North Korea fires missile from Pyongyang towards the east: South Korea

[rijb]

NK should worry more about Japan.  Their toys are way more advanced than NK's weapons.

 

 

[observer90210]

Whenever such crazy things occur in the world...some people make big money out of it,  either directly or indirectly...arms deals, currency fluctuations, oil price hikes, stock variations...just name it!

 

Naturally, nobody is suggesting that this is all another global money making partnership hoax and plot, but nevertheless not all that a loss for everybody!!!!

[canuckamuck]

4 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Why on earth would Kim fire a missile at anybody when he knows that America will nuke him if he does ?

Kim is doing all this, to demonstrate that he can destroy Washington and it's allies (Japan and South Korea) in the same way that Washington can destroy him. Kim is showing that he can take part in so-called 'mutually assured destruction'. Kim is trying to guarantee his own survival. That's what we're seeing. He's a bad man, yes, but his goal and aim is to simply survive.

Why on Earth does Kim do what he does at all? All he would have to do to get out of this brinkmanship is to just quit with the military buildup and start running the country. No one is going to invade NK if they quit all the mad dog stuff. In fact the world would likely be falling all over itself to provide aid. He's a paranoid nutcase plain and simple. His ideas are crazy man ideas. Sure he is trying to get into the position of mutually assured destruction. But that is way too much leverage to give to a little pariah state with a psycho at the control panel. He cannot be allowed to get that leverage.

So even if Kim never intends to fire a missile at anyone (although he already has done so, didn't he sink a ship, attacked an island) He cannot be allowed to get into a position of greater fear mongering. It just isn't good for humanity.

[Morch]

9 hours ago, tonray said:

Accept that DPRK is a nuclear power and get over it. Bolster our own weapons and capabilities so he is aware that the only sure thing to happen in an unprovoked attack on us or our allies is the complete and utter annihilation of his country and the death of him and all his heirs. It's called deterrence and it's the only solution that has kept peace since 1945. The genie is out of the bottle. Sanctions have only watched him stabilize and grow his GDP and actually force him to do things like sell missile technology to adversaries to survive their effect. Our policies have failed yet we continue to do the same tired old things and hope the outcome will be different. 

 

Get over it....he and NK are here to stay until an internal revolution takes him out which will eventually happen and China prospers and becomes more western leaning.  We cannot promote more wars, they do nothing for stability ...just look at the utter cluster-dump we have created in the Middle East. The conditions were there and we lit the match...time to put the matchbox away.

 

The bright side ? Ivanka may actually find a cheaper place to manufacture her crap with real slaves instead of just Chinese slave wages.

 

Deterrence works when both sides subscribe to a similar reasoning and similar values. It is probably also a safer proposition when both sides have some sort of respective checks and balances in place. Lacking a clear insight as to Kim's decision making process or to the inner deliberations of his regime, it is somewhat difficult to assess what he will or will not do.

 

Short of an all out nuclear strike by Russia or the PRC, I don't think that the US will use nuclear weapons - provided the attack was of a very limited scale (such as what NK may execute). Carrying out a nuclear strike (whether retaliatory or otherwise) on NK might effect SK, and result in an unintended response by the PRC, leading to even more disastrous consequences. If the US wished to rain destruction on NK it could do so by relying on conventional weapons.
 

It is true that the cat is out of the bag. Perhaps not so much with regard to existing hardware, which under favorable circumstances can be decommissioned, but when it comes to know-how, then yes. Harder to stop these kind of leaks. Wouldn't know that that sanctions were a direct cause of NK selling weapon technologies and hardware to other countries,  and it doesn't make much of an argument either way - if there were no sanctions he'd have an easier time selling the very same.

 

Many of the war-like actions, aggression and provocation emanate from Kim's regime, on this pretext or another. It is easy to ignore that in favor of "US Bad", but it doesn't change anything. Same goes for conflating or equating Kim with NK. North Korea is a country, populated by a whole lot of people who doesn't have a minimal say on these matters. Kim is a dictator.

[Morch]

9 hours ago, tonray said:

What about "he has already done it" don't you understand ?

 

It's too late...he already has both bomb and missile technology and there is nothing we can do to turn the clock back.

 

You war mongers have to get off your 'turn it into a parking lot' mentality...if we attack him and he thinks he has nothing to lose he can drop a nuke on Seoul or Tokyo. 

