Your opinion on what the USA should do about the North Korea issue.

[Urethra Franklin]

Sorry Lassie, I am what I perport to be

Hmm

, but that avatar is sexy, and who could resist?

Sorry to disappoint you Deegan, but strange as it may seem, the avatar's not actually me, and I'd check yourself since the character depicted is male.
Though I'm not British, I grew up there, and Brits of a certain age willl recognize Zippy from "Rainbow"
Now if only I DID have a mouth that wide, the possibilities would be endless.

I am glad that I could make you smile though

You've grown on me. That's so rare on here, I must be going soft in my old age. But I'll leave you for your wife. I may be a slapper but I'm no homewrecker - I make sure the wives never find out.

 

[Deegan]

Hmm



Sorry to disappoint you Deegan, but strange as it may seem, the avatar's not actually me, and I'd check yourself since the character depicted is male.
Though I'm not British, I grew up there, and Brits of a certain age willl recognize Zippy from "Rainbow"
Now if only I DID have a mouth that wide, the possibilities would be endless.

You've grown on me. That's so rare on here, I must be going soft in my old age. But I'll leave you for your wife. I may be a slapper but I'm no homewrecker - I make sure the wives never find out.

Oh my...............I really don't know what to say?:3oops:

What were we talking about again?

 

[Kelzie]

Oh my...............I really don't know what to say?:3oops:

What were we talking about again?

I was just wondering how many pages you two could flirt for. :mrgreen:

 

[Deegan]

I was just wondering how many pages you two could flirt for. :mrgreen:

Well...............there goes my wood, I don't like stalkers!

 

[Kelzie]

Well...............there goes my wood, I don't like stalkers!

Don't lie, you love the attention.

Besides, I was at this thread before you were.

 

[Deegan]

Don't lie, you love the attention.

Besides, I was at this thread before you were.

:stooges
:lol: :wcm

 

[Joby]

OK....

Well, back to the question of what we should do, we should work with the Chinese and Russians especially to tell North Korea-You don't **** with us. If they see China on our side, they'll stop and wish they hadn't begun.

 

[Kelzie]

OK....

Well, back to the question of what we should do, we should work with the Chinese and Russians especially to tell North Korea-You don't **** with us. If they see China on our side, they'll stop and wish they hadn't begun.

Except China and Russia aren't on our side and don't want to do anything except shake their finger at NK. So now what?

 

[tecoyah]

Well...............there goes my wood, I don't like stalkers!

Then you must....truly hate me.


Which is OK....as you seem to hate a large percentage of American Citizens, I need not feel lonely in this.

 

[Goobieman]

Perhaps the USA should set an example and destroy its own WMD's and dismantle its own nuclear capablity. Then it won't look like such a hypocrite when it demands that others do the same.

Is it hypocritical for law-abiding citizend to demand that criminals give up their guns while themselves retaining theirs?
Will criminals give up their guns if their potential victioms are unarmed?


Those that we are trying to keep from getting nuclear weapons dont give a hoot in hell about your version of hypocircy or anything similar -- all they want is something at makes a big BOOM so they can ry to get a better spot on the world stage.

And what keeps those that DO geet the big stick from using it on us or one of our friends?

Nothing other than the fact that we can immolate them, in total, if they do.

And that why your suggestion is among the most foolish ever posted.

 

[Goobieman]

OK....

Well, back to the question of what we should do, we should work with the Chinese and Russians especially to tell North Korea-You don't **** with us. If they see China on our side, they'll stop and wish they hadn't begun.

What should we do?

1: Continue deploying the NMD and continue to improve it as we go. There's NO better way to protect us from a ICBM-lobbed nuke than the ability to shoot it down.
2: Ring Kim's bell. Next time a T-2 missile fuels up on the pad, hit it with a Tomahawk. Remind him in very concrete terms that he's a little fish in a big pond and the guys at the top of the food chain aren't afraid to take a bite out of him.
3: Keep pushing China (and Russia ) to e NK to play nice. Kim is their dog, and they need to muzzle him.

