North Korea Expands Long-Range Missile Base, Analysts Say

[ElChupacabra]

I'm pretty sure he was paying close attention to what happened with Gaddafi. Any chance of denuclearization (I doubt there was any to begin with to be honest) was completely thrown out the window. America simply can't be trusted, even more so with Trump in office. The only reasonable option is to simply ignore them, Kim wants to stay in power so the likelyhood of him attacking the US is virtually zero as he knows that would essentially garauntee his death.

Leaders of nations possessing nuclear weapons understand that it's a deterrent and not an offensive weapon; especially against the US. I agree with your point about any nation being leery of giving up that leverage when there are examples of what can happen when you lose it; more so if you aren't an established, industrialized nation.

 

[ElChupacabra]

It would be reasonable for NK to not attack the US. But the man is far from reasonable so anything is possible.

I don't see him as the type of leader who would be a threat on this scale. The actions witnessed by NK are more in the context of a nation wanting to be recognized as a military power not to be trifled with rather than one crazy enough to start a nuclear war when there is no chance of it being victorious or destroying its enemies. So far I haven't seen anything which leads me to think Jong-un is in that category.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

I don't see him as the type of leader who would be a threat on this scale. The actions witnessed by NK are more in the context of a nation wanting to be recognized as a military power not to be trifled with rather than one crazy enough to start a nuclear war when there is no chance of it being victorious or destroying its enemies. So far I haven't seen anything which leads me to think Jong-un is in that category.

That is like saying its ok that, that gang banger has a uzi because he is just all talk. People like Kim should not have nukes period. NK continuously tells us that they want to wipe us off the map, then built nukes and long range missiles.
But your all nothing to see here, this guy is too rational to actually do something stupid?

 

[ElChupacabra]

That is like saying its ok that, that gang banger has a uzi because he is just all talk. People like Kim should not have nukes period. NK continuously tells us that they want to wipe us off the map, then built nukes and long range missiles.
But your all nothing to see here, this guy is too rational to actually do something stupid?

Oh I'd much rather NK not have nuclear weapons given that it's an insular, despotic regime. The question is what to do about it that doesn't lead to war; that scenario can create the kind of desperation which forces a leader to use those kind of weapons. I think this requires coaxing instead of force, and a treaty which ties economic assistance and investment to denuclearization is a better tactic than threatening to invade.

 

[sangha]

Oh I'd much rather NK not have nuclear weapons given that it's an insular, despotic regime. The question is what to do about it that doesn't lead to war; that scenario can create the kind of desperation which forces a leader to use those kind of weapons. I think this requires coaxing instead of force, and a treaty which ties economic assistance and investment to denuclearization is a better tactic than threatening to invade.

I agree, in concept, but how can we have a treaty with a nation that has no credibility due to its long history of breaking its promises?

 

[ElChupacabra]

I agree, in concept, but how can we have a treaty with a nation that has no credibility due to its long history of breaking its promises?

That's the question isn't it? It's possible with a treaty that has rigorous measures to ensure compliance with denuclearization milestones and the kind of transparency which prevents weapons development of this kind. If you tie economic investment and aid with those milestones then the incentive and choice for NK is whether they want to focus on growing economically or remaining a heavily armed country with little to no economic growth. There are no guarantees, and as you stated NK has a history of backing out of deals, but I think something is possible if a treaty is structured correctly and Jong-un is sincere in taking his country in a different direction. The latter is what I'm most skeptical about because of how their society functions and how he maintains power. Opening the doors also inevitably opens minds, and that could be very problematic if your power is based on keeping people in the dark and worshiping you.

 

[sangha]

That's the question isn't it? It's possible with a treaty that has rigorous measures to ensure compliance with denuclearization milestones and the kind of transparency which prevents weapons development of this kind. If you tie economic investment and aid with those milestones then the incentive and choice for NK is whether they want to focus on growing economically or remaining a heavily armed country with little to no economic growth. There are no guarantees, and as you stated NK has a history of backing out of deals, but I think something is possible if a treaty is structured correctly and Jong-un is sincere in taking his country in a different direction. The latter is what I'm most skeptical about because of how their society functions and how he maintains power. Opening the doors also inevitably opens minds, and that could be very problematic if your power is based on keeping people in the dark and worshiping you.

How do we ensure compliance? Its a big country with a lot of space to hide things. It would require a massive army of inspectors. What are the odds that a regime as insular as NKs would allow thousands and thousands of inspectors to roam free over the country, including its military facilities?

