|
.
sincx fucked around with this message at 06:32 on Mar 23, 2021 |
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 00:37 |
|
|
sincx posted:If South Korea launches a surgical strike (using cruise missles, for example) on NK's nuclear facilities, would China respond militarily? Just start a war man, gently caress it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
sincx posted:If South Korea launches a surgical strike (using cruise missles, for example) on NK's nuclear facilities, would China respond militarily? mr. clancy i'm impressed you've managed to cast off the veil of death and return to the mortal plane but don't you have better things to do than post on a forum
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
.
sincx fucked around with this message at 06:32 on Mar 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
sincx posted:There's already a war. Nobody is actively shooting. And gently caress, yes China would probably have some strongly worded letters sent, but North Korea would unleash hell. Would they lose? Yes. but they would cause immense havoc before they went down. Please don't turn a cold war into a hot one, Mr. Clancy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
sincx posted:If South Korea launches a surgical strike (using cruise missles, for example) on NK's nuclear facilities, would China respond militarily? Let's hope they manage to destroy every single nuke! Hope none of them are aboard submarines, maybe right next to that submarine-launched missile they just tested!
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
sincx posted:There's already a war. Go stand in downtown Seoul and repeat this. There's already a war, so gently caress it! You'll just get into a bunker. You know what is really cool about those bunkers? They definitely exist, they are perfectly safe, and they have room for twenty five million Koreans and your dumb rear end.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
Seoul still isn't actually targetable by the North Koreans, the deaths are going to be actual South Korean military. It sucks for South Koreans but in a qite different way than you seem to think.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:Yeah, if the 90's famine didn't cause the regime to collapse, no natural disaster or emergency situation will. Especially since it's easier to shift the blame away with an epidemic. Wouldn't this depend on how much North Korea has recovered to its pre-famine state, though? If North Korea weathered the famine but didn't manage to bounce back in terms of food security, nutrition, economic development, and so on, it seems to me that they would still be vulnerable to another national crisis. The famine would have been the staggering blow in the past, but a pandemic or rebellion or whatever would be the finishing one today. Not that it would be a good or desirable thing, of course; I just think that it's hazardous to say the North Korean government is totally resilient because it survived a famine situation, when it's possible that the famine (among other factors) has ultimately dropped the baseline for post-famine resilience in the face of crisis.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
I think it may depend on how spread out the population is. I could picture North Korea slowly contracting, with the population concentrated in the most livable areas and the rest of the country going back to nature.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
sincx posted:If South Korea launches a surgical strike (using cruise missles, for example) on NK's nuclear facilities, would China respond militarily? http://www.yhchang.com/OPERATION_NUKOREA.html
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Seoul still isn't actually targetable by the North Koreans, the deaths are going to be actual South Korean military. It sucks for South Koreans but in a qite different way than you seem to think. I thought the DPRK had plenty of conventional artillery that can reach Seoul.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:I thought the DPRK had plenty of conventional artillery that can reach Seoul. No. They have a small amount of artillery that could reach the northern suburbs consistently, if they're even still in working order, and if they don't get wiped out by South Korean counter-fire that's been targeted where the North Korean artillery is for decades. Their ranges are way better suited for hitting the military bases the South Koreans have north of Seoul, and the South's counterpart artillery that's positioned to fire over the DMZ into the North. The position of the North Korean side of the DMZ in relation to Seoul, in combination with the terrain between there and Seoul, makes it very difficult to hit Seoul - it's a large part of why the DMZ is where it is, because the South Koreans always fought to try to keep the Northern troops as far from Seoul as possible. A terrain map helps to illustrate it, you can see the DMZ's center point as that big black line:  Artillery has to be a further ways to the northern side beyond that, and the position of the DMZ just isn't favorable for clear shots into Seoul itself, due to the effective ranges of the equipment the north has. fishmech fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Sep 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:I thought the DPRK had plenty of conventional artillery that can reach Seoul. well you know since internet forums user fishmech says so with such authority, he must be correct
