U.N. sets sights on North Korea (Kim Jong Un)

[LaughAtTheWorld]

Im sorry, maybe you should learn to finish reading before making yourself look stupid. My claim was that Japan is nuclear capable. Here ill make it easier for you.

You said specifically that Japan has nukes. Read back to your original post.

 

[Chocolate]

I don't think he is stupid... Looks like a misunderstanding really but yes japan is nuclear capable I agree

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

I don't think he is stupid... Looks like a misunderstanding really but yes japan is nuclear capable I agree

Depends. It has the technology sure but it would need the agreement of the US which would be very difficult at best

 

[Chocolate]

Depends. It has the technology sure but it would need the agreement of the US which would be very difficult at best

Yeah, I hear they have some shaking history Lol

 

[Sammy]

Depends. It has the technology sure but it would need the agreement of the US which would be very difficult at best

You honestly believe the lead in technology on the planet is going to have problems making a nuclear bomb? I would estimate a day at best, that is if they don't already have some ready to go minus the plutonium. You cant see what you cant track.

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

You honestly believe the lead in technology on the planet is going to have problems making a nuclear bomb? I would estimate a day at best, that is if they don't already have some ready to go minus the plutonium. You cant see what you cant track.

If it was that easy why didn't NK and Iranian bombmaking go undetected? You're also greatly exaggerating to say the least that they could make a bomb in a day. Even with the designs it would take weeks if not months to properly arm it, test it, and make it ready.

 

[Helix]

I remember NKs horror stories for many decades. What they do there is almost incomprehensible. High living royalty and a nation of slaves.

The are so dug in that even if China told them to **** off, there is no way of attacking them unless maybe China actively participated. A lot of people are going to die. Seoul will be flattened immediately. They have primitive nukes. They're buried under the mountains. So, there is not a chance that anybody can do anything about them no matter how much technology you bring to bear. Unless we decide to kill everyone and just start over but somehow, that doesn't sound like a good idea.

A completely hopeless modern horror show.

it is pretty awful. this kid is a real scumbag.

it can be done, but not without China. basically, one would have to wait until Kim and his generals head to China for a meeting like they do occasionally. China could arrest him, and we could theoretically stuxnet their weapons system, power grid and communications. you'd still have a **** ton of soldiers with guns, though. with Kim gone, it's hard to know what they would do.

assholes like this ****er make non-interventionism hard, but China is the regional hegemon, and the fallout from this is on them for as long as they protect the little ****.

 

[haymarket]

it is pretty awful. this kid is a real scumbag.

it can be done, but not without China. basically, one would have to wait until Kim and his generals head to China for a meeting like they do occasionally. China could arrest him, and we could theoretically stuxnet their weapons system, power grid and communications. you'd still have a **** ton of soldiers with guns, though. with Kim gone, it's hard to know what they would do.

assholes like this ****er make non-interventionism hard, but China is the regional hegemon, and the fallout from this is on them for as long as they protect the little ****.

Yes, China is the key to this question. As long as they protect the NK regime, the UN and the world will do precious little. And that is probably pragmatic and sensible given the potential of that downside.

 

[Sammy]

If it was that easy why didn't NK and Iranian bombmaking go undetected? You're also greatly exaggerating to say the least that they could make a bomb in a day. Even with the designs it would take weeks if not months to properly arm it, test it, and make it ready.

Well they didn't go undetected, as we now know they have them. Even with the middle east it took us 18 years to prove they were working on nuclear projects. Not to mention they are trying to pass detonators as affective nuclear reactors publicly. I seriously doubt NK or Iran have the knowledge to make it work right which is why they are meddling.

As for NK they straight out told us, and we didn't know.

On October 9, 2006, North Korea announced it had successfully conducted its first nuclear test. An underground explosion was detected, its yield was estimated as less than a kiloton, and some radioactive output was detected.[6][7][8]

On January 6, 2007, the North Korean government further confirmed that it had nuclear weapons.[9]

In April 2009, reports surfaced that North Korea has become a "fully fledged nuclear power", an opinion shared by IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei.[10] On May 25, 2009, North Korea conducted second nuclear test, detected explosion yield was estimates vary between 2 and 7 kilotons.[11] The 2009 test, like the 2006 test, is believed to have occurred at Mantapsan, Kilju County, in the north-eastern part of North Korea.[12]

On February 11, 2013, the U.S. Geological Survey detected a magnitude 5.1 seismic disturbance,[13] reported to be a third underground nuclear test.[14] North Korea has officially reported it as a successful nuclear test with a lighter warhead that delivers more force than before, but has not revealed the exact yield. Multiple South Korean sources estimate the yield at 6-9 kilotons, while the German Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources estimates the yield at 40 kilotons.[

Japan on the other hand has a lot more know how and history with the technology.

