertainties, and war wouldn't surprise me.
Yeah, that's where I'm at too.
The good news in that scenario is that Trump will be spared any feelings of remorse.
No shooting war, no nuclear exchange. Random provocations every two years or so, like shooting up an island or a patrol boat. Wait for NK to crumble, perhaps pushed along by feelers sent to generals.
If NK goes full retard we turn it into glass.
Sounds like South Korea's president is on Trump's shit list so he likely views them as acceptable casualties.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/in-latest-test-north-korea-detonates-its-most-powerful-nuclear-device-yet/2017/09/03/4c5202ea-90b4-11e7-8754-d478688d23b4_story.html
Quote
Trump did not talk to Moon on the phone Sunday — in stark contrast to the two calls he had with Shinzo Abe, the prime minister of Japan and a leader who has proven much more willing to agree with his American counterpart.
...
Trump's twitter jab came amid news that the U.S. president has instructed advisers to prepare to withdraw from a free-trade agreement with South Korea — a move that is resolutely opposed by South Korea and one that would undermine the two countries' economic alliance.
Trump's twitter jab came amid news that the U.S. president has instructed advisers to prepare to withdraw from a free-trade agreement with South Korea — a move that is resolutely opposed by South Korea and one that would undermine the two countries' economic alliance.
...
Analysts said Trump's actions were puzzling.
"It's strange to see Trump going after South Korea more aggressively than he's going after China, especially since China also thinks that dialogue is central to solving this problem," said John Delury, a professor of international relations at Yonsei University in Seoul.
In an earlier tweet, Trump had said that China "was trying to help," although he added it was "with little success."
Delury said that the "passive aggressive" tone of Trump's tweets suggested that Moon had been standing up to the American president during their previous phone calls. They spoke Friday after North Korea sent a missile over Japan.
"It sounds like Moon is saying, 'We're going to have to talk to these guys' — which is true — and Trump is frustrated," Delury said, noting that the latest tweet seemed to address Moon directly, with its "like I told you."
Trump's tweet was even more puzzling, analysts say, because Trump himself — both as a candidate and as president — had repeatedly suggested he would be willing to talk to North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Un.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 03, 2017, 08:17:24 PM
No shooting war, no nuclear exchange. Random provocations every two years or so, like shooting up an island or a patrol boat. Wait for NK to crumble, perhaps pushed along by feelers sent to generals.
If NK goes full retard we turn it into glass.
Awwww, look. Yi thinks Trump is people.
South Korea needs to offer some major business deal to Trump's son in law, pronto.
The drumbeat to war seems to be echoing around the UN security council.
Quote from: mongers on September 04, 2017, 11:06:46 AM
The drumbeat to war seems to be echoing around the UN security council.
they're shaking their box of strongly worded letters again?
-----
We'll see what happens. None of if will be good, some of it might be least bad.
Quote from: mongers on September 04, 2017, 11:06:46 AM
The drumbeat to war seems to be echoing around the UN security council.
Link?
Nikki Haley turns me on.
Kim is going to get anxious soon, what with Trump not paying him any attention on twitter; maybe the N.Koreans will come out claiming the hurricanes hitting the US was their work?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 03, 2017, 05:30:18 PM
How quickly would putting nuclear warheads on cruise missiles.
Oh, those poor, poor Korean students.
Quote from: dps on September 13, 2017, 04:35:36 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 03, 2017, 05:30:18 PM
How quickly would putting nuclear warheads on cruise missiles.
Oh, those poor, poor Korean students.
What Kim's nukes will do to their bodies, Tim's teaching has already done to their minds. :(
Quote from: mongers on September 13, 2017, 02:37:57 PM
Kim is going to get anxious soon, what with Trump not paying him any attention on twitter; maybe the N.Koreans will come out claiming the hurricanes hitting the US was their work?
Well it didn't take him long to get itchy fingers:
Quote
North Korea missile test splits world powers
15 September 2017
The latest missile test by North Korea, its furthest-reaching yet, has split world powers who united behind new UN sanctions just days ago.
US President Donald Trump said he was more confident than ever of America's military options, should one be needed.
China earlier accused the US of shirking its responsibilities, while Russia called US rhetoric "aggressive".
The UN Security Council has unanimously condemned the missile test, but no new sanctions have been announced.
The missile was fired over Japan and reached an altitude of about 770km (478 miles), travelling 3,700km past the northernmost island of Hokkaido before landing in the sea, South Korea's military says.
The missile had the capacity to reach the US territory of Guam and experts say it is the furthest any North Korean ballistic missile has ever travelled above ground.
South Korea, a key ally of the US, responded within minutes by firing two ballistic missiles into the sea in a simulated strike on the North.
The Security Council convened an emergency meeting, in which members unanimously condemned the missile launch as "highly provocative" - coming as it did after Pyongyang's nuclear bomb test on 3 September.
....
Full item here:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41281050 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41281050)
Quoteexperts say it is the furthest any North Korean ballistic missile has ever travelled above ground
:o OK now I'm scared.
Quote from: The Brain on September 15, 2017, 04:36:34 PM
Quoteexperts say it is the furthest any North Korean ballistic missile has ever travelled above ground
:o OK now I'm scared.
I don't know, those missiles that travel underground seem far more sneaky, who's to know how far those things can go. :unsure:
Quote from: mongers on September 15, 2017, 05:33:13 PM
Quote from: The Brain on September 15, 2017, 04:36:34 PM
Quoteexperts say it is the furthest any North Korean ballistic missile has ever travelled above ground
:o OK now I'm scared.
I don't know, those missiles that travel underground seem far more sneaky, who's to know how far those things can go. :unsure:
:unsure:
I wonder if there's a white cat on his lap?
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/320/cpsprodpb/5CD2/production/_97826732_e3e59402-8722-4716-96b9-450f2f408a37.jpg)
Quote
North Korea will reach its nuclear force goal - Kim Jong-un
16 September 2017
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has vowed to reach the country's nuclear goals, according to state media.
The aim was to establish "equilibrium" of military force with the US, the KCNA news agency quoted him as saying.
Mr Kim's comments come after North Korea fired its latest missile over Japan - in what is being described as the country's farthest-reaching test.