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Koramei posted:well you know since internet forums user fishmech says so with such authority, he must be correct He's correct in a way. The only tube artillery they have capable of reaching from the Northern side of the DMZ to the suburbs of Seoul are the Koksan guns, of which there weren't many made and some were exported to other assorted cool-dictator-club countries. Also, those can only reach when using modern-ish rocket-assist shells. Considering over a quarter of the shells failed to explode the last time North Korea shelled South Korea during a tantrum, that's not exactly an overwhelming amount of artillery. That doesn't tell the entire story, though, because they also have a decent number of long range artillery rockets they could certainly purpose toward terror-bombing kinda things. Which is why Seoul actually does have a fuckton of bunkers and underground shelters.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
Are you guys forgetting they have short range nukes and missiles?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
drilldo squirt posted:Are you guys forgetting they have short range nukes and missiles? That would be the long range rocket artillery. If the nukes are on any rockets it's gonna be the larger payload/longer ranged ones, not the short range ones.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
drilldo squirt posted:Are you guys forgetting they have short range nukes and missiles? They have shown no evidence they have successfully built a nuke that's small enough and reliable enough to mount on a rocket. The ones they have detonated would need to be transported by plane or land, which sets some serious constraints on their use in offense. Also, that stuff ain't the artillery everyone keeps chicken-littling about there being thousands of pointed towards Seoul.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Unsubscribe from North Korean Artillery facts
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
fishmech posted:The ones they have detonated would need to be transported by plane or land, which sets some serious constraints on their use in offense. Lol. How do you know what they've detonated?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
mediadave posted:Lol. How do you know what they've detonated? Their reports, and other countries' intelligence services agreeing on it. Also the fact that there's no evidence of them successfully buying existing nuclear nations' own stocks of nuclear bombs that work on a missile. Or are you saying that you've totally seen the North Koreans carrying around a missile-compatible nuke? People are so obsessed with the idea of the one city they know about in South Korea being bombed into a crater as the most likely scenario for renewed war. What's really going to happen is not that much civilian damage, but up to 3 million South Koreans being reinducted into the military (because practically all the men 18-35 in South Korea underwent mandatory training when young and are eligible to be called up for war), all sorts of business going to poo poo because the war disrupts poo poo, and a bunch of those people called back into the military dying in slow, grueling combat. It'd all be awful, but it's not the flashy kind of horrible people want to have Tom Clancy wet dreams about. fishmech fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Sep 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Their reports, and other countries' intelligence services agreeing on it. Also the fact that there's no evidence of them successfully buying existing nuclear nations' own stocks of nuclear bombs that work on a missile. Yeah actually, Kim Jong un just popped around to show me it the other day. Tomorrow I'm booked to have a peek inside a Trident missile, and next week the Pakistanis are going to show me around their top secret nuclear facility. The Israeli's are proving a bit more difficult to pin down, but I'm sure I'll be able to get them to show me their warheads soon. ANYWAY, other country's intelligence agencies have decided that North Korea probably does have a miniaturised warhead: North Korea can put nuclear warhead on mid-range missile: South http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-nuclear-idUSKCN0X21EM Intel officials: North Korea 'probably' has miniaturized nuke http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/24/politics/north-korea-miniaturized-nuclear-warhead/ And the argument that North Korea started with a miniaturised nuke design is very believable for me: North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons: The Great Miniaturization Debate http://38north.org/2015/02/jlewis020515/ quote:Not surprisingly, as early as 1999, DIA was arguing that North Korea might try to build a 650-750 kg device, even if others in the US intelligence community were skeptical. DIA just assumed that North Korea would go straight to a Mark 7-like design.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:Yeah, if the 90's famine didn't cause the regime to collapse, no natural disaster or emergency situation will. Especially since it's easier to shift the blame away with an epidemic. I'm not so sure about this - from what I've read, my understanding is that most North Koreans were true believers (at least for the start) of the Arduous March. North Koreans today by comparison have no such love for the regime. If it happened again today, nobody would believe KJU was living off one rice ball a day. I think more North Koreans than ever before are questioning the regime, if not openly in defiance of it (see: grey markets). I wouldn't be surprised if one more huge disaster was the difference between Kim rule and something else.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