A side thought: I believe a computer program could be made to mirror nuclear reactions and fine tuning the methods of its detonation with complete accuracy.

 

[Helix]

Yes, China is the key to this question. As long as they protect the NK regime, the UN and the world will do precious little. And that is probably pragmatic and sensible given the potential of that downside.

it's sort of like if Mexico became a rogue nation. China couldn't do **** about it unless we played ball. it would be on us to fix it.

here's an interesting article about why China lets these asshole dictators murder and enslave their own people.

Why China still supports North Korea, in six little words

makes sense, but it sucks. it really sucks.

 

[SBu]

I should add... No offense was meant to the soldiers and people involved in the Korean war. However this war was quickly abandoned lasting only a short 3 years, and a baby compared to the life of wars.

Not so, Sammy. Protracted wars lasting more than 3-4 years are the exception rather than the rule.

 

[Sammy]

Not so, Sammy. Protracted wars lasting more than 3-4 years are the exception rather than the rule.

I was just comparing the length of the Korean war to the other wars. Im aware there is no rule to the length of wars, however the global majority are a lot longer then 3 years.

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

I was just comparing the length of the Korean war to the other wars. Im aware there is no rule to the length of wars, however the global majority are a lot longer then 3 years.

Depends on what age. For the modern age (after WWII) it's on the scale of being relatively long. Aside from small regional wars and Vietnam, most wars such as the Gulf war, the Israeli-Arab wars, and most other modern wars have been quick due to the development of logistics and technology which made assaults and movement and therefore, victory or defeat faster. The Korean War in comparison was fought in mountainous terrain which made such speed very difficult and the attrition and protracted nature of the war made it naturally a slow war.
Of course compared to earlier ages such as the Middle Ages where decades of the same war was not uncommon, it's an entirely different story.

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

Well they didn't go undetected, as we now know they have them. Even with the middle east it took us 18 years to prove they were working on nuclear projects. Not to mention they are trying to pass detonators as affective nuclear reactors publicly. I seriously doubt NK or Iran have the knowledge to make it work right which is why they are meddling.

As for NK they straight out told us, and we didn't know.


Japan on the other hand has a lot more know how and history with the technology.

A side thought: I believe a computer program could be made to mirror nuclear reactions and fine tuning the methods of its detonation with complete accuracy.

How about Israel, South Africa, Libya? Even if Japan somehow miraculously develops it, it will be in a paradox: It can't use it, but if it wants to use it as a deterrent (which is the main point of nukes) it will have to announce it, at which point it will immediately receive backlash and threats from all over the world. It has absolutely no incentive to waste money on such a program.
As for the program, it may be possible and at the rare which technology is developing, may be closer than just a few decades.

 

[Sammy]

Depends on what age. For the modern age (after WWII) it's on the scale of being relatively long. Aside from small regional wars and Vietnam, most wars such as the Gulf war, the Israeli-Arab wars, and most other modern wars have been quick due to the development of logistics and technology which made assaults and movement and therefore, victory or defeat faster. The Korean War in comparison was fought in mountainous terrain which made such speed very difficult and the attrition and protracted nature of the war made it naturally a slow war.
Of course compared to earlier ages such as the Middle Ages where decades of the same war was not uncommon, it's an entirely different story.

Granted the terrain is a great defense.

The Vietnam War (Vietnamese: Chiến tranh Việt Nam, in Vietnam also known as the American War, Vietnamese: Chiến tranh Mỹ), also known as the Second Indochina War,[31] was a Cold War-era proxy war that occurred in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia from December 1956[A 1] to the fall of Saigon on 30 April 1975.

19 years is short? not to mention this war had been going way before American and Britain troops arrived.

Granted desert storm was only a year or so, but it wasn't the end of it either. Then moving to Afghanistan on the same premise "war on terror".