The move split world powers who united behind new UN sanctions against North Korea just days ago.
"We should clearly show the big power chauvinists how our state attain the goal of completing its nuclear force despite their limitless sanctions and blockade," Mr Kim was quoted as saying by the KCNA.
Full item here:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41289532 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41289532)
Quote from: mongers on September 16, 2017, 03:46:41 PM
I wonder if there's a white cat on his lap?
He probably ate it.
Quote from: mongers on September 16, 2017, 03:46:41 PM
I wonder if there's a white cat on his lap?
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/320/cpsprodpb/5CD2/production/_97826732_e3e59402-8722-4716-96b9-450f2f408a37.jpg)
You only wish you could have that. That, my friend, is the very definition of Boss.
Quote from: mongers on September 03, 2017, 03:13:12 PM
What's your prediction about how this crisis over N.Korea will play out?
NK will keep on developping/refining its nuclear arsenal and Trump will keep making angry tweets about fire&fury about it.
If impeachment becomes a near-reality, he will launch a full strike of nuclear missile while his generals are vacationning somewhere.
Don't worry America, we've got your back! We've expelled the N.Korean ambassador. :menace:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 16, 2017, 06:46:20 PM
Quote from: mongers on September 16, 2017, 03:46:41 PM
I wonder if there's a white cat on his lap?
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/320/cpsprodpb/5CD2/production/_97826732_e3e59402-8722-4716-96b9-450f2f408a37.jpg)
You only wish you could have that. That, my friend, is the very definition of Boss.
Why don't ya git some of that bologna cake out the ice box.
I had never heard of the word dotard before today, apple even autocorrects it to dogsled. But I like it.
I'm sorta surprised that so many people are surprised about it. Isn't that where the term "doddering" originates from, as in "doddering old man"...?
Quote from: Liep on September 22, 2017, 05:50:47 AM
I had never heard of the word dotard before today, apple even autocorrects it to dogsled. But I like it.
Have you heard the word dotage, as in that old geezer is in his dotage?
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-threatens-totally-destroy-north-korea-first-u-n-speech-n802596
Donald calls Kim "Rocket Man" at the UN and threatens to "totally destroy" North Korea.
Does not fill me with confidence
https://www.yahoo.com/news/north-korea-says-trump-insult-ensures-attack-us-202235594.html
QuoteNKorea: Trump insult makes attack on US 'more inevitable'
Associated Press EDITH M. LEDERER,Associated Press 5 hours ago
UNITED NATIONS (AP) — North Korea's foreign minister told world leaders Saturday that U.S. President Donald Trump's insult calling leader Kim Jong Un "rocket man" makes "our rocket's visit to the entire U.S. mainland inevitable all the more."
Ri Yong Ho called the American president "a mentally deranged person full of megalomania and complacency" with his finger on the "nuclear button." And he said Trump's "reckless and violent words" had provoked "the supreme dignity" of North Korea and "rendered this sacred U.N. arena tainted."
Ri's highly anticipated speech to the General Assembly's annual ministerial meeting fueled the fiery rhetoric between the U.S. Republican president and North Korea's young leader.
Trump threatened in his speech to the 193-member world body on Tuesday to "totally destroy" North Korea if forced to defend the U.S. or its allies. Kim, in an unusual direct statement to the world, responded pledging to take "highest-level" action against the United States.
"None other than Trump himself is on a suicide mission," Ri told the assembly Saturday. "In case innocent lives of the U.S. are lost because of this suicide attack, Trump will be held totally responsible."
In a show of American military might, U.S. bombers and fighter escorts flew in international airspace on Saturday to the farthest point north of the border between North Korea and South Korea that any such American aircraft has gone in this century.
Defense Department spokesman Dana White said the mission demonstrated "U.S. resolve and a clear message that the president has many military options to defeat any threat." He said it showed how seriously Trump takes North Korea's "reckless behavior."
Ri called the Democratic People's Republic of Korea — the country's official name — "a responsible nuclear weapon state."
But he warned that "we will take preventive measures by merciless pre-emptive action in case the U.S. and its vassal forces show any sign of conducting a kind of 'decapitating' operation on our headquarters or military attack against our country."
Ri said, however, that North Korea has no intention of using or threatening to use nuclear weapons against countries that don't join U.S. military actions against the DPRK.
The U.N. Security Council has imposed its toughest sanctions ever against Pyongyang, but Ri said "it is only a forlorn hope to consider any chance that the DPRK would be shaken an inch or change its stance due to the harsher sanctions by the hostile forces."
Ri suggested to reporters Friday in New York that his country could conduct an atmospheric hydrogen bomb test to fulfill Kim's vow to take action. But he made no mention of such a test Saturday.
He did say that North Korea's recent successful "ICBM-mountable H-bomb test" was part of the effort to complete the country's nuclear force.
"Our national nuclear force is, to all intents and purposes, a war deterrent for putting an end to nuclear threat of the U.S. and for preventing its military invasion," Ri said, "and our ultimate goal is to establish the balance of power with the U.S."
The foreign minister's opening remarks reflected the deep anger in North Korea at Trump's derisive nickname for Kim, who is revered by many people in the North.
During Trump's eight months in power, Ri said the American president had turned the White House "into a noisy marketing place," and now he has tried to turn the United Nations "into a gangsters' nest where money is respected and bloodshed is the order of the day."
The North Korean minister called Trump a "gambler who grew old using threats, frauds and all other schemes to acquire a patch of land" and claimed he is even derided by the American people as "Commander in Grief," ''Lyin King," and "President Evil."
"Due to his lacking of basic common knowledge and proper sentiment, he tried to insult the supreme dignity of my country by referring it to a rocket," Ri said. "By doing so, however, he committed an irreversible mistake of making our rockets' visit to the entire U.S. mainland inevitable all the more."
Comments (225)
North Korea doesn't know how to do anything but raise, even when we've all seen they're holding a pair of threes.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on September 24, 2017, 12:33:49 AM
North Korea doesn't know how to do anything but raise, even when we've all seen they're holding a pair of threes.