mediadave posted:Yeah actually, Kim Jong un just popped around to show me it the other day. Tomorrow I'm booked to have a peek inside a Trident missile, and next week the Pakistanis are going to show me around their top secret nuclear facility. The Israeli's are proving a bit more difficult to pin down, but I'm sure I'll be able to get them to show me their warheads soon. So no evidence they actually have a working system, just that they're working on one. Sooooooo they don't have missile capable nukes. Wow, that was easy! "There was no direct evidence that the North has successfully mounted a warhead on such a missile, the South Korean official said, declining to discuss the basis for the change in assessment." "U.S. officials who endorse the notion that Kim probably has a nuclear warhead still note that they don't know if the device would actually work. The North Koreans believe it would. ... But he said that this operational assumption "does not mean that they have that capability. They've not demonstrated that."" And the last one also says there's no evidence it exists, just that maybe they could have one soon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 23:21
|
|
|
Whitlam posted:I'm not so sure about this - from what I've read, my understanding is that most North Koreans were true believers (at least for the start) of the Arduous March. North Koreans today by comparison have no such love for the regime. If it happened again today, nobody would believe KJU was living off one rice ball a day. I think more North Koreans than ever before are questioning the regime, if not openly in defiance of it (see: grey markets). I wouldn't be surprised if one more huge disaster was the difference between Kim rule and something else. The problem with this is that we get this impression from defectors, who are already self selected as the kinds of people who are disloyal/ trying to look for the cracks. As with anything to do with North Korea nobody knows for sure, so I agree saying nothing could bring about the regime's collapse at this point, after the famine, is an exaggeration, but we can't really trust defectors as an infallible glimpse at the country. They're a particular kind of people, usually the underclasses, close to the border where they get easier access to foreign media and less government support. Opinions might be very different among the more privileged, and they're the ones who are more able to potentially change something. Keep in mind defectors, particularly the ones you read about, actively involved in media, are often pretty actively trying to drum up support for their cause. It's not like they're lying but they have an incentive to make you think change is more possible than it necessarily is. fishmech posted:People are so obsessed with the idea of the one city they know about in South Korea being bombed into a crater as the most likely scenario for renewed war. You seem more to be reacting against this (which is kinda understandable) than saying anything substantive. It just makes you sound a bit ridiculous when you're pretending to speak with authority on the military capabilities of state that even our most in-the-know experts only vaguely understand. And extremely callous when you're so quick to dismiss people's concerns about a city of tens of millions coming under threat as though they're idiots.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
fishmech posted:" ... But he said that this operational assumption "does not mean that they have that capability. They've not demonstrated that."" Mmmm. This attitude is one of Jeffrey Lewis' bugbears. What would be necessary for North Korea to demonstrate that capability? America Is in Denial About North Korea’s Nukes http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/03/11/america-is-in-denial-about-north-koreas-nukes/ quote:Hecker has, for some time, been giving a great presentation where he argues that we’ve overlooked how much North Korea’s capabilities have advanced since his first visit in 2004. I take his point to be that we’ve grown accustomed to each and every step the North Koreans make, without realizing quite how far they’ve gone and how distant the prospect of disarmament has now become. Hecker has tried mightily to draw attention to the problem, though I am not sure he’s made much headway....
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
Koramei posted:
There are simple matters of calculating ballistics at stake, for showing that the North Koreans can't unleash a massive artillery barrage on Seoul dude. It's a specific misconception that is weirdly common among people who want to be real scared, when what the South Koreans, US etc are worried about is practically everything besides that small amount of artillery in range to hit any of Seoul. mediadave posted:Mmmm. This attitude is one of Jeffrey Lewis' bugbears. What would be necessary for North Korea to demonstrate that capability? Uh, how about demonstrating it? Have them record the detonation of an appropriately sized device delivered by a missile. They've hardly been shy about testing other nukes. The article you linked talked about how we finally took Chinese nukes seriously when they fired a nuclear missile across their own country for a test, after all. The only thing we can actually say right now is that they're attempting to build such a system, and don't seem to have achieved it. The most that intelligence officials in countries watching them will say is "they're trying to do it, but don't seem to have accomplished it".