 

[Sammy]

How about Israel, South Africa, Libya? Even if Japan somehow miraculously develops it, it will be in a paradox: It can't use it, but if it wants to use it as a deterrent (which is the main point of nukes) it will have to announce it, at which point it will immediately receive backlash and threats from all over the world. It has absolutely no incentive to waste money on such a program.
As for the program, it may be possible and at the rare which technology is developing, may be closer than just a few decades.

I agree Japan can't use nuclear weapons unless they want to poison their own lands. Likewise neither can NK. Yet NK still has them. I also doubt they would care, they have no respect for human life. I wouldn't put it past Un to have it rigged for his own country incase of invasion. NK is surrounded on all sides, if China lifts their helping hand he would be a cornered rat and im sure he can already feel it looming.

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

Granted the terrain is a great defense.



19 years is short? not to mention this war had been going way before American and Britain troops arrived.

Granted desert storm was only a year or so, but it wasn't the end of it either. Then moving to Afghanistan on the same premise "war on terror".

I held Vietnam as the exception not an example. You must have misunderstood me.

 

[Sherman123]

I had been under the assumption this was common knowledge since the methods used in North Korea were directly adopted from Stalin, who had killed an estimated 20 million Russians during his reign. It surprises me they are acting like this is new to the worlds ears.

So why hadn't this gotten out? How could this level of cruelty be hidden so well. It made sense to me once China had their reaction to the UN's charges against North Korea. Why would china refuse any assistance if they weren't guilty of something, and feared what we might find out? China has for a long time been operating under these same methods against their own people, and I can only imagine what they came up with together following the same path. I believe America has given some bad tendencies to other countries, like doing one thing and saying another.

This still doesn't explain how this knowledge escaped the publics sight for so long. We had a tiny tussle with Korea before Vietnam and then left it at that. We were aware of the methods being used and the government in place enforcing such acts of horror. Could we really have just taken their word they weren't doing anything bad to their people? The amount of victims, can only say this would have never gone un-noticed and in fact it hadn't. So why till now? U.N. looked into NK because of their nuclear possibilities, and then suddenly discovers the truth?

I remember during (not before) Desert Storm, finding all about the Middle East to which most Americans knew nothing of. But we were already fighting this "reign of terror" before we even knew what it was. So why have we been stalling? We only stand to gain for the better of the Koreans, and not financially. If China wasn't protecting Korea and Korea had massive oil fields, do you really think we would be "talking it over"?

Which leads me back to my question. Why now? Well I was looking at the world map. North Korea is in the middle of two MASSIVE import/export countries. Shipping things by sea is expensive, and why keep paying when it could be shipped by land. Especially now that Korea is getting all this attention, the money is ripe for the picking.

In the light of all of this I find it hard to complain as its the people im worried about, and the promise of money will make it happen. It just saddens me that justice is only served if it pays off, and how long they had to suffer for our profits. It's hard for me to think about the in between, but it always ends the same and time will go on.

(Above) Hussein was hanged for crimes against humanity at dawn on Saturday, a dramatic, violent end for a leader who ruled Iraq by fear for three decades

The only reason the international community has not mustered a military challenge to North Korea is due to the hypothetical protective embrace of China and the enormous retaliatory capability that Pyongyang possesses. The possibility of tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of deaths along with the loosing of chemical and nuclear weapons is a significant deterrent to launching a humanitarian intervention. This is palpably different from Iraq in 2003.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

The part about how he reports his mom and brother is sooooooooooooooo ****ed.

Yes. Not even because he does it, but because he lived in a paradigm that viewed his mother and brother as people to be reported. It was as if he lived with strangers who were competing for the same resources as he, rather than living with people with whom he shared a familial bond.

 

[Sammy]

The only reason the international community has not mustered a military challenge to North Korea is due to the hypothetical protective embrace of China and the enormous retaliatory capability that Pyongyang possesses. The possibility of tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of deaths along with the loosing of chemical and nuclear weapons is a significant deterrent to launching a humanitarian intervention. This is palpably different from Iraq in 2003.

I agree, and as a lot have been saying in here that China is the crux.

I think it ends there though, as nuclear threats are very real in the middle east. The casualties you project already are better then that of the "war on terror".

The 9/11 attacks resulted in 2,996 casualties, which included 343 firefighters and 59 police officers who were in trying to save victims inside the World Trade Center. The War on Terror launched by George W. Bush Jr. has led to at least 227,000 people (more than 300,000 according to other estimates). This includes 116,657 civilians (51%) between 76 - 108,000 insurgents or Taliban Islamists (34% to 36%), 25,297 Iraqi and Afghan soldiers (11%), and 8,975 American, British, and other coalition forces (3.9%).