Luckily we have a president that hits on 21. And on 24. And again on 29.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 24, 2017, 12:39:08 AM
Luckily we have a president that hits on 21. And on 24. And again on 29.
Oh God it's Jerry. Yes, THAT Jerry.
China orders most North Korean businesses closed under UN sanctions:
QuoteBEIJING — China on Thursday ordered North Korean-owned businesses to close, cutting foreign revenue for the isolated North under U.N. sanctions imposed over its nuclear and missile programs.
China is North Korea's main trading partner, making Beijing's co-operation essential to the success of sanctions aimed at stopping the North's pursuit of weapons technology. China, long North Korea's diplomatic protector, has gone along with the latest penalties out of growing frustration with leader Kim Jong Un's government.
North Korean businesses and ventures with Chinese partners must close within 120 days of the U.N. Security Council's Sept. 11 approval of the latest sanctions, according to the Ministry of Commerce. That would be early January.
(https://financialpostcom.files.wordpress.com/2017/09/xbej103-ap.jpg)
North Korean performers entertain customers at the Okryugwan restaurant in Beijing. China has ordered most North Korean-owned businesses and ventures with Chinese partners to close under U.N. sanctions imposed over the North's nuclear and missile programs.
Full article: http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/china-orders-north-korean-business-closed-under-un-sanctions
Sigh, we made it to Oct 1. Now I shouldn't have run up my credit cards. Damn you Seedy.
Quote from: PDH on October 01, 2017, 08:04:17 PM
Sigh, we made it to Oct 1. Now I shouldn't have run up my credit cards. Damn you Seedy.
How do you think I feel, I stopped making my mortgage payments.
Although I will feel no great sense of satisfaction knowing that we missed my September prediction only to die in February.
I predict Seedy lives to be 80.
DO ME NEXT.
wait, that sounds funny.
Fuck all you fucks. No fucking way I'm growing old in this bullshit country. Fuck you cunts and your retirements.
I GOT AN OUT
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 01, 2017, 08:51:02 PM
Fuck all you fucks. No fucking way I'm growing old in this bullshit country. Fuck you cunts and your retirements.
told you: Canada.
If you want to learn French and are willing to entertain another branch, we are hiring :)
At most, 45% of your gross earnings are going into taxes. You don't get any money to spend, but you get to be on the waiting list of your favorite doctor for free! :)
Stop being a dickhead, Viper. Nobody gives a fuck about your hangups with your shitty ass country. Don't like it, take it up with BB.
BB would just put him in a gaol for insufficient loyalty to the Queen.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 01, 2017, 10:24:50 PM
Stop being a dickhead, Viper. Nobody gives a fuck about your hangups with your shitty ass country. Don't like it, take it up with BB.
Does that mean I need to clean up the basement spare room?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 01, 2017, 10:24:50 PM
Stop being a dickhead, Viper. Nobody gives a fuck about your hangups with your shitty ass country. Don't like it, take it up with BB.
Then keep whining about mean Trump, by all means. We don't tire at all of seeing you whining constantly like the little bitch you are :)
Yes, move to Canada and it's like Trump doesn't even exist. :wacko:
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 03, 2017, 02:33:13 PM
Yes, move to Canada and it's like Trump doesn't even exist. :wacko:
I do not believe I said that. I only said he was a whiny little bitch.
If access to healthcare is his main problem, there are, I guess, States that offer better coverage, and there is a multitude of countries where healthcare coverage is universal.
But the main point is that he really is a whiny little bitch. He probably dreams every night he gets fucked in the ass by a closeted gay Republican and he enjoys it.
Hating on me is not going to address your self-loathing about being a Canadian, V.
That is something you, and only you, can solve. :hug:
How can anybody hate Seedy? He's a teddy bear.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 03, 2017, 02:33:13 PM
Yes, move to Canada and it's like Trump doesn't even exist. :wacko:
Yeah really. Everyone knows prevailing wind patterns would push the fallout over the border.
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 03, 2017, 08:03:41 PM
How can anybody hate Seedy? He's a teddy bear.
I don't think viper gets the joke. He's otnay ootay ightbray, you know. His hate amuses the rest of us.
October is the new September.
Quote from: PDH on October 07, 2017, 07:43:42 PM
October is the new September.
Just went for a swim. :)
QuoteThe Amazon Washington Post
The Fix Analysis
Almost half of Republicans want war with North Korea, a new poll says. Is it the Trump Effect?
By Aaron Blake October 15 at 8:30 AM
There was a pretty striking finding in Thursday's Quinnipiac University poll: Fully 46 percent of Republicans — a plurality — said they would support a preemptive strike against North Korea.
That's nearly half of President Trump's party that is ready for war — today — with Kim Jong Un, his nuclear weapons and all. (Forty-one percent said they opposed a preemptive strike.)
It's no surprise that Republicans are more hawkish on this than Democrats are; that's generally the case on foreign policy. But basically nobody is talking about the prospect of a strike right now. Even when Trump talks about it, he's responding to North Korea threatening the United States or its allies.
Yet it also seems possible that Trump's ramped-up rhetoric on this could be having an effect on his base. Trump in August promised "fire and fury" if North Korea ran afoul of him. Last month, he threatened in his speech at the United Nations to "totally destroy" the country — a threat that seemed to tie average North Koreans to their government's demise. He has repeatedly called Kim "Rocket Man" and generally proved fond of the kind of saber-rattling we expect from the other side of this standoff.
So does he suddenly have Republicans gearing up to wave the flag of war? Maybe.
There has been limited polling on this question over the years, but the new survey does show a marked increase from previous ones. In 2006, for example, a Fox News-Opinion Dynamics poll asked whether the United States should continue with diplomacy or use a preemptive strike "to stop North Korea from continuing to develop nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles." In that case, 20 percent of respondents overall and just 28 percent of Republicans picked the preemptive strike.
However, a Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted a couple of weeks ago also differs markedly from the new Quinnipiac survey. The late-September Post-ABC poll asked whether the United States should launch a military strike "only if North Korea attacks the U.S. or its allies first" or "before it can attack the U.S. or its allies." In that case, 23 percent overall and 30 percent of Republicans picked the preemptive-strike option, and Republicans were about two to one against it.