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
fishmech posted:
Yes, and that was a bad thing. Do we really want North Korea to fire a live nuke into the sea of Japan? EDIT: Something worth remembering on this is that live flight-tests of nukes on ballistic missiles just don't really happen. The US did, once (Frigate-Bird). India and Pakistan never have, nor have Britain or France. China only did because the US refused to accept the reality of their nuclear programme until it did so. mediadave fucked around with this message at 00:11 on Sep 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
mediadave posted:Yes, and that was a bad thing. Do we really want North Korea to fire a live nuke into the sea of Japan? They are free to fire it into a mountain or whatever - they don't really need to prove massive range, just that the device still works after launch occurs. They've already nuked themselves at least twice in real tests of their larger devices that require plane or ground transport. Look if you want to jerk off over your fear of North Korean nuclear missiles, you're free to do it right now. But there's no call to go around believing they already have nuclear missiles until they show us they have them. Just like there was no reason to go around believing they could drop a nuke out of a plane until they showed they had actually built and successfully tested a nuke. Why not believe the North Koreans have fully intercontinental missiles if you don't think proof is necessary?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
fishmech posted:They are free to fire it into a mountain or whatever - they don't really need to prove massive range, just that the device still works after launch occurs. They've already nuked themselves at least twice in real tests of their larger devices that require plane or ground transport. Again, you - and the rest of us - really have no idea what type of devices they have tested. They could have been incredibly lovely fat-man devices, or they could have been miniature devices as Jeffrey Lewis suspects. But we're going nowhere in this conversation, so back to artillery chat I guess...
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
mediadave posted:Again, you - and the rest of us - really have no idea what type of devices they have tested. They could have been incredibly lovely fat-man devices, or they could have been miniature devices as Jeffrey Lewis suspects. But we're going nowhere in this conversation, so back to artillery chat I guess... The intelligence services of the world believe that what they've demonstrated is simple, large, nuclear devices that are not miniaturized enough to work on a missile. Why do you think they started off with the considerably harder to develop miniaturized devices or progressed immediately to them after the first test or two? They've only done 4 of the tests after all. It takes a lot of work to successfully build miniaturized nuclear weapons, especially under the sort of resource and money constraints they have, and relative lack of friendly countries providing help.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
fishmech posted:The intelligence services of the world believe that what they've demonstrated is simple, large, nuclear devices that are not miniaturized enough to work on a missile. Why do you think they started off with the considerably harder to develop miniaturized devices or progressed immediately to them after the first test or two? They've only done 4 of the tests after all. Do you believe Pakistan and India have working nuclear weapons? They've 'only' made 6 tests each (of variable yield), and neither has demonstrated it as you would wish. Would it be perhaps be best to assume that they do?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
The question is largely pointless, since the list of countries who do NOT want a second Korean War includes North Korea, South Korea, China, and the US.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 00:48
|
|
|
mediadave posted:Do you believe Pakistan and India have working nuclear weapons? They've 'only' made 6 tests each (of variable yield), and neither has demonstrated it as you would wish. Would it be perhaps be best to assume that they do? Pakistan and India have repeatedly demonstrated proper missile capability, and have both conducted significantly more powerful tests. India specifically demonstrated a warhead-sized bomb in the past, as well as demonstrating thermonuclear capability; while Pakistan has demonstrated a specific warhead-sized bomb. And perhaps more importantly, we know that they have air forces capable of delivering nuclear weapons against each other even if all their warheads failed, since neither is hobbling along with decades out of date and poorly maintained craft, for the craft large enough to carry them. Meanwhile North Korea has demonstrated none of this sort of capability outside of some half-competent missile testing. Again, you're free to be scared of the North Koreans nuking you if you want, but it's not considered a serious threat. The relevant militaries/intelligence services in the region are far more concerned about the effects of conventional war.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Pakistan and India have repeatedly demonstrated proper missile capability, and have both conducted significantly more powerful tests. India specifically demonstrated a warhead-sized bomb in the past, as well as demonstrating thermonuclear capability; while Pakistan has demonstrated a specific warhead-sized bomb. And perhaps more importantly, we know that they have air forces capable of delivering nuclear weapons against each other even if all their warheads failed, since neither is hobbling along with decades out of date and poorly maintained craft, for the craft large enough to carry them. It is weird how you are so sure Pakistan can develop bombs and North Korea can't yet they've had arm trade deals for this exact purpose before. Either they both can or both can't.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
