|
Probably - much of that is for domestic consumption, anyways - but if they do see that we are preparing to invade, I think it gets a little bit uncertain as to what will happen. The regime members will probably end up dead in either case, so it's more a matter of how many people they want to take with them.
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 23:48 |
|
|
Yeah, we're all just arm-chair generals here, and so in that spirit... I would actually expect them to do whatever they think will kill the most Americans and South Koreans, since they know that any use of nukes, even in the event of war, will inevitably end with them dead or up on charges at The Hague and their government completely destroyed. They may be desperate, but they're not so crazy as to think that after using nukes that they'll be allowed to continue being a state. In a very real way, they're like a desperate hostage-taker with a bomb strapped to them, a dead-man's switch in one hand and a pistol in the other. They know there's no situation where they can use their weapons that doesn't end with them dying, but they also know that they can kill a bunch of people on their way out, and that gives them some leverage. Not enough leverage to walk out scot-free, but enough to keep the situation going indefinitely, despite how hosed up it is. And now we've added into this dynamic a new leader who may, at any time, order the hostage negotiators to storm the building and kill everyone inside because he thinks it'll make people like him more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:Do you think North Korea would use nuclear weapons if the US did a traditional All-American invasion a la Iraq? Maybe, they would definitely try to hit Seoul with either artillery or maybe missles, probably Japan too. Maybe us.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
They hate Japan even more than SK, if they actually believe they can win the conflict there's no sense in nuking Seoul.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
If they can miniaturize a nuclear warhead, then their nuclear program essentially IS complete. From then on, it's only improvements to their system, like solid-fueled ICBMs and hydrogen bombs. But they already have everything they need to threaten the US. Not only that, but the report also says that they're expected to have about 60 of these things already, and the last ICBM test showed that there's no way for us to know where all of them are located or will be launched from. What worries me is that I don't think Trump's ego will let him back down and talk unconditionally with NK now. I believe that his level of knowledge about the situation will have him thinking that a military strike is not only viable, but ideal. Some former CIA officials said that they feel it's being vastly underestimated just how serious the US is talking about a preemptive attack and the sanctions were a last-minute ditch attempt from cooler heads. Though it didn't take in consideration NK's continued advances, the US military's "last few months to attempt diplomacy" or the fact that these sanctions are likely not going to to jack poo poo. On top of that, if we reach the point where McMaster gets sacked, that likely means that he's replace by Bolton and then it's really happening. There were some recent polls where the American public now considers NK to be their biggest threat and a large chunk of Republican voters would support a preemptive attack to attempt to remove NK's nuclear capabilities. These polls may be poo poo, but they're reported enough that they're likely all that Trump needs in order to be convinced. The worst thing is I don't even think that Seoul, Tokyo, and/or an American city or two being wiped off the earth is the worst case scenario. I think it's naive to assume that China and Russia are going to sit down and do absolutely nothing if the US attacks. Especially after the sanctions vote. The US in their eyes will look like they are the ones who are basically starting this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
And that, kids, is how the US started WW3.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
This is really hard to process I'm scared shitless about all of this. I'm afraid that if we attack North Korea, South Korea and Japan will be wiped off the face of the earth
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:This is really hard to process Stop reading this thread and stop watching cable news.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Stop reading this thread and stop watching cable news. And what? Just put my head in the sand and pretend everything is going to be ok?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:Do you think North Korea would use nuclear weapons if the US did a traditional All-American invasion a la Iraq? pretty sure that's entirely the reason they made these weapons chief
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:And what? Just put my head in the sand and pretend everything is going to be ok? They don't have enough nukes to wipe either country off of the face of the Earth, if that's reassuring at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:And what? Just put my head in the sand and pretend everything is going to be ok? Move to an important city so you'll be incinerated instantly, with no time to feel pain, if you're that worried about Making A Difference in case of nuclear war. Saves suffering through the apocalypse. Alternately move somewhere no on will bother to nuke, like Bolivia, probably.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
Mozi posted:They don't have enough nukes to wipe either country off of the face of the Earth, if that's reassuring at all. It's estimated that they have anywhere from 30 to 60 currently.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
brockan posted:Not only that, but the report also says that they're expected to have about 60 of these things already, and the last ICBM test showed that there's no way for us to know where all of them are located or will be launched from. If I may play devils addy for a second - the report was written by the same institutions that gave us the "Saddam has nuclear smallpox ready to go in 45 minutes, scouts honour" reports. I'll admit the intelligence orgs are not as chummy with Trump as they were with Bush and Cheney, but it's worth keeping in mind.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