It's difficult to believe that Republican support for a preemptive strike suddenly rose by 16 points over the past two weeks, given that all of Trump's comments noted above came before both polls — and given that there haven't been many other developments of late. More likely, it seems, the truth lies somewhere between the two polls, with the questions' wording affecting how people responded.
But it's also true that the president is a politician who is very focused on what his base likes. He has proved he can affect its views and priorities. So perhaps it's no surprise that the GOP is at least somewhat more ready to strike North Korea today than it was back in 2006. And either way, it's still a substantial proportion of the party.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 15, 2017, 11:23:23 AM
QuoteThe Amazon Washington Post
There has been limited polling on this question over the years, but the new survey does show a marked increase from previous ones. In 2006, for example, a Fox News-Opinion Dynamics poll asked whether the United States should continue with diplomacy or use a preemptive strike “to stop North Korea from continuing to develop nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles.” In that case, 20 percent of respondents overall and just 28 percent of Republicans picked the preemptive strike.
Of course, there's been 11 years of diplomacy failing to curtail North Korean development of nukes and missiles, so perhaps it's not unreasonable that people are thinking that maybe we shouldn't keep following the same failed course.
Quote from: dps on October 15, 2017, 12:47:41 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 15, 2017, 11:23:23 AM
QuoteThe Amazon Washington Post
There has been limited polling on this question over the years, but the new survey does show a marked increase from previous ones. In 2006, for example, a Fox News-Opinion Dynamics poll asked whether the United States should continue with diplomacy or use a preemptive strike "to stop North Korea from continuing to develop nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles." In that case, 20 percent of respondents overall and just 28 percent of Republicans picked the preemptive strike.
Of course, there's been 11 years of diplomacy failing to curtail North Korean development of nukes and missiles, so perhaps it's not unreasonable that people are thinking that maybe we shouldn't keep following the same failed course.
And so the reasonable alternative is...?
Quote from: dps on October 15, 2017, 12:47:41 PM
Of course, there's been 11 years of diplomacy failing to curtail North Korean development of nukes and missiles, so perhaps it's not unreasonable that people are thinking that maybe we shouldn't keep following the same failed course.
11 years? Now, now...we're really talking almost 25 years going back to Clinton's Agreed Framework and that includes two terms of a Bush's Axis of Evil
tm, so let's not try to pin the rap on on the first nigger we see matching the general description, OK? Asshole.
I'm confused. We've only been dealing with the latest leader of NK for 6 years...
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 15, 2017, 02:09:43 PM
Quote from: dps on October 15, 2017, 12:47:41 PM
Of course, there's been 11 years of diplomacy failing to curtail North Korean development of nukes and missiles, so perhaps it's not unreasonable that people are thinking that maybe we shouldn't keep following the same failed course.
11 years? Now, now...we're really talking almost 25 years going back to Clinton's Agreed Framework and that includes two terms of a Bush's Axis of Eviltm, so let's not try to pin the rap on on the first nigger we see matching the general description, OK? Asshole.
11 years since the earlier poll cited in the article, and the first couple of years of that would have been under President Bush the Younger.
You ready to nuke those slopes now into the stone age star-spangled style since the nigger wouldn't do it, dps? Is that what you're saying, since we "keep following the same failed course?"
Quote from: garbon on October 15, 2017, 03:08:40 PM
I'm confused. We've only been dealing with the latest leader of NK for 6 years...
Like father, like son.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 15, 2017, 03:57:13 PM
You ready to nuke those slopes now into the stone age star-spangled style since the nigger wouldn't do it, dps? Is that what you're saying, since we "keep following the same failed course?"
I'd settle for a decapitation strike on the leadership.
Quote from: dps on October 15, 2017, 04:12:24 PM
I'd settle for a decapitation strike on the leadership.
But what about the North Korean leadership?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 15, 2017, 04:26:36 PM
Quote from: dps on October 15, 2017, 04:12:24 PM
I'd settle for a decapitation strike on the leadership.
But what about the North Korean leadership?
Them too.
Quote from: garbon on October 15, 2017, 03:08:40 PM
I'm confused. We've only been dealing with the latest leader of NK for 6 years...
Now I'm confused. If only the "latest leader" counts, then our latest leader has only been dealing with their latest leader for ten months or so.
Quote from: mongers on September 03, 2017, 03:13:12 PM
What's your prediction about how this crisis over N.Korea will play out?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_jNklBqVCA
Quote from: dps on October 15, 2017, 04:12:24 PM
I'd settle for a decapitation strike on the leadership.
For real?
You think a pre-emptive attack on North Korea's leadership is the best course of action?
You've considered the risk of the 25 million people in Seoul's capital area being subject to intense artillery bombardment, you've considered the potential cost in American lives and treasure if the region gets destabilized and the US gets drawn into an extended conflict, and you've considered the risk of destabilizing the North leading to the creation of millions of refugees... and you think "seems like the best course of action"?
That strikes me as a sub-optimal outcome.
Quote from: Jacob on October 16, 2017, 12:19:05 PM
Quote from: dps on October 15, 2017, 04:12:24 PM
I'd settle for a decapitation strike on the leadership.
For real?
You think a pre-emptive attack on North Korea's leadership is the best course of action?
You've considered the risk of the 25 million people in Seoul's capital area being subject to intense artillery bombardment, you've considered the potential cost in American lives and treasure if the region gets destabilized and the US gets drawn into an extended conflict, and you've considered the risk of destabilizing the North leading to the creation of millions of refugees... and you think "seems like the best course of action"?
Quit being a pussy. Real men drop bombs.
When has that course ever failed to work out for us?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 03, 2017, 03:54:35 PM
Hating on me is not going to address your self-loathing about being a Canadian, V.
That is something you, and only you, can solve. :hug:
I don't really hate you CdM. I just think you're a whiny little bitch and that's annoying. You always need something to complain about. You hate everyone around you and we're supposed to hate you.
If it's what pleases you, then ok, I hate you. Happy now? :)
Yeah, I'm such a whiny little bitch, I'm going to act like one right now.
That's definitely a whiny bitch move, for sure.