mediadave posted:Good poo poo Given the hard cash problems of the Norks, is this Kim's way of advertising to other despots his weapons shop? Those caviar daiquiris don't grow on trees, after all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 06:52
|
|
|
Whitlam posted:I'm not so sure about this - from what I've read, my understanding is that most North Koreans were true believers (at least for the start) of the Arduous March. North Koreans today by comparison have no such love for the regime. If it happened again today, nobody would believe KJU was living off one rice ball a day. I think more North Koreans than ever before are questioning the regime, if not openly in defiance of it (see: grey markets). I wouldn't be surprised if one more huge disaster was the difference between Kim rule and something else. What is your source for this? And would this change in attitude be the result of increased access to outside information?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 10:50
|
|
|
WarpedNaba posted:Given the hard cash problems of the Norks, is this Kim's way of advertising to other despots his weapons shop? Those caviar daiquiris don't grow on trees, after all. It's also useful for North Korean internal propaganda where they portray themselves as a bully - state that pushes around the inferior, evil barbarians.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
Much of it is simple necessity--the welfare state has largely broken down; the average North Korean relies on the market for much of their living. It's a fact of life. However, for the same reason, market activity is only considered seditious to the extent that it involves contraband goods. The information cordon is definitely broken down. North Korea still has an impressive ability to propagandize its people, but they can't get away with bald-faced lies like claiming that South Korea is a war-torn wasteland where children pick at trash heaps while dodging American soldiers who kill them for fun. The thing is, everyone in North Korea knows that there are problems with the regime, but that doesn't mean that they want to overthrow it and reunify in a liberal democracy with South Korea. Many do not blame the Kims personally, and even those who would denounce Kim Jong Un as having lost his way are still loyal to Kim il Sung. You're still talking about people who've been trained for the better part of a century to believe in a false retelling of history and a fascist ideology that preaches racism, xenophobia, and genocide. This is where you see the other major problem with the breakdown of the information cordon: the DPRK now has less ability to send one message to the international community and a completely different message in its internal propaganda. Halloween Jack fucked around with this message at 15:10 on Sep 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 00:37 |
|
|
There was a story floating around a couple of months back that the government was (trying to) clamping down hard on the black market. You can guarantee they're not happy about the loss of control there no matter what the actual situation is.Phlegmish posted:What is your source for this? And would this change in attitude be the result of increased access to outside information? I don't agree with "North Koreans today by comparison have no such love for the regime"- there's obviously a huge range of opinions and plenty of evidence that a huge number are still unfalteringly loyal. But for a number of years now defectors have been saying that a growing number of North Koreans these days just grit their teeth and bare it, that the genuine devotion you practically universally got before mostly died in the famine, at least outside of Pyongyang. There is no single cause of the apparent change. Outside media is obviously part of it but I don't think the effect of the famine can be understated, or even the fact that having a young (and fat) man like Jong-un in charge flies in the face of Korean cultural values that fairly strictly link age to authority. There are stories of defectors that snapped the moment they saw a glimpse of South Korean TV, some who picked up airdropped pamphlets and were distrustful of it but always a little more open to defection until something else gave them cause to leave, and others who were getting bombarded with pleas and evidence from their relatives who had defected but never budged an inch until their kids dragged them kicking and screaming out of the country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 16:29
|
|