 

HE ALREADY HAS THE WEAPONS AND THE TECH.....shall I repeat once again so you get it ?

 

It is unknown whether the technology to reliably combine a nuclear warhead and a ballistic missile is in his possession. No doubt he'll get there, eventually, perhaps quicker than some think. Other than that, not much by way of realistic delivery options. Without a reliable delivery system, his nukes are not a direct threat.

 

There are still the artillery trained on Seoul, and ballistic missiles able to reach Japan. Probably some chemical and biological warfare connected with both.

 

Calling anyone who's not fully on-board with appeasing Kim a "war monger" is way off mark.

[Morch]

9 hours ago, tonray said:

Perhaps the remote on your Lazy-Boy chair is getting low on batteries today, another guy willing to get others killed so he can spout off. 

 

WHAT IS YOUR SOLUTION ? Lay it out for us so the Pentagon can implement ASAP. I don't know why they just don't call you directly.

 

Perhaps playing fantasy general cuts both ways - those who envisage a simplistic clear cut military strike on the one hand, and those saying that there is military solution on the other.

 

I think that if the former path was anywhere close to reality, it would have been taken years ago. There are them known issues often cited - Seoul held hostage, destruction rained on Japan, cannot use nukes, he might use nukes, the PRC will step in. Etc. etc.

 

But saying that there is no military options at all? Doubt it. Granted, any military engagement will entail casualties. No way to get around that one, and I don't think anyone claims otherwise. The issue there is more to do with minimizing the threat and the expected death toll.

 

I have no doubt that the Pentagon does not need poster's assistance to formulate such plans, and similarly, not quite sure why you'd expect such plans to be public knowledge. There are certain elements which seem plausible enough to feature in such designs, based on some acquaintance with conditions, capabilities and tactics.

[Morch]

6 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

The real big question is, is Washington going to launch a pre-emptive strike. North Korea are not going to launch the first military strike. Kim is doing all this to show that he can defend himself, he's doing this to make sure everyody knows that he can't be removed.
Now, how long is Washington going to accept and tolerate Kim detonating nukes in North Korea and firing missiles above Japan's sky. Is Washington going to panic and attack Kim at some point in time ?

 

You have no idea what Kim will or will not do. Applying outsider logic to his decision making is all very well, but not necessarily all that convincing. If this was merely about making a point regarding capabilities and defense then why continue pushing it?

 

And furthermore, all the assertions dealing with what Kim will do rely on things remaining as they are. They do not allow for Kim miscalculating, panicking or simply having a bad hair day. Somehow though, no problems with attaching considerations like these to possible US actions.

 

 

[Morch]

6 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

So what do you suggest ?  Attack North Korea before Kim is able to get a nuke onto a missile ?

We, including you, have already declared that any pre-emptive strike on North Korea would be a very bad idea. How about let Kim attach a nuke onto a missile, and carry on not launching any pre-emptive strikes ?

 

Right now, Kim's deterrent is a certain level of threat - serious, but perhaps not catastrophic. So long as he does not possess a reliable delivery system. Granted, an attack on NK, even under current conditions, is a dangerous proposition. What you suggest seem to be leaving him to improve his deterrent to a degree that any military option would be off the table.

 

This goes a step further than views previously aired, which at least tied US non-aggression and a pause of Kim's nuclear and ballistic efforts.

 

To head off expected nonsense - I do not suggest that I have an all encompassing, workable solution to the situation, military or otherwise. There are no perfect answers to this one. There are cons and pros relevant to almost all of the suggestions, views and line of thinking posted on these topics. It's not always an either/or world out there. If I had to guess, then this too will end in an unsatisfactory compromise, which is the perhaps the best that can be hoped for.

[BKK1969]

The gold market reckons Phat Boy is bluffing as the price is steady. Hope so!


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Morch]

6 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Why on earth would Kim fire a missile at anybody when he knows that America will nuke him if he does ?

Kim is doing all this, to demonstrate that he can destroy Washington and it's allies (Japan and South Korea) in the same way that Washington can destroy him. Kim is showing that he can take part in so-called 'mutually assured destruction'. Kim is trying to guarantee his own survival. That's what we're seeing. He's a bad man, yes, but his goal and aim is to simply survive.