Meh, even when I agree with him he wants to fight about it. He's like the chick that breaks your stuff just to have an excuse for the makeup sex.
Quote from: Jacob on October 16, 2017, 12:19:05 PM
Quote from: dps on October 15, 2017, 04:12:24 PM
I'd settle for a decapitation strike on the leadership.
For real?
You think a pre-emptive attack on North Korea's leadership is the best course of action?
You've considered the risk of the 25 million people in Seoul's capital area being subject to intense artillery bombardment, you've considered the potential cost in American lives and treasure if the region gets destabilized and the US gets drawn into an extended conflict, and you've considered the risk of destabilizing the North leading to the creation of millions of refugees..'m. and you think "seems like the best course of action"?
I'm not sure that there is a good course of action with regards to North Korea, but I'm pretty sure that waiting around until they develop missiles that can reliably hit the US is a bad idea.
Quote from: dps on October 16, 2017, 05:32:08 PM
I'm not sure that there is a good course of action with regards to North Korea, but I'm pretty sure that waiting around until they develop missiles that can reliably hit the US is a bad idea.
Yeah, there are no obviously awesome courses of action on the table I don't think. The salient one is whether a preemptive attack is worth the risk.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 15, 2017, 03:57:13 PM
You ready to nuke those slopes now into the stone age star-spangled style since the nigger wouldn't do it, dps? Is that what you're saying, since we "keep following the same failed course?"
I got a hard on.
Shut up, Earl.
No wheelchair gif? :cry:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.yaseenday.com%2Farticles%2FHAD040323-12.jpg&hash=d560856eb32defceb1f80aa46a75873c713a79cc)
:lol:
QuoteWashington (CNN)
US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said Sunday his diplomatic efforts will continue as long as they possibly can despite the saber-rattling on both sides of the Pacific.
"Those diplomatic efforts will continue until the first bomb drops," Tillerson said on CNN's "State of the Union."
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/15/politics/rex-tillerson-north-korea-cnntv/index.html
(https://media.giphy.com/media/rl0FOxdz7CcxO/giphy.gif)
TURN YOUR KEY, SIR!
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 16, 2017, 07:17:07 PM
QuoteWashington (CNN)
US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said Sunday his diplomatic efforts will continue as long as they possibly can despite the saber-rattling on both sides of the Pacific.
"Those diplomatic efforts will continue until the first bomb drops," Tillerson said on CNN's "State of the Union."
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/15/politics/rex-tillerson-north-korea-cnntv/index.html
(https://media.giphy.com/media/rl0FOxdz7CcxO/giphy.gif)
Naw.
Quote from: 11B4V on October 16, 2017, 08:09:12 PM
Naw.
Yeah, well if it's all the same to you, I'm not going to put my ducats on this crew at the MGM Grand sports book, thanks. I'll go with the Jets and the points.
It's a lovely football. It is nice and very clean. Best nuclear football ever.
Quote from: dps on October 16, 2017, 05:32:08 PM
Quote from: Jacob on October 16, 2017, 12:19:05 PM
Quote from: dps on October 15, 2017, 04:12:24 PM
I'd settle for a decapitation strike on the leadership.
For real?
You think a pre-emptive attack on North Korea's leadership is the best course of action?
You've considered the risk of the 25 million people in Seoul's capital area being subject to intense artillery bombardment, you've considered the potential cost in American lives and treasure if the region gets destabilized and the US gets drawn into an extended conflict, and you've considered the risk of destabilizing the North leading to the creation of millions of refugees..'m. and you think "seems like the best course of action"?
I'm not sure that there is a good course of action with regards to North Korea, but I'm pretty sure that waiting around until they develop missiles that can reliably hit the US is a bad idea.
I doubt anyone will ally with or even trust the US after it sacrificed an ally because the the American President was unwilling to tolerate a situation that the ally has tolerated for 60 years.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 17, 2017, 12:18:21 AM
I doubt anyone will ally with or even trust the US after it sacrificed an ally because the the American President was unwilling to tolerate a situation that the ally has tolerated for 60 years.
Yeah there's a significant reputational risk to the US if triggers a conflict that results in significant civilian casualties in an allied country.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 16, 2017, 03:40:44 PM
Yeah, I'm such a whiny little bitch, I'm going to act like one right now.
Did you give another one the bmolson treatment?
Don't fret, he's just pouting. Give him a quaalude, he love me again.
Bumping as there's been an upswing in the confrontation in the last 48 hours.
Quote from: mongers on November 30, 2017, 08:57:10 PM
Bumping as there's been an upswing in the confrontation in the last 48 hours.
And what upswing is that? That we've threatened China now? That we're replacing incompetence at State with impetuousness?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 30, 2017, 09:54:16 PM
That we're replacing incompetence at State with impetuousness?
Tillerson wasn't completely incompetent during his tenure at State. I'm sure he got some pretty good deals for Exxon. ;)
Tillerson is out?
Quote from: Jacob on December 01, 2017, 09:42:30 PM
Tillerson is out?
Trump says no, which means yes.
QuoteDonald J. TrumpVerified account
@realDonaldTrump
The media has been speculating that I fired Rex Tillerson or that he would be leaving soon - FAKE NEWS! He's not leaving and while we disagree on certain subjects, (I call the final shots) we work well together and America is highly respected again!
12:08 PM - 1 Dec 2017
Apparently this was some sort of form of shaming Tillerson. I wish I was making this up.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/30/politics/white-house-tillerson/index.html
QuoteReports that the White House has a tentative plan to replace Secretary of State Rex Tillerson that emerged Thursday were an effort to express President Donald Trump's deep displeasure and publicly shame his secretary of state, a source with direct knowledge of the White House's thinking said Thursday.
The hope from the White House, the source said, is to push out the plan to replace Tillerson and then "wait for him to punch out."
The news that the White House is seriously considering replacing Tillerson with CIA Director Mike Pompeo comes as Trump remains deeply frustrated with his secretary of state, another source familiar with the President's thinking said.
And the plan is not just being considered at the staff level, but by the President himself, the source said.
The issue could come up during a scheduled lunch between Trump, Tillerson and Defense Secretary James Mattis at the White House Friday.
