So if NK hit Guam or Japan or SK with these missile tests/ demonstrations the US just sits there and takes it?
North Korea
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Surley what Kim wants is recognition of their status as a nuclear power, in which case the negotiating table is the best route ? I doubt this could lead to a minor military escalation which could be easily stopped. It would likely be a massive first strike with conventional weapons by the US so as to demolish all North Korean chances of retaliation - or nuclear. Those actions, presumably, would be cleared with China beforehand.
Sorry for the stupid question, but what does that mean? A landlocked territory is one surrounded by land borders - so is a non-landlocked country an island?
Surely NK cannot be non-landlocked if it borders Russia and China?
I've seen this phrase used by a few posters, but cannot get me head around it
The us would never start a full ground invasion. That's a non starter. Thats not even possible without massive build-up. It would be an air campaign and maybe a ground offence to secure territory along the SK boarder (to protect Seoul &Co).
I actually could imagine (implicit/secret) cooperation between the us and China along what you lined out: us conducts a preventive strike + China sends ground troops and secures the country. I bet the us military would be more than happy not having to commit 100k+ soldiers for decades. Anyway. My point is that even if the us decided to use military means, it wont lead to a military conflict between China (Russia) and the USA.
Landlocked means surrounded entirely by other countries. NK has coastline so is not landlocked.Sorry for the stupid question, but what does that mean? A landlocked territory is one surrounded by land borders - so is a non-landlocked country an island?
Surely NK cannot be non-landlocked if it borders Russia and China?
I've seen this phrase used by a few posters, but cannot get me head around it
I think he is saying only non landlocked country that shares a border with both Russia and ChinaSorry for the stupid question, but what does that mean? A landlocked territory is one surrounded by land borders - so is a non-landlocked country an island?
Surely NK cannot be non-landlocked if it borders Russia and China?
I've seen this phrase used by a few posters, but cannot get me head around it
I agree that a multi national co-operative effort would seem far more beneficial (and therefore likely) from the point of view of all the major powers.
(though no doubt some serious poker to be played beforehand as to who will do / get what out of it all)
probably not... but if it lands missiles in international waters off the coast of Guam then probably - I mean one of the recent tests fell about 25 miles off out of Russian territory didn't it without anything kicking off.
Sorry for the stupid question, but what does that mean? A landlocked territory is one surrounded by land borders - so is a non-landlocked country an island?
Surely NK cannot be non-landlocked if it borders Russia and China?
I've seen this phrase used by a few posters, but cannot get me head around it
Yeah, non-landlocked means basically it has a coastline directly onto water.
NK has borders to two superpowers and has a coastline for easy movement of men and equipment, that is why it is so important. China protect it not because of kim, but because they do not want a US friendly government in that location. Neither do Russia.
While America has no senior diplomats in the region, because trump couldn't be bothered to appoint any, you can bet your life China and Russia are working on a solution that serves their own interests, that is ensuring no western friendly power takes control of NK, right now. As mighty as the US military is, does it really want to piss off both Russia and China to the point of military intervention at the same time? I would not think so, and i expect that the adults will start walking back trumps idiocy fairly soon once they start getting the message from Beijing.
NK has borders to two superpowers and has a coastline for easy movement of men and equipment, that is why it is so important. China protect it not because of kim, but because they do not want a US friendly government in that location. Neither do Russia.
While America has no senior diplomats in the region, because trump couldn't be bothered to appoint any, you can bet your life China and Russia are working on a solution that serves their own interests, that is ensuring no western friendly power takes control of NK, right now. As mighty as the US military is, does it really want to piss off both Russia and China to the point of military intervention at the same time? I would not think so, and i expect that the adults will start walking back trumps idiocy fairly soon once they start getting the message from Beijing.
It's not like you have to look long and hard to see that either. We all agree that Trump is impulsive, nasty, destructive and on many subjects just plain stupid, yet his ability to enforce his will on the people and drive meaningful change has been almost non-existent, in large part because of the state apparatus.
For whatever reason we like to convince ourselves that rhetoric is more important than it is. Ultimately it implies that we are simply a passive mass, easily manipulated by politicans who can achieve what they want just be pulling the right rhetorical strings. It's particularly easy for some people to take that view when the "other" side are the ones in power. Aside from that being a thoroughly contemptible view on human nature, it doesn't stack up too well against the evidence.
But there's at least two factor security on the launch codes isn't there? Amongst other safety features in place?
The two man rule means that both POTUS and SecDef need to agree with each other before the Joint Chief of Staff pass the command to the military. If SecDef doesn't agree then POTUS can fire him on the spot and the responsibility would fall the Deputy Sec Def and so on.