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

The situation with North Korea is a very delicate one made so by the fact that we're bogged down both diplomatically and militarily at the present time. Due to the fact that we are bogged down in Iraq, still working in Afghanistan, and trying to find a solution to the Iranian problem we wouldn't be able to deal with the potential consequences of an attack against North Korea. By potential consequences I mean the following:

1. China could take advantage of the fact that we would be both diplomatically and militarily strained and invade/attack Taiwan and/or Hong Kong.

2. The North Korean's would probably focus it's efforts on lobbing missiles at Japan and South Korea.

3. Japan would probably launch an attack against North Korea in response to the above. The Chineese would not be very happy about the Japaneese presence and the reaction would be unpredictable.

4. North Korea and Iran are in league with eachother. I doubt Iran would sit idely by while we attack it's second largest supplier of unconventional weaponry. Any hope of a diplomatic solution to the Iranian problem would be erradicated.

5. A war against North Korea would not be an easy one. The North Korean army is well equiped, well trained, and well diciplined. Casualties would be enormous and the innocent would die with the guilty on both sides.

On the other hand, the Korean War never officially ended and we know that diplomacy simply doesn't work with North Korea. Clinton tried it in the 90s with the Agreed Framework and North Korea found a loop hole which they firmly believe allows them to process uranium. In addition, I consider littering our west coast with test missiles to be an act of war.

 

[Goobieman]

1. China could take advantage of the fact that we would be both diplomatically and militarily strained and invade/attack Taiwan and/or Hong Kong.

Attack Hong Kong... which has been part of China since 1999?
Isnt that like the US attacking Seattle?

In any event, the USN and the USAF, along with the Tiawanese military, can defend Taiwan well enough.

2. The North Korean's would probably focus it's efforts on lobbing missiles at Japan and South Korea.

And have the favor returned in like in kind... as the NK missile are shot down.

3. Japan would probably launch an attack against North Korea in response to the above. The Chineese would not be very happy about the Japaneese presence and the reaction would be unpredictable.

Only if you think China will be OK with NK attacking Japan. Recent evcents indicate this is not so.

4. North Korea and Iran are in league with eachother. I doubt Iran would sit idely by while we attack it's second largest supplier of unconventional weaponry.

And Iran will do... what?

Any hope of a diplomatic solution to the Iranian problem would be erradicated.

Then maybe Europe will get off its *** and actually DO something.
Nyeh. Probably not.

5. A war against North Korea would not be an easy one. The North Korean army is well equiped, well trained, and well diciplined.

Sure - much like the Iraqi army was in 1991.
Yawn.

 

[American]

What would a well place .50 caliber sniper round do to the government of North Korea?

 

[Kandahar]

What would a well place .50 caliber sniper round do to the government of North Korea?

I think US Special Ops might be a little conspicuous on the nearly empty streets of Pyongyang.

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

Attack Hong Kong... which has been part of China since 1999? Isnt that like the US attacking Seattle?

Not really. Hong Kong is still, in reality, independent from China. It has it's own government, it's own legal system, it's own currency, it's own laws, etc etc.

In any event, the USN and the USAF, along with the Tiawanese military, can defend Taiwan well enough.

Doubtful and you don't honestly believe that if the U.S. interferes militarily the battle would be limited to Taiwanese territory do you?

And have the favor returned in like in kind... as the NK missile are shot down.

Our missile "defense" has never been tested in a real life scenario and has failed in most of tests it has been subjected to.

Only if you think China will be OK with NK attacking Japan. Recent evcents indicate this is not so.

I think China would be okay with North Korea attacking Japan. Recent events indicate that China is not concerned about what North Korea might do to Japan, rather, what North Korea might do to the United States.

And Iran will do... what?

Iran could make things go far worse in Iraq if it chose to and it would probably attack Israel.

Sure - much like the Iraqi army was in 1991.
Yawn.

The Iraqi army was never a match for the North Korean army. They differ in many respects including their dicipline and loyalty.