The attempt at public shaming is just the latest such instance emanating from the Trump White House, where the President has repeatedly publicly undermined his secretary of state and publicly berated his attorney general.
His public response to the reports on Thursday signaled no desire to spare his secretary of state -- who still has not denied having called the President a "moron" in private.
"He's here. Rex is here," Trump offered, noting that Tillerson was in the building -- but not in the room -- at the time.
The response was equally uninspired from the White House briefing room, where White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said simply that "when the President loses confidence in someone, they will no longer serve in the capacity that they're in."
The timing of Tillerson's expected departure remains uncertain, but multiple officials said the shake-up could come at the end of the year or early next.
"The clock is ticking," the source familiar with the White House's latest thinking said.
Mattis said Thursday that "there's nothing to" the rumors about Tillerson being forced out by the White House.
"I make nothing of it, there's nothing to it," Mattis said before a bilateral meeting with Libya's Prime Minister.
But the White House's tentative plans to replace Pompeo at the CIA with Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Arkansas, could present a wrinkle in the strategy.
Cotton isn't up for reelection until 2020, and moving him to the CIA role would put another Senate seat in play in 2018 -- at a time when Republicans have a razor-thin majority. That is giving West Wing officials pause, a source close to the White House said.
If Cotton were to take the CIA job, Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, a Republican, would select someone to fill the vacant seat -- and Republican officials would have a tight time frame to field a candidate who can win statewide in 2018, even though Arkansas is a deep red state.
The GOP would have to field a candidate by March 1, when the filing period ends, and the primaries are currently scheduled for May 22.
But the process could hit a roadblock as the governor's Senate appointee could not run in 2018, according to a clause in the state's constitution. But the Arkansas Secretary of State's office raised questions about that clause, noting that US Constitution may offer a conflicting view that could override the state statute.
Why would anyone work for that guy.
Interesting piece from FP.
QuoteArgument
China Should Send 30,000 Troops Into North Korea
The only way to stand down from a nuclear confrontation is to reassure Kim Jong Un that the United States won't — and can't — invade.
By Alton Frye | November 28, 2017, 4:46 PM
In confronting North Korea's adamant pursuit of nuclear weapons, so far nothing has been effective. Pledges to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula have failed. United Nations resolutions have failed. Increasingly severe sanctions have failed. And insults not only fail but also reinforce the hard-line stance of Kim Jong Un. In the latest provocation, Pyongyang resumed its slate of ballistic missile launches, firing a test salvo eastward on Tuesday, Nov. 28.
Are there any other options left worth pursuing? Cold War experience offers insight into a basic factor — a posture of strategic reassurance — that has persuaded other countries to forgo a nuclear-weapons option.
What is the central concern driving North Korea's quest for nuclear weapons? Pyongyang claims it is a well-founded fear that the United States and South Korea plan aggression to overthrow the Kim regime. To Americans, that fear seems absurd; Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has explicitly denied any such intention. Yet it is the stated basis for the intensive, costly missile and nuclear programs that make Kim Jong Un so dangerous. It would be prudent to address it directly, demonstrating first that the threat of invasion against the North is unreal and, second, that absent the threat, continued defiance of international demands for nuclear and missile restraint has more sinister purposes.
Declarations by Washington and Seoul are insufficient, but more potent approaches are available. Those approaches rely on policies that helped induce several potential nuclear-weapons states to forego such arsenals. Three critical examples were Germany, Japan, and South Korea — all countries with far more substantial technological bases than North Korea. Their choice of self-restraint rested on many factors, none more critical than the security afforded by military alliance with the United States, bolstered by deployment on their territory of U.S. military forces. As historian Michael Howard explained years ago, reassurance of allies is scarcely less crucial than deterrence of adversaries. Durable strategic stability depends on both.
Understandably, attempts to stop North Korea's reckless conduct have centered on coercive diplomacy and threats of military strikes. It may yet become necessary to employ some measure of force; continued overflights of Japan by North Korean missiles, for example, are powerful incentives to fire interceptors against them. There is nearly universal consensus among analysts, however, that overt military action carries grave risk of escalation to major war.
For years, a constant theme of debates and intermittent negotiations has been that Beijing holds the key to halting this disturbing trend. Although China is the Kim government's main trading partner and strongest security supporter, it downplays its leverage to compel that government to alter course. The Chinese are clear, however, that a nuclearized Korean Peninsula is not in their interest. Gradually, reluctantly, Beijing has been drawn into the multilateral campaign to pressure Pyongyang economically and politically. Recent months have seen China joining strong U.N. Security Council resolutions and stern sanctions against North Korea, particularly in pledging curtailment of trade between the two neighbors. On present evidence, it remains doubtful that even the sharpest diplomatic and economic measures will dissuade Kim from his nuclear and missile ambitions.
Perhaps it is time to explore a different initiative: Could China reassure North Korea as the United States reassures South Korea? As Beijing has grown anxious over North Korea's behavior, it has qualified its 1961 defense agreement with Pyongyang by emphasizing that it would assist against attack — but it would not support the Kim regime if it began a war. That is a constructive stance, but it may well be read by Pyongyang as a wobble that justifies the longstanding policy of self-reliance. The young Korean dictator may have little knowledge of China's tremendous sacrifices in the war of 1950 to 1953 — almost 3 million soldiers engaged, more than 380,000 were wounded, and 180,000 were killed. Their casualties far exceeded the killed and wounded suffered by the United States; they approach the estimated losses by the North Koreans themselves.
Unwelcome as China's intervention was to America and other nations defending South Korea, those numbers lend credibility to Beijing's security guarantee. That guarantee would be most credible, however, if coupled with actual deployment of Chinese forces on North Korean territory.
A symmetrical policy of reassurance could involve possibly 30,000 Chinese military personnel stationed there, a total comparable to U.S. forces south of the 38th parallel.
Yes, it seems counterintuitive to encourage China to strengthen military capabilities in the north. Some may find the notion antithetical to American interests. Shoring up a state with such vicious human rights abuses is a high price to pay for security. Yet the net effect should be to reduce the actual likelihood of war.