 

[ElChupacabra]

How do we ensure compliance? Its a big country with a lot of space to hide things. It would require a massive army of inspectors. What are the odds that a regime as insular as NKs would allow thousands and thousands of inspectors to roam free over the country, including its military facilities?

Routine inspections of known facilities, inspection of any facilities suspected of nuclear weapons manufacturing or uranium enrichment etc. Remember, it's not as if these kind of facilities are made over night and can slip detection easily so the size of the country doesn't matter factor as much since satellite surveillance is pretty good at detecting construction of facilities. Once you create an inspections and compliance process, you get a better sense of how sincere a leader is in moving forward. The sticking spot will likely be around military bases, and in this case those should still be open to inspection given their history of violating terms.

 

[sangha]

Routine inspections of known facilities,

What about the unknown ones?

inspection of any facilities suspected of nuclear weapons manufacturing or uranium enrichment etc. Remember, it's not as if these kind of facilities are made over night and can slip detection easily so the size of the country doesn't matter factor as much since satellite surveillance is pretty good at detecting construction of facilities. Once you create an inspections and compliance process, you get a better sense of how sincere a leader is in moving forward. The sticking spot will likely be around military bases, and in this case those should still be open to inspection given their history of violating terms.

Inspection of any suspected facilities requires NK to grant unrestricted access to their entire country. How likely is that?

Also, satellites do not provide round the clock surveillance. They pass over at regular, and predictable, intervals.

 

[ElChupacabra]

What about the unknown ones?

Well we'd have to rely on our national intelligence agencies getting it right, and there are never any guarantees. It is fair to say though, that they usually get these things right because to develop missiles and nuclear warheads at a military scale isn't going to be accomplished at a shack in the woods.

Inspection of any suspected facilities requires NK to grant unrestricted access to their entire country. How likely is that?

You'll find that out when you present the terms and what pushback you get. How likely it is will depend on Jong-un wanting to maintain the status quo for his country or wanting to move it in a different direction. It's also about who the players are, so watching what Russia and China do is key.

Also, satellites do not provide round the clock surveillance. They pass over at regular, and predictable, intervals.

Sure, but there are enough of them overhead to identify large scale construction. Intelligence agencies also track the purchases of materials used for uranium refinement so there are multiple ways of piecing together what a nation is doing in this regard.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Oh I'd much rather NK not have nuclear weapons given that it's an insular, despotic regime. The question is what to do about it that doesn't lead to war; that scenario can create the kind of desperation which forces a leader to use those kind of weapons. I think this requires coaxing instead of force, and a treaty which ties economic assistance and investment to denuclearization is a better tactic than threatening to invade.

How would you police NK on keeping with a treaty? Send in inspectors? I do not believe that NK would accept that proposition. IMO the decision should lie with SK for the most part. They stand to lose the most if NK lashes out. I mean NK is not a peaceful nation they do not intend to be peaceful, and the more that you clip their wings the more that they turn to their nukes for a solution.

 

[ElChupacabra]

How would you police NK on keeping with a treaty? Send in inspectors? I do not believe that NK would accept that proposition. IMO the decision should lie with SK for the most part. They stand to lose the most if NK lashes out. I mean NK is not a peaceful nation they do not intend to be peaceful, and the more that you clip their wings the more that they turn to their nukes for a solution.

Inspectors are the only way you're going to ensure compliance other than taking someone's word for it, and I don't think that's going to fly for anyone. The South Koreans have been doing most of the heavy lifting in regards to establishing a peace process. North Korea may be a militarized nation, but they haven't been outwardly aggressive on the scale of some western nations over the past 50 years. What was the last major war North Korea either waged? The South Koreans face a similar choice in how they manager the denuclearization process. Jong-un talked about peace and denuclearizing, the question is what does that actually mean other than just the idea. How you make it work and enforce it is where things get tricky.

 

[Nap]

It would be reasonable for NK to not attack the US. But the man is far from reasonable so anything is possible.

Anything is possible, but his rhetoric has always been defensive in tone. All of his threats have been contingent on the US attacking or provoking him. Given the history of the US and regimes we didn't like, I can't honestly say his rhetoric and actions are unreasonable. If I were in his position, I would likely have the same fears and reactions as he does.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Anything is possible, but his rhetoric has always been defensive in tone. All of his threats have been contingent on the US attacking or provoking him. Given the history of the US and regimes we didn't like, I can't honestly say his rhetoric and actions are unreasonable. If I were in his position, I would likely have the same fears and reactions as he does.