 

[Bullets]

in reality, KJI is getting pissed because we have stopped caring about him since bush's "axis of evil" speech. He is just acting like a little kid throwing a temper tantrum to get some attention.

This is the perfect opportunity to save some diplomatic realtions with other countries. I think China is an easier country to get on our side then the New Communist Russia.

Also, if we see some missles fueling up, and we will, since they are liquid fueled rockets that take time to fuel, we send a tomahawk from over the horizon and hammer it, just to let him know we can reach him without seeing him.

 

[Goobieman]

Not really. Hong Kong is still, in reality, independent from China. It has it's own government, it's own legal system, it's own currency, it's own laws, etc etc.

Hoing Kong belongs to China. Period. The US can;t "invade" Seattle.

Doubtful and you don't honestly believe that if the U.S. interferes militarily the battle would be limited to Taiwanese territory do you?

Doubtful... how? You REALLY think the Chinese can successfuly take Taiwan in an opposed invasion backed by our navy and airforce? Why?

And if China wants to expand the war from just Taiwan, we can do the same. We can proiject power into China anywhere we want; they cannot stop us or do the same to us. Its a war they cannot win.

Our missile "defense" has never been tested in a real life scenario and has failed in most of tests it has been subjected to.

1: I'm not talking about the NMD
2: Since no one has ever actually lobbed an ICBM at us, of course it hasnt been tested in a 'real life scenario'
3: The NMD is 5/10 in hit-to-kill tests; 4 of the misses were due to failures in surrogate systems and 1 was due to a problem on the ground.

So - your point?

I think China would be okay with North Korea attacking Japan.

Then you're just nuts.
War between Japan and NK is bad for China in several different ways.

Iran could make things go far worse in Iraq if it chose to and it would probably attack Israel.

And th Israelis wold devastate Iran.
What problem, Iran?

The Iraqi army was never a match for the North Korean army.

According to...?

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

Hoing Kong belongs to China. Period. The US can;t "invade" Seattle.

Wrong. Period. Hong Kong is entirely autonomous and will remain so until 2047 at which time their agreement with China expires. Your comparrison to Seattle is rendered invalid by the fact that Seattle is not in any way, shape, or form autonomous from the rest of the U.S.

Doubtful... how? You REALLY think the Chinese can successfuly take Taiwan in an opposed invasion backed by our navy and airforce? Why?

Doubtful because the Taiwaneese can't defend themselves from the 700 missiles China has directly pointed at them and the U.S. can't defend Taiwan from them either. You keep imagining a world in which the U.S. isn't preoccupied by 3 wars and countless diplomatic constraints. The U.S. doesn't have ability to fight 4 or more wars at the same time.

And if China wants to expand the war from just Taiwan, we can do the same. We can proiject power into China anywhere we want; they cannot stop us or do the same to us. Its a war they cannot win.

It's a war we cannot win either.

1: I'm not talking about the NMD

Then what are you talking about?

2: Since no one has ever actually lobbed an ICBM at us, of course it hasnt been tested in a 'real life scenario'

Thats not what I meant by real life scenario. By real life scenario I meant including all of the uncertainties which go with a missile attack. The tests involved launcing missiles from an aircraft carrier, knowing where it was being launched from, knowing it's trajectory, knowing it's speed, knowing the payload, etc etc ad infinitum. Those are all things we would not know in a real life event.

Then you're just nuts. War between Japan and NK is bad for China in several different ways.

If China really cared about what North Korea could/would do to Japan then why didn't China make a big stink about the test missile which soared over Japan in the 90s?

And th Israelis wold devastate Iran.

I highly doubt it.

According to...?

Common knowledge.

 

[Monkey Mind]

Hard to choose between the two checkboxes on the US defending itself against missile attacks. I would hope the answer is Yes, but the defense system performed pretty badly in testing. That doesn't bode well for us should NK decide to lob a Taepodong at Hawaii. Then again, the so-called long range missile didn't live up to its billing in their recent test. I can't help but wonder if that was intentional though, shoot one up just so they could say they did it, but don't let it get far enough to cause any real trouble. The alternative scenario is pretty ridiculous and pathetic.