South Korea and the United States have always had to expect that in the event of war they would face both Chinese and North Korean forces. But the increased proximity of some Chinese soldiers would not alter the military balance. South Korea and the United States are already amply deterred from invading North Korea; a marginal Chinese military presence would not change that reality.
What it could do is shore up a policy of reassurance, removing any doubt that China would be engaged in the case of an attack against North Korea. That reassurance could relieve Pyongyang's expressed fear of American aggression and thus remove the justification for its destabilizing nuclear- and missile-test programs. Coupled with offers to relax economic sanctions and political isolation, this initiative should offer maximum incentive for Kim Jong Un to suspend such tests.
I disagree with it, not because of its premise--which has its own problems--but because it is ascribing to Chinese strategic policy some very un-Chinese presumptions: it's not how they envision their relationship with North Korea, it's not how they envision the purpose and evolving maturity of the PLA, and it's not the established script from which they conduct foreign policy.
Contrary to internet opinion, China and North Korea no longer get along. North Korea won't let 30k Chinese troops in, because they are the enemy. And China won't do it, because non-interference in other people's affairs is a central premise in Chinese diplomacy (and in fact in Chinese culture as well).
Quote from: Monoriu on December 01, 2017, 10:14:19 PM
And China won't do it, because non-interference in other people's affairs is a central premise in Chinese diplomacy (and in fact in Chinese culture as well).
I'm glad somebody said it.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 01, 2017, 10:14:19 PM
Contrary to internet opinion, China and North Korea no longer get along. North Korea won't let 30k Chinese troops in, because they are the enemy. And China won't do it, because non-interference in other people's affairs is a central premise in Chinese diplomacy (and in fact in Chinese culture as well).
Is the North Koreans nuking things not China's affair?
Quote from: Monoriu on December 01, 2017, 10:14:19 PM
non-interference in other people's affairs is a central premise in Chinese diplomacy (and in fact in Chinese culture as well).
Tibet would disagree :lol:
Tibet is China's affair. Because.
Quote from: HVC on December 01, 2017, 10:33:26 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 01, 2017, 10:14:19 PM
non-interference in other people's affairs is a central premise in Chinese diplomacy (and in fact in Chinese culture as well).
Tibet would disagree :lol:
Not anymore. Their resettlement program fixed that.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 01, 2017, 10:14:19 PM
Contrary to internet opinion, China and North Korea no longer get along. North Korea won't let 30k Chinese troops in, because they are the enemy. And China won't do it, because non-interference in other people's affairs is a central premise in Chinese diplomacy (and in fact in Chinese culture as well).
They don't have to send in any troops. They could cut off trade, watch North Korea wither away, and plan with Japan and South Korea and the US how to pick up the pieces. That's the grown up play.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 02, 2017, 04:28:02 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 01, 2017, 10:14:19 PM
Contrary to internet opinion, China and North Korea no longer get along. North Korea won't let 30k Chinese troops in, because they are the enemy. And China won't do it, because non-interference in other people's affairs is a central premise in Chinese diplomacy (and in fact in Chinese culture as well).
They don't have to send in any troops. They could cut off trade, watch North Korea wither away, and plan with Japan and South Korea and the US how to pick up the pieces. That's the grown up play.
Part of "not interfering in other people's affairs" is the realisation that it goes both ways. China doesn't believe that it can get help under any and all circumstances. Either it is part of a deal that involves cash, or other people are there to screw them.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 02, 2017, 05:05:58 AM
Part of "not interfering in other people's affairs" is the realisation that it goes both ways. China doesn't believe that it can get help under any and all circumstances. Either it is part of a deal that involves cash, or other people are there to screw them.
Well they need to fucking figure out the prisoners' dilemma if they wanted to be treated like big boys.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 02, 2017, 05:07:37 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 02, 2017, 05:05:58 AM
Part of "not interfering in other people's affairs" is the realisation that it goes both ways. China doesn't believe that it can get help under any and all circumstances. Either it is part of a deal that involves cash, or other people are there to screw them.
Well they need to fucking figure out the prisoners' dilemma if they wanted to be treated like big boys.
That's not how they think. They think having money, soldiers, factories, aircraft carriers, satellites, lots of land and people make them a huge boy.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 02, 2017, 05:17:22 AM
They think having money, soldiers, factories, aircraft carriers, satellites, lots of land and people make them a huge boy.
It's "big boy," you Central Casting flunkie.
Quote from: Valmy on December 01, 2017, 10:30:53 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 01, 2017, 10:14:19 PM
Contrary to internet opinion, China and North Korea no longer get along. North Korea won't let 30k Chinese troops in, because they are the enemy. And China won't do it, because non-interference in other people's affairs is a central premise in Chinese diplomacy (and in fact in Chinese culture as well).
Is the North Koreans nuking things not China's affair?
Because North Korea is unlikely to nuke China?
Quote from: HVC on December 01, 2017, 10:33:26 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 01, 2017, 10:14:19 PM
non-interference in other people's affairs is a central premise in Chinese diplomacy (and in fact in Chinese culture as well).
Tibet would disagree :lol:
All of China's aggressive territorial plays are based on initially constructing a "this is China" argument - Tibet, South China Seas etc. Whether other people agree or not is less material... so it still fits in their framework.
Nothing will happen till after the Olympics. Then Tim needs to go on a long vacation.
Quote from: Jacob on December 02, 2017, 02:06:49 PM
All of China's aggressive territorial plays are based on initially constructing a "this is China" argument - Tibet, South China Seas etc. Whether other people agree or not is less material... so it still fits in their framework.
It works for them in part because, originally, it was all true. Look up the Shantung Question; China concede the Japanese position when it had to, then re-raised the topic and eventually won. Later, it did the same thing in Manchuria. Tibet was a stretch, but by then the pattern was set.
This'll teach 'em. #
[email protected]QuoteU.S. Defies North Korea With Drills Involving 230 Aircraft
By Kanga Kong
Bloomberg
Updated on December 4, 2017, 1:02 AM EST
The U.S. and South Korea on Monday began a five-day joint air exercise on the Korean peninsula involving 230 aircraft and 12,000 American troops, the allies said in a joint statement.