 

You have no idea what Kim knows. You have no idea how the US will respond. Assuming that the US will use nuclear weapons against NK is not necessarily a hard fact (disregarding Trump's statements). There's some sound arguments as to why this is less likely to happen. And perhaps Kim is aware of this, or he miscalculates or he panics or some underling does something stupid.

 

If Kim achieves his goal of having a nuclear capable ICBM - then the stakes are up. MAD works when sides got some insight as to their opponents motivations and decision making. With Kim, it doesn't work this way - not because he's mental or anything (he might be, I've no idea), but because MAD relies on both side making applying at least a measure of similar reasoning. The US side (as are the PRC and Russia) applies consideration relating to a country as a whole, not, as opposed to considerations relating to one person's political survival (and possibly the continuation of the dynasty). To put in in other words, MAD is something taken up by countries, not individuals. I don't think that there's a whole lot of precedence when it comes to evaluating MAD related situations involving individuals.

[Morch]

6 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

We have to bear in mind that this can only be done if large numbers of local people really do hate the regime.

Kim is surrounded by people who actually want him. We can claim that they've been brain-washed by Kim, that might be so. It doesn't change the issue of how Kim's regime is too strong to be removed by 'the CIA going in there, and carrying out action that will cause Kim to be removed'.

 

All deposed dictators are "too strong" until they are brought down.

[Trouble]

13 hours ago, tonray said:

Accept that DPRK is a nuclear power and get over it. Bolster our own weapons and capabilities so he is aware that the only sure thing to happen in an unprovoked attack on us or our allies is the complete and utter annihilation of his country and the death of him and all his heirs. It's called deterrence and it's the only solution that has kept peace since 1945. The genie is out of the bottle. Sanctions have only watched him stabilize and grow his GDP and actually force him to do things like sell missile technology to adversaries to survive their effect. Our policies have failed yet we continue to do the same tired old things and hope the outcome will be different. 

 

Get over it....he and NK are here to stay until an internal revolution takes him out which will eventually happen and China prospers and becomes more western leaning.  We cannot promote more wars, they do nothing for stability ...just look at the utter cluster-dump we have created in the Middle East. The conditions were there and we lit the match...time to put the matchbox away.

 

The bright side ? Ivanka may actually find a cheaper place to manufacture her crap with real slaves instead of just Chinese slave wages.

I think one of the concerns with DPRK nuclear weapons program has always been the worry that they will export the technology and it could end up in the hands of any number of terrorists.  I am not so worried about Kim using the "bomb" as I am his technology being sold and used by others. Think that is why his regime is such a big threat.  In the case of Iran, I think Iran would be more careful of who has its technology although there is no doubt both countries are surely cooperating to some degree in their programs.  Kim is a loose cannon in this regard.

[Scott]

Off-topic post removed.  

[craigt3365]

9 hours ago, Trouble said:

I think one of the concerns with DPRK nuclear weapons program has always been the worry that they will export the technology and it could end up in the hands of any number of terrorists.  I am not so worried about Kim using the "bomb" as I am his technology being sold and used by others. Think that is why his regime is such a big threat.  In the case of Iran, I think Iran would be more careful of who has its technology although there is no doubt both countries are surely cooperating to some degree in their programs.  Kim is a loose cannon in this regard.

Excellent point.  We already know they've sold chemical weapons to Syria for use there recently.  It's not all about nuclear weapons, but that's the #1 item right now.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

Excellent point.  We already know they've sold chemical weapons to Syria for use there recently.  It's not all about nuclear weapons, but that's the #1 item right now.

 

North Korea assisted Syrian efforts to construct a nuclear reactor.

 

 

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

North Korea assisted Syrian efforts to construct a nuclear reactor.

Really?  Wow.  Another reason to deal with this.  I read Saudi Arabia will get their nuke from Pakistan if Iran gets a nuclear weapon.  Proliferation.  Another reason to deal with this.

[Scott]

Baiting post removed.   

 

This is getting tedious.   So further removals will be without notice.  

[Andaman Al]

On 9/15/2017 at 6:28 AM, steven100 said:

He is being totally defiant of any sanctions applied and continues to develop WMD and nuclear warheads.

The problem is when we want the world to act, some Governments will not back up measures that are needed because the line above describes exactly what Israel have done with nuclear weapons. All UN Resolutions ignored. 