As far as what we should do about it, I'm in favor of continuing to press for multilateral talks. China and South Korea are against additional sanctions, I think we need to respect their wishes on that and give the situation some more time. It would be nice if China were to take a proactive role and come up with a solution. One would hope that those negotiations are already underway.



On a side note, did anyone see the press conference where George Bush had to say the word "Taepodong"? The look on his face was priceless.

 

[hipsterdufus]

I don't think Bush calling Kim Jong Il a "pygmy" and "a spoiled child" is the way to go. I prefer diplomacy. :roll:

http://www.kimsoft.com/2002/pygmy.htm

 

[aquapub]

What we need to do is develop a time machine so we can go back and stop Clinton from appeasing them while they built their nukes in the first place. :mrgreen:

 

[Goobieman]

Wrong. Period. Hong Kong is entirely autonomous and will remain so until 2047 at which time their agreement with China expires. Your comparrison to Seattle is rendered invalid by the fact that Seattle is not in any way, shape, or form autonomous from the rest of the U.S.

Hong Kong is as "autonomomous" as China allows. Hong Kong is part of China. Period

Doubtful because the Taiwaneese can't defend themselves from the 700 missiles China has directly pointed at them and the U.S. can't defend Taiwan from them either.

700 missiles? Where di you pull that number from?
And yes, the US and Tiwanese CAN effectively defend Taiwan from that many missiles.
And in any event -- missile strikes will not cause Tiawan to fall -- you need an invasion for that.

You keep imagining a world in which the U.S. isn't preoccupied by 3 wars and countless diplomatic constraints. The U.S. doesn't have ability to fight 4 or more wars at the same time.

The USAF and (especially) thr USN are not overly taxed by the wars in Iraq and Afganistan. The army is, but the army isnt necessary to defend Taiwan.

You keep forgetting that the Chinese need to land and suppot troops to tale Taiwan. They have to cross water to do that.

It's a war we cannot win either.

Against China?
Sure we can. We can shut down and then destory the Chinese economy, and we can do it without landing a single foot on their territory. And they canlt stop us.

Then what are you talking about?

I suggest you took up things like THAAD, SM-3 and PAC-3.

Thats not what I meant by real life scenario. By real life scenario I meant including all of the uncertainties which go with a missile attack.

Like?

The tests involved launcing missiles from an aircraft carrier,

Clealy you dont have a clue about the NMD. Not a single test involved a launch from an aircraft carrier.

Knowing where it was being launched from,
knowing it's trajectory,
knowing it's speed,
Those are all things we would not know in a real life event.

These things are detected at launch and are computed while the missie is in flight. They are also locked in as soon as the booster burns out.
Knowing therm in advance is no real advantage to knowing them a minute or so after launch.

knowing the payload,

Why do you need to know that?

etc etc ad infinitum.

You rann out of things to say, didnt you?

If China really cared about what North Korea could/would do to Japan then why didn't China make a big stink about the test missile which soared over Japan in the 90s?

That was before NK had nukes.

I highly doubt it.

Given your demonsration of knowledge, above, your doubt here doeesnt mean much.
Iran sends a nuke to Israel, Israel sends 100 back.

Common knowledge.

Translation:
You dont have a source to back up your claim.

 

[Goobieman]

I would hope the answer is Yes, but the defense system performed pretty badly in testing.

The NMD is 5 for 10 in hit to kill tests.
5 kills
4 misses due to failures in surrogate systems
1 miss due to afailure in ground control.

How is this "poor preformance"?

That doesn't bode well for us should NK decide to lob a Taepodong at Hawaii.

Why not? You're going to fire at least 2 interceptors at a single missile.

 

[Monkey Mind]

The NMD is 5 for 10 in hit to kill tests.
5 kills
4 misses due to failures in surrogate systems
1 miss due to afailure in ground control.

How is this "poor preformance"?

5 out of 10. I've heard the term "close enough for government work" but this is one case where such odds are unacceptable. You didn't cite any sources, btw. Got any?