I do not agree that it has all been defensive. And if Nk was so afraid you would think that they would stop threatening us with total annihilation while they continue to expand their nuke abilities to bomb us.

 

[sangha]

Well we'd have to rely on our national intelligence agencies getting it right, and there are never any guarantees. It is fair to say though, that they usually get these things right because to develop missiles and nuclear warheads at a military scale isn't going to be accomplished at a shack in the woods.

How about a hollowed out mountain? Satellites cannot see into those and NK is said to have a number of them

You'll find that out when you present the terms and what pushback you get. How likely it is will depend on Jong-un wanting to maintain the status quo for his country or wanting to move it in a different direction. It's also about who the players are, so watching what Russia and China do is key.

Well, it is certainly not impossible but the odds seem to be slim to none, IMO

Sure, but there are enough of them overhead to identify large scale construction. Intelligence agencies also track the purchases of materials used for uranium refinement so there are multiple ways of piecing together what a nation is doing in this regard.

No, not really. For example, it took years for our intelligence agencies to realize that pakistan was supplying NK with nuclear technology.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Inspectors are the only way you're going to ensure compliance other than taking someone's word for it, and I don't think that's going to fly for anyone. The South Koreans have been doing most of the heavy lifting in regards to establishing a peace process. North Korea may be a militarized nation, but they haven't been outwardly aggressive on the scale of some western nations over the past 50 years. What was the last major war North Korea either waged? The South Koreans face a similar choice in how they manager the denuclearization process. Jong-un talked about peace and denuclearizing, the question is what does that actually mean other than just the idea. How you make it work and enforce it is where things get tricky.

North Korea is very outwards aggressive. No they have no invaded anyone since the DMZ was built, but they have bombed and attacked outside of their borders. Then theres the cyberwar crap. You make it sound as if NK is just a peaceful little country that cannot harm anyone.

Kim is not a trust worthy player by any stretch of the imagination. Nk will never submit to inspections. If they did they would restrict access that much is a given. The only thing left is military action. Other than that we will just give NK more time to develop long range nukes. And such attempt to peacefully attack the problem will only help NK and put off the inevitable.
Nk has made it clear that their goal is to become a world player by having nukes. Having nukes means that you are willing to use them. Kim has shown that he is very willing to use them. Nukes will make him feel that he is powerful, just look how he has acted so far. The talks with the south only happened after he had nukes that were usable. Then he played Trump like a fiddle. Like most of the world he must see Trump as weak. Kim has no real reason at this point to denuclearize, and every reason to keep developing his nukes. The longer the world waits the worse the war will be. ANd there will be a war sooner or later.

 

[Nap]

I do not agree that it has all been defensive. And if Nk was so afraid you would think that they would stop threatening us with total annihilation while they continue to expand their nuke abilities to bomb us.

Think about things from his perspective for a moment:

First, the Korean war and US involvement and actions

How the US has dealt with various dictators around the world.

Gaddafi giving up his nukes only to see the next administration help overthrow him.

The US imposing crippling sanctions on them.


With those in mind, if you were in his position would you not act in the same manner? He knows can't attack as that would inevitably lead to annihilation, his only possible position is to build up nuclear weapons to threaten the US to try and get the sanctions reduced or dropped and prevent US intervention in the region. If we simply told him an attack on SK is an attack on the US and we would respond in kind, dropped the sanctions and let him go about his business then we wouldn't have an issue with NK.

 

[ElChupacabra]

North Korea is very outwards aggressive. No they have no invaded anyone since the DMZ was built, but they have bombed and attacked outside of their borders. Then theres the cyberwar crap. You make it sound as if NK is just a peaceful little country that cannot harm anyone.

Kim is not a trust worthy player by any stretch of the imagination. Nk will never submit to inspections. If they did they would restrict access that much is a given. The only thing left is military action. Other than that we will just give NK more time to develop long range nukes. And such attempt to peacefully attack the problem will only help NK and put off the inevitable.
Nk has made it clear that their goal is to become a world player by having nukes. Having nukes means that you are willing to use them. Kim has shown that he is very willing to use them. Nukes will make him feel that he is powerful, just look how he has acted so far. The talks with the south only happened after he had nukes that were usable. Then he played Trump like a fiddle. Like most of the world he must see Trump as weak. Kim has no real reason at this point to denuclearize, and every reason to keep developing his nukes. The longer the world waits the worse the war will be. ANd there will be a war sooner or later.