a scenario where NK bombards dc, and is then erased from the earth could be win-win
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
Tias posted:If I may play devils addy for a second - the report was written by the same institutions that gave us the "Saddam has nuclear smallpox ready to go in 45 minutes, scouts honour" reports. I'll admit the intelligence orgs are not as chummy with Trump as they were with Bush and Cheney, but it's worth keeping in mind. That's fair. What has me looking at these reports more frequently now though is the number of nuclear weapons experts have been saying similar things. And they've been pretty much spot on with NK's ICBM capabilities for a few months. They suggested back during the July 4th launch that the Hwasong-14's capabilities were much greater than what was demonstrated and that NK already had the capability to strike most of the US. They basically said "I told you so" during the most recent launch, feeling that that was more or less a response from the US "daring" them by saying "Well, it can ONLY reach Alaska for now." They're now expecting NK to likely detonate an actual nuclear weapon soon to further demonstrate their ability. Recalling that a similar situation happened with China in the 1960s. Where the US was equally hostile with them and downplayed China's nuclear capabilities after a similar number of nuke tests to where NK is now. They responded by detonating a nuclear weapon, forcing US to recognize them as a nuclear power.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
brockan posted:If they can miniaturize a nuclear warhead, then their nuclear program essentially IS complete. From then on, it's only improvements to their system, like solid-fueled ICBMs and hydrogen bombs. But they already have everything they need to threaten the US. Not only that, but the report also says that they're expected to have about 60 of these things already, and the last ICBM test showed that there's no way for us to know where all of them are located or will be launched from. this. i think its gonna happen. there are bunch of rumors floating around that the last icbm was supposed to hit a japanese island and missed only because it was calculation error. personaly, if we are gonna preemtive strike. id prefer to do a decapatation move. kill kim and any of his high up lackeys, then have china replace them with a more manageable goverment. Tias posted:If I may play devils addy for a second - the report was written by the same institutions that gave us the "Saddam has nuclear smallpox ready to go in 45 minutes, scouts honour" reports. I'll admit the intelligence orgs are not as chummy with Trump as they were with Bush and Cheney, but it's worth keeping in mind. true, the media is drumming the war drum, though from what i hear, IC wish they would have done it under Obama or earlier. also most of the iraq poo poo wasnt from IC surprisingly. basicaly cheney and rummie went to them and asked for intel saying that they had nukes and chemical weapons. IC said it was mostly bullshit and a invasion wouldnt work unless specifically done in certain way. cheney said gently caress you and went to the private sector and after money they said everything he wanted. http://thedollop.libsyn.com/122-the-iraq-war
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:this. i think its gonna happen. there are bunch of rumors floating around that the last icbm was supposed to hit a japanese island and missed only because it was calculation error. personaly, if we are gonna preemtive strike. id prefer to do a decapatation move. kill kim and any of his high up lackeys, then have china replace them with a more manageable goverment. What concerns me here is that those same experts have pretty much no confidence in this type of operation being successful. NK's been very effective at avoiding and preparing for these scenarios. Any attempt to strike has no room for error, but has next to no chance that there won't be an error. And this is assuming that China will go along with it kindly. Which I also have no confidence in. This is why you can't invade a nuclear power. But I don't think the Trump administration looks at it that way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/894954486762008576 Well, if a nuclear North Korea is capable of striking the US, then it's already too late for war. You should be feeling good about that headline, not scared. For over ten years, we've been watching them slowly put together a weapon capable of attacking the US mainland, while knowing full well that they didn't have that capability yet but that it would only be a matter of time before they did attain it. We've had quite a few years to stop them - including a good eight months under Trump - and never really bothered. We're not going to suddenly jump in and attack now that they finally have the means to counterattack in any meaningful way. It's too late for a preemptive strike, it's too late to stop their nuclear program. They're already done. It's too late to avert the threat. The military option is now officially off the table.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Well, if a nuclear North Korea is capable of striking the US, then it's already too late for war. You should be feeling good about that headline, not scared. For over ten years, we've been watching them slowly put together a weapon capable of attacking the US mainland, while knowing full well that they didn't have that capability yet but that it would only be a matter of time before they did attain it. We've had quite a few years to stop them - including a good eight months under Trump - and never really bothered. We're not going to suddenly jump in and attack now that they finally have the means to counterattack in any meaningful way. It's too late for a preemptive strike, it's too late to stop their nuclear program. They're already done. It's too late to avert the threat. The military option is now officially off the table. Do you truly have confidence in the Trump administration coming to that same conclusion? Considering everything we know about them? Having two inexperienced and at least one ego-based and easily influenced leaders pointing nuclear weapons at each other is about as dangerous at it gets. And the Cold War and nuclear deterrence were based entirely around luck, which is not an effective strategy when it comes to nuclear deterrence. Sooner or later, luck runs out. Especially when that luck is being mismanaged. Which is where it currently is. brockan fucked around with this message at 20:27 on Aug 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