This is not including the casualties of desert storm. Which is about another estimated 200,000 total casualties.

 

[Sherman123]

I agree, and as a lot have been saying in here that China is the crux.

I think it ends there though, as nuclear threats are very real in the middle east. The casualties you project already are better then that of the "war on terror".



This is not including the casualties of desert storm. Which is about another estimated 200,000 total casualties.

There is a fantastic difference between casualties spread over innumerable small incidents, brush fire battles, and separate campaigns spread over decades and a potential cataclysm like a sudden armed conflict on the Korean peninsula would bring about.

 

[Sammy]

I held Vietnam as the exception not an example. You must have misunderstood me.

I did, my mistake. So sorry.

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

I agree, and as a lot have been saying in here that China is the crux.

I think it ends there though, as nuclear threats are very real in the middle east. The casualties you project already are better then that of the "war on terror".



This is not including the casualties of desert storm. Which is about another estimated 200,000 total casualties.

A war in Korea would be in the millions range. North Korean long-range artillery is enough to obliterate the Seoul Metropolitan Area which has a population of 20 million (which I repeatedly stated before but for some reason which has been ignored). NK ground forces alone number more than 1 million and SK ground forces number more than 550k. Add the reserves (of which SK is no.2 in the world due to most males having served the mandatory conscription and then staying in the reserves) and you easily get more than millions of participants. Add potentially tens of thousands of US casualties and hundreds of thousands of Chinese casualties (if they do participate which I highly doubt) then the casualties of the War on Terror is just a fraction. That's not even considering casualties from a potential nuclear fallout from NK nukes.
Of course, this is the best case scenario. In the worst case, China and Russia will get involved and a nuclear war ensues, in which the whole world will go to hell.

 

[Sammy]

A war in Korea would be in the millions range. North Korean long-range artillery is enough to obliterate the Seoul Metropolitan Area which has a population of 20 million (which I repeatedly stated before but for some reason which has been ignored). NK ground forces alone number more than 1 million and SK ground forces number more than 550k. Add the reserves (of which SK is no.2 in the world due to most males having served the mandatory conscription and then staying in the reserves) and you easily get more than millions of participants. Add potentially tens of thousands of US casualties and hundreds of thousands of Chinese casualties (if they do participate which I highly doubt) then the casualties of the War on Terror is just a fraction. That's not even considering casualties from a potential nuclear fallout from NK nukes.
Of course, this is the best case scenario. In the worst case, China and Russia will get involved and a nuclear war ensues, in which the whole world will go to hell.

Again pointing toward an alternative to war. War has always been our go to action with resistance. Maybe the creator had this planned. Perhaps we had to be forced not to go to war before a united solution could be found globally. Otherwise the outlook is most grim with actions or inactions.

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

Again pointing toward an alternative to war. War has always been our go to action with resistance. Maybe the creator had this planned. Perhaps we had to be forced not to go to war before a united solution could be found globally. Otherwise the outlook is most grim with actions or inactions.

My prediction is that internal strife and discontent will invariably grow within NK to the point of collapse and possibly reunification. Evidence points towards this as historically, totalitarian countries have mostly failed due to growing discontent. The people could endure poverty but when they see that there's a much better alternative, there the seeds of rebellion and collapse is sowed. NK has done a superb job of withholding outside information to ensure that this doesn't happen and it have succeeded for several decades, much longer than most other such countries. However with the flow of media such as South Korea dramas (or soap opera which I believe is the American term), DVDs, news, and such from the Chinese border brought by smugglers, information is slowing spreading across NK from what reports say. Black market goods including ordinary goods such as clothes, food to even computers and television have been also smuggled and brought in to be bought at the black markets in NK which is also another new trend and has established a very primitive form of capitalism. With such internal changes, I see that the NK regime will perhaps collapse from the inside though its enormous and unique military is also a very serious, unknown factor.
Of course it may never happen, but I see these changes as being a cause of hope.
I also apologize earlier for my condescending attitude. I have grown tired of trying to converse with Internet scholars who have no idea of geopolitics and NK. You need only to see the comments section of newspaper sites to see what I'm saying. I must admit I was more than being idiotic to you and I apologize for it.