No, that's not what I've said. The point is that up to now they have only flirted with any kind of military action, but even without nuclear weapons they have a large standing army. I don't think military action is the solution, and if it's yours what exactly are you proposing: full scale invasion and regime change, or just elimination of certain sites? The latter will only delay their program and the former is a quagmire. I don't agree with your assessment that their goal is to have them with the intention to use them; they are a means of leverage and ensuring no one invades your country. What other country in the history of nuclear weapons has used in war besides the US? The only leader who would be willing to use them is one who is willing to eliminate the existence of their nation and their power. I do find it interesting that you're proposing creating the very scenario you want to avoid in order to avoid it when there are other strategies.

 

[ElChupacabra]

How about a hollowed out mountain? Satellites cannot see into those and NK is said to have a number of them



Well, it is certainly not impossible but the odds seem to be slim to none, IMO




No, not really. For example, it took years for our intelligence agencies to realize that pakistan was supplying NK with nuclear technology.

Nothing is perfect, but if that is your standard then nothing will work because everything involves risk and the possibility of failure.

 

[sangha]

Nothing is perfect, but if that is your standard then nothing will work.

If your goal is to get NK to give up its nukes, then I agree with your last three words

NK is not giving up its nukes. If NK built those nukes in order to get foriegn investment, they would have kept to the agreement they signed with Clinton. Instead, they took the money, and kept developing nukes

When someone shows you who they are, you should believe them.

 

[ElChupacabra]

If your goal is to get NK to give up its nukes, then I agree with your last three words

NK is not giving up its nukes. If NK built those nukes in order to get foriegn investment, they would have kept to the agreement they signed with Clinton. Instead, they took the money, and kept developing nukes

When someone shows you who they are, you should believe them.

I don't think any nation with nuclear weapons will do so; to date the only one that did was South Africa and it wasn't because someone asked them to. All I'm saying is if denuclearization is the goal and their leader is sincere, a solid treaty would be the way to do it.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

No, that's not what I've said. The point is that up to now they have only flirted with any kind of military action, but even without nuclear weapons they have a large standing army. I don't think military action is the solution, and if it's yours what exactly are you proposing: full scale invasion and regime change, or just elimination of certain sites? The latter will only delay their program and the former is a quagmire. I don't agree with your assessment that their goal is to have them with the intention to use them; they are a means of leverage and ensuring no one invades your country. What other country in the history of nuclear weapons has used in war besides the US? The only leader who would be willing to use them is one who is willing to eliminate the existence of their nation and their power. I do find it interesting that you're proposing creating the very scenario you want to avoid in order to avoid it when there are other strategies.

Yet what have these sanctions done? WHen Kim took over there were already sanctions and despite them here we are with NK having nukes and in the process of establishing the missile bases to use them. It appears that, that the point in playing with Trump was to buy the time to build the infrastructure needed. And quit treating Nk as if they are just like every other nation, they are not. Most nations with nukes do not threaten to wipe Washington off the map.

You seem to be willing to gamble millions of lives on the notion that NK is a reasonable player. Would KIM nuke someone? You do not know that answer either. You are over estimating the mental stability of a nut case dictator. We are one Trump insult away from testing to see if Kim is willing to use nukes.

Now it would be silly for me to layout a plan for military force. Not being a military tactician, most likely my plan would be lame. Instead I would leave that planing to those who would actually being doing it. No one wants war, but no one wants a madman like Kim to use nukes either. The longer that we wait the bigger the danger will be to humanity. There will be a point of no return where the only option is the nuclear option. I have no doubt that the leverage that Kim is thinking about isnt self defense only. He has already threatened SK, it is not a stretch to assert that Kim would use his nukes to force agreements.

Its like you have no clue what and who we are talking about. There can be no negotiations with regimes like this. They will always stab you in the back eventually. Just look at those bases that Kim is expanding as we speak; he said that he was dismantling FFS. Kim lied had no intentions of denuclearizing. Kim used Trump and laughed the entire time at his naivety and weakness. There was a reason why the policy was to not do such things. Its because it will never do anything but help NK do exactly what we were trying to stop them from doing. Sanctions failed time to move on to reality.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Think about things from his perspective for a moment:

First, the Korean war and US involvement and actions

How the US has dealt with various dictators around the world.