So what to do? Either move in and attack and sign the death warrants of 5-10 million South Koreans and Lord knows how many N Koreans or Send in the people in black and whack the fat one, or just watch and monitor. It might help if his oil/fuel supply was cut off, after all that will not degrade the life of the citizens as only a tiny percentage have cars/electricity etc, it would just cut off his military and infrastructure at the knees. I don't imagine his net ballistic missiles are battery powered so just cut off fuel and specialist fuel and get China to do the same (easier said than done I know - but its the only thing that will work short of death and destruction on a massive scale).

[puck2]

21 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Kinda like letting a drunk drive a car hoping an accident will never happen.  Odds are, one will happen eventually.

Your comparison is far away of reality, completely wrong.

You cannot compare Kim with a drunken driver. He is driving a vehicle fraught with explosives. When you fire at it you are in an extreme danger to be shot yourself. That's the real picture.

[craigt3365]

7 minutes ago, puck2 said:

Your comparison is far away of reality, completely wrong.

You cannot compare Kim with a drunken driver. He is driving a vehicle fraught with explosives. When you fire at it you are in an extreme danger to be shot yourself. That's the real picture.

Try to pull over a drunk driver without causing any problems.  Perhaps the comparison is apt?

[puck2]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

Try to pull over a drunk driver without causing any problems.  Perhaps the comparison is apt?

Missing the problem again.

The problem is, how to eliminate a diver surrounded by bombs (being drunken or not).

[Morch]

48 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

The problem is when we want the world to act, some Governments will not back up measures that are needed because the line above describes exactly what Israel have done with nuclear weapons. All UN Resolutions ignored. 

So what to do? Either move in and attack and sign the death warrants of 5-10 million South Koreans and Lord knows how many N Koreans or Send in the people in black and whack the fat one, or just watch and monitor. It might help if his oil/fuel supply was cut off, after all that will not degrade the life of the citizens as only a tiny percentage have cars/electricity etc, it would just cut off his military and infrastructure at the knees. I don't imagine his net ballistic missiles are battery powered so just cut off fuel and specialist fuel and get China to do the same (easier said than done I know - but its the only thing that will work short of death and destruction on a massive scale).

 

You are right in that once nations do have the capability, it's much harder to undo things. Even then, the know how remains.

 

Without being crass, the expected casualty figured tossed about are often exaggerated. It doesn't imply that there will be no casualties or that the figures will be low, just not the way presented. As an aside, wondering how Kim would react if SK started evacuating citizens from Seoul. 

 

Both NK and SK dabbled in assassination attempts and operations, without much success. Considering the current state of alert, probably even harder to pull off.

 

Cutting Kim's supplies (especially oil, fuel and finances) may indeed be the way to go. Relative to other countries, NK is easier to isolate if such measures are decided upon. As for the PRC not fully on-board with this - perhaps for now, but I think their policies and stance toward NK are nowhere near as protective as they used to be, and will continue to grow more active, as NK becomes more of a threat (to be clear, NK being attacked by the US/SK is still a threat to the PRC).

[puck2]

Missile defense.

 

One question I didn't read and learn about:

 

Even if the missiles are shot down by defense missiles, be it over S.Korea, Japan or the USA, what would happen if an N.Korean rocket carries a nuclear weapon? Destroying the the area under it where it has been shot down? Maybe a military secret?

 

If yes, that would be a reason to be very cautious to blast such a missile. Therefore I would understand that the concerned states abstain from shooting down.

 

 

 

[Morch]

25 minutes ago, puck2 said:

Missile defense.

 

One question I didn't read and learn about:

 

Even if the missiles are shot down by defense missiles, be it over S.Korea, Japan or the USA, what would happen if an N.Korean rocket carries a nuclear weapon? Destroying the the area under it where it has been shot down? Maybe a military secret?

 

If yes, that would be a reason to be very cautious to blast such a missile. Therefore I would understand that the concerned states abstain from shooting down.

 

 

 

 

There were some informative posts on one of the previous topics relating the consequences of intercepting a missile carrying a nuclear warhead. Various levels of not-a-whole-lot-of-fun, depending on height, phase and yield. But as the current assessment is that Kim's regime isn't quite there with regard to placing a nuclear warhead on a missile, the answer is probably more to do with capabilities - as was linked and discussed on this topic and others. The short version, interception is less then an assured proposition, and failure to intercept, regardless of warhead, might imply a serious blow to credibility.