We are going to die aren't we
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/W7VOA/status/895003882149072896
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
It was a honor to post with you, ladies and gentlemen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Somewhere, deep in the underworld, Fidel Castro watches and laughs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
Holy gently caress. Of all the people to be in charge of the US right now, its that clusterfuck. WW3 shouldn't be possible due to globalisation but Trump is going to do his damnest to try.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Bluedeanie posted:We are going to die aren't we I don't think EVERYONE in this thread will
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:I don't think EVERYONE in this thread will I'm in sunny Denmark looking at my own neo-con government dropping the odd bomb in Syria, I'll be fine 
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
brockan posted:Do you truly have confidence in the Trump administration coming to that same conclusion? Considering everything we know about them? Yes, absolutely. If Trump wanted to bomb North Korea, he would have done it months ago. It's simply too late now. Besides, the only conclusion the Trump administration has ever come to on any military matter is "why the gently caress are you asking me about this, you're the smart general guy, do whatever the gently caress you want, I don't care". Which is not good for basic democratic principles like civilian control of the military, but most of our high-ranking military officials would rather bomb the Middle East some more instead of starting a fight with the North, so it works out just fine for our Asia policy. Besides, I'm sick of this stupid madman theory garbage. "Korea could explode into war at any given time because a world leader is so wild and crazy, we can't assume that they won't go to war and commit national suicide because they're just too irrational and insane for logic to matter" has been the prevailing narrative on North Korea for fifteen years or more. As far as I've ever been able to tell, it's never had any basis beyond playing to people's desperate desire to be terrified in spite of all evidence that they're panicking over nothing. The target of the accusations may have changed, but the argument is the same old tired trope that's been applied not only to Kim Jong-Un but to his father as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Bencjacobs/status/895003779363373056 Here's the full statement.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
Why did he repeat himself?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Why did he repeat himself? Because he's loving stupid
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Besides, I'm sick of this stupid madman theory garbage. It's the instability that gets me thinking about that. Trusting them to keep the program secure and to not spontaneously create incidents seems risky. And I would add that a brutal dictator could end up tortured to death for a variety of reasons. This can make ultimatums involving nuclear weapons and nuclear proliferation perfectly rational. Death isn't exactly high-stakes when you run the risk of dying like Gaddafi. They're not even a real country. They're like a drug-addled mafia with legacy-infrastructure in the form of institutions and territorial claims from when they used to be.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Besides, I'm sick of this stupid madman theory garbage. "Korea could explode into war at any given time because a world leader is so wild and crazy, we can't assume that they won't go to war and commit national suicide because they're just too irrational and insane for logic to matter" has been the prevailing narrative on North Korea for fifteen years or more. As far as I've ever been able to tell, it's never had any basis beyond playing to people's desperate desire to be terrified in spite of all evidence that they're panicking over nothing. The target of the accusations may have changed, but the argument is the same old tired trope that's been applied not only to Kim Jong-Un but to his father as well. I have to concur, their instability is an image the Kims have fostered to intimidate people - someone truly that unstable would have been tipped over the edge a very long time ago. However, we haven't, and hopefully never will, seen what a Kim would do when they feel they truly have nothing to lose, and frankly, Kim is not the leader in this equation I am afraid will do something catastrophically rash right now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Why did he repeat himself? He never repeats himself, but he repeats himself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:Because he's loving stupid Maybe he's accustomed to doing multiple takes on The Apprentice, maybe he just had fun saying it the first time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:https://twitter.com/Bencjacobs/status/895003779363373056 welp. its been fun. my guess is NK will do another test soon and trump will go nuts and poo poo will go down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
It's honestly kind of refreshing to see the shrieking hyperbole coming from our side for a change. Hopefully ours is equally insincere.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Why did he repeat himself? Simulation is skipping again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
Couldn't we just use tactical nukes to take out Kim and his heads of state? China must not think they have nukes or else they'd be somewhat scared too, it's not like they or Russia want World War.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 23:48 |
|
|
ThisIsWhyTrumpWon posted:Couldn't we just use tactical nukes to take out Kim and his heads of state?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2017 21:51
|
|