Gaddafi giving up his nukes only to see the next administration help overthrow him.

The US imposing crippling sanctions on them.


With those in mind, if you were in his position would you not act in the same manner? He knows can't attack as that would inevitably lead to annihilation, his only possible position is to build up nuclear weapons to threaten the US to try and get the sanctions reduced or dropped and prevent US intervention in the region. If we simply told him an attack on SK is an attack on the US and we would respond in kind, dropped the sanctions and let him go about his business then we wouldn't have an issue with NK.

So its ok for NK to behave the way that they are because you would do the same? Rational people would not do what NK has been doing that led to US involvement in the first place. The reality is that if dropped the sanctions and acted all nice and crap it would get thrown back in our face since Kim is a ****ing asshole dictator. The first thing that he would do would be to build his military and and his nukes and then take over South Korea and beyond (if he could). North Korea will never be a good neighbor all friendly and ****. North Korean ideology is to wipe out everyone and rule over the survivors until they kill them all.
Do you know nothing about North Korea or what?

 

[Nap]

So its ok for NK to behave the way that they are because you would do the same? Rational people would not do what NK has been doing that led to US involvement in the first place. The reality is that if dropped the sanctions and acted all nice and crap it would get thrown back in our face since Kim is a ****ing asshole dictator. The first thing that he would do would be to build his military and and his nukes and then take over South Korea and beyond (if he could). North Korea will never be a good neighbor all friendly and ****. North Korean ideology is to wipe out everyone and rule over the survivors until they kill them all.
Do you know nothing about North Korea or what?

It is completely rational to want nuclear deterrence given the actions of the US. Any dictator would be a fool to not want it. We may not like his actions, but that doesn't make them irrational. As far as NK building up it's military and wanting to take over the world, it is NK.....you would have an argument if we were talking about China but to think NK is going to try for world domination is rather humorous. NK essentially has the nation version of Little man syndrome, he talks big and wants enough power to ensure the larger powers don't mess with him.

 

[ElChupacabra]

Yet what have these sanctions done? WHen Kim took over there were already sanctions and despite them here we are with NK having nukes and in the process of establishing the missile bases to use them. It appears that, that the point in playing with Trump was to buy the time to build the infrastructure needed. And quit treating Nk as if they are just like every other nation, they are not. Most nations with nukes do not threaten to wipe Washington off the map.

You seem to be willing to gamble millions of lives on the notion that NK is a reasonable player. Would KIM nuke someone? You do not know that answer either. You are over estimating the mental stability of a nut case dictator. We are one Trump insult away from testing to see if Kim is willing to use nukes.

In none of my posts have I stated NK is like any other nation; they are not by a long shot. I also haven't said there is an easy answer either way, and a chance will be taken either way because no one can guess how many lives will be lost in the process of disarming North Korea; not to mention the fall out. Would Jong-un nuke anyone? Maybe, maybe not but since he doesn't seem hell bent on destroying his country I'll venture he won't. Either way it's a crap shoot.

Now it would be silly for me to layout a plan for military force. Not being a military tactician, most likely my plan would be lame. Instead I would leave that planing to those who would actually being doing it. No one wants war, but no one wants a madman like Kim to use nukes either. The longer that we wait the bigger the danger will be to humanity. There will be a point of no return where the only option is the nuclear option. I have no doubt that the leverage that Kim is thinking about isnt self defense only. He has already threatened SK, it is not a stretch to assert that Kim would use his nukes to force agreements.

So are you proposing to use the military to remove him from power and basically take on North Korea as a nation building process?

Its like you have no clue what and who we are talking about. There can be no negotiations with regimes like this. They will always stab you in the back eventually. Just look at those bases that Kim is expanding as we speak; he said that he was dismantling FFS. Kim lied had no intentions of denuclearizing. Kim used Trump and laughed the entire time at his naivety and weakness. There was a reason why the policy was to not do such things. Its because it will never do anything but help NK do exactly what we were trying to stop them from doing. Sanctions failed time to move on to reality.

Well it seems like South Korea, the current US administration, Russia, and China have a different view than yours. I don't know conclusively if Jong-un will end up being a nutter who ends up attacking his neighbors, but your proposing war to avoid a war no one is certain will happen. Maybe next we should invade Pakistan because that's a country whose nuclear weapons are a revolution away from falling in the hands of Islamic extremists.