A day before the Vigilant Ace 18 drills, North Korea called for "merciless revenge" and said the nation would consider the "highest-level hard-line countermeasure in history," according to the state-run Korean Central News Agency. It referred to a similar statement in September, which Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho said may refer to a ground-level test of a hydrogen bomb in the Pacific Ocean.
North Korea regularly cites military drills around the peninsula as justification for its nuclear and missile-testing program. Last week, the isolated regime launched a new type of intercontinental ballistic missile with improved technology that can deliver a nuclear warhead anywhere in the U.S, and claimed it had completed its nuclear force.
The exercise is similar in size to previous drills, but with the inclusion of six F-22s, six F-35As and 12 F-35B fighters, according to a U.S. military statement. The U.S. and South Korea said the exercises are an annual event were aimed at ensuring peace and security on the peninsula. Yonhap News reported that the allies planned to stage simulated attacks on mock North Korean nuclear and missile targets.
Talks Proposal
White House National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster told Fox News on Sunday that North Korea was the greatest immediate threat to the U.S., saying that the potential for war "is increasing every day."
Sen. Lindsey Graham said it's time to start moving the families of American military personnel out of South Korea. "It's crazy to send thousands of children to South Korea, given the provocation of North Korea," the member of the Senate Armed Services Committee said on CBS's "Face the Nation."
Meanwhile, a Russian lawmaker who recently visited Pyongyang as part of a delegation from Moscow said that North Korea is ready for talks with the U.S. as long as Russia participates as a third party, the TASS news agency reported on Friday.
Vitaly Pashin said that before last week's ICBM launch, North Korea had refrained from military provocations for 75 days while awaiting reciprocal steps from the U.S., according to TASS. Instead of meeting North Korea halfway, it said, the U.S. "announced large-scale surprise military drills."
(https://i.imgur.com/Z5TDTY6.jpg)
QuoteDPRK News Service
@DPRK_News
New painting, of high ideological value, depicts Marshal Kim Jong-Un expertly drawing "charge" from US founder George Washington.
Great Soviet leader Joseph Stalin remains skillfully poised for rebound over US fascist Abraham Lincoln.
We should also be moving the valuable supply of kpop girl groups to the US. First priority, before the military brats.
China's talking, but nobody's listening.
QuoteSouth China Morning Post
Chinese air force holds drills in 'new routes and areas' near Korean peninsula
Date and exact location of exercise isn't revealed but announcement said to be aimed at sending a message to Washington and Seoul
PUBLISHED : Monday, 04 December, 2017, 9:02pm
UPDATED : Tuesday, 05 December, 2017, 10:10am
China's air force recently staged drills involving various aircraft through "routes and areas it has never flown before" over the Yellow and East seas near the Korean peninsula.
Air force spokesman Shen Jinke made the announcement at an airport in northern China on Monday – the same day the United States and South Korea began their biggest joint air force exercise, and days after Pyongyang launched its most powerful intercontinental ballistic missile to date.
Without specifying the date or exact location of the drills, Shen said warplanes had ventured into unknown areas, adding that this kind of training would become a regular feature as the air force worked to strengthen its capabilities so that it was ready to safeguard China's strategic interests.
The exercise involved aircraft including reconnaissance planes, fighter jets, an early warning and control aircraft, and a joint operation with surface-to-air missile units, he said.
Beijing-based military expert Li Jie said the drills were intended to show that the People's Liberation Army Air Force was making strides in joint operations, which are an important part of modern warfare.
He added that Monday's announcement was also aimed at sending a message to the United States and South Korea.
"The timing of this high-profile announcement by the PLA is also a warning to Washington and Seoul not to provoke Pyongyang any further," Li said.
Although the specific location of the drills was not revealed, military affairs specialist Song Zhongping said the air force may have flown over sensitive areas of China's air defence identification zone (ADIZ) over the East China Sea that overlaps with Japanese and South Korean airspace.
China set up that ADIZ, its first such zone, in late 2011.
Song, a commentator on Phoenix Satellite Television in Hong Kong, added that the PLA's surveillance aircraft involved in the exercise would have helped Beijing to collect intelligence about the latest military deployments on the Korean peninsula.
The exercise also reflected a training push for aircraft stationed inland to fly to coastal areas and over seas in the region, according to Zhou Chenming, a military expert in Beijing.
Meanwhile, the US and South Korea's five-day joint exercise, known as Vigilant Ace, was labelled by North Korea as an "all-out provocation". Some 230 aircraft are involved in the drills – including F-22 Raptor stealth jet fighters and tens of thousands of troops – which began on Monday morning, South Korea's air force said.
Pyongyang over the weekend condemned the joint exercise, accusing US President Donald's Trump's administration of "begging for nuclear war".
Separately, China's air force on Saturday said its home-grown Y-9 transport aircraft had completed its first long-distance exercise over the South China Sea.
It said the Y-9 had flown thousands of kilometres from an air force base in Sichuan to simulate an airdrop over an island in the contested waters before returning the same day.
Yeah what happened to all this stuff about not interfering in other people's affairs?
Of course the only reason North Korea exists and the Kim family are in power at all is because China decided that they would. But we could sit around talking about who decided whose border would be where forever. I say let's just move on and unite Korea. What do you say China?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 04, 2017, 01:57:32 AM
QuoteDPRK News Service
@DPRK_News
New painting, of high ideological value, depicts Marshal Kim Jong-Un expertly drawing "charge" from US founder George Washington.
Great Soviet leader Joseph Stalin remains skillfully poised for rebound over US fascist Abraham Lincoln.
:lol:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 06, 2017, 09:25:17 PM
China's talking, but nobody's listening.
Sometimes you just gotta let talkers talk.
Quote from: grumbler on December 06, 2017, 10:16:51 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 06, 2017, 09:25:17 PM
China's talking, but nobody's listening.
Sometimes you just gotta let talkers talk.
Was kind of hoping we didn't have to do that.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chinadaily.com.cn%2Fchina%2Fimages%2Fcpc2011%2Fattachement%2Fjpg%2Fsite201%2F20100925%2F0013729e40c30e07abfa18.jpg&hash=270d383bd424c5fb86eae8be54a9a796189a42d8)