It's not a great failsafe.
Those are in place to make sure a rogue military person can't launch one. It is not in place to stop the president
Can't he be offered some kind of immunity from prosecution in return for him and his family giving up power and retiring to a nice life on an island somewhere?
But enough about Trump..
But enough about Trump..
There is the unofficial hope that the commander who first receives the orders will ask for authentication and for a secondary confirmation (something that is within their right to ask for) to make sure it is not a case of the President being off his tits on MDA or toupee glue. How likely that would be to happen though is unknown.
Secondary would then come from someone the president has the power to fire/appoint
Just look at the GIF above of him in a yellow suit then ask yourself, how could that man become President? and could he really be responsible for starting WWIII?
You have to consider that it was developed during the Cold War, when the decision to launch a preemptive or counter strike against the Soviet Union would have to be made in a matter of minutes, not hours or days.
Well, at this stage we are reduced to relying on Mike Pence, Tom Price and Betsy DeVos to invoke Section 4 of the 25th Amendment in such scenario.
What a delightful prospect!
Just when I thought things couldn't be any more depressing. Thanks for that.
Well.. it's also important to remember that our nation didn't elect complete morons to the presidency back then either lol
And that is where the theory talk gets interesting. Military commander asks for confirmation. Sec of Def refuses, saying President is off his rocker. President now fires Sec of Def, VP tries to give confirmation. Now, what we are faced with is the commander the type just to accept the order now or will he now begin to question the legality of the orders being given by the President and therefore not carry them out. Especially in a situation where it is not a case of a massive Soviet strike is already in bound and we have to use em or lose em and just be destroyed. Even if NK has launched a missile at say Los Angeles, our carrying out an immediate counter strike does nothing to prevent LA from being destroyed, and our ability to launch a strike against NK will still be there , hours, days, weeks from now.
I've read some papers on this, and even watched one of those round table discussions where they bring in former military and government officials and talk about issues like this. I think this was back in the mid to late 90's after the fall of the USSR, so they paradigm of nuclear conflict had shifted quite a bit and they focused on non-MAD scenarios.
The problem being of course, this sort of scenario changes depending on the players. And depends on a military commander questioning his orders, something that can not be counted on.
Last edited:
I thought there were a bunch of Clancy fans here, per discussion in the Trump thread weeks ago. Have you guys forgotten about the ending of The Sum of All Fears (book, not movie)?
President Fowler wants to launch a nuke at Iran, gives the order and asks Ryan (our hero, CIA Deputy Director) to confirm. SecDef and SecState were killed in nuclear blast at SuperBowl (don't ask me, I didn't write it). NSA can't confirm because needs to be someone confirmed by Congress. Ryan identifies himself and reads his numbered code, but then yells into phone to CINC STRATCOM (military) that he does not confirm the order, and that the President is not in mental condition to function.
CINC STRATCOM never wanted to launch in the first place, they call Congressional leadership and inform of situation. Behind the scenes constitutional crisis ensues, ends with Fowler resigning (I think). Ryan and Clark do their usual heroics and track down terrorists and they're executed in Saudi Arabia. Day is saved, everyone can be friends (until Japan attacks the US years later).
Basically what I'm saying is, Ryan will save the day. I'm not worried.
President Fowler wants to launch a nuke at Iran, gives the order and asks Ryan (our hero, CIA Deputy Director) to confirm. SecDef and SecState were killed in nuclear blast at SuperBowl (don't ask me, I didn't write it). NSA can't confirm because needs to be someone confirmed by Congress. Ryan identifies himself and reads his numbered code, but then yells into phone to CINC STRATCOM (military) that he does not confirm the order, and that the President is not in mental condition to function.
CINC STRATCOM never wanted to launch in the first place, they call Congressional leadership and inform of situation. Behind the scenes constitutional crisis ensues, ends with Fowler resigning (I think). Ryan and Clark do their usual heroics and track down terrorists and they're executed in Saudi Arabia. Day is saved, everyone can be friends (until Japan attacks the US years later).
Basically what I'm saying is, Ryan will save the day. I'm not worried.
I think the artillery threat to Seoul is massively overstated. There will be a lot of property damage once the shelling stops but there are contingency plans that quickly evacuate civilians to safety. Using that as an excuse to do nothing (The Atlantic article) allows a mad man to dangle nuclear weapons in a geopolitical powder keg and no one else can do nothing, not even China.
Trump's bluster is just that but I'm not sure why anything apart from lying down and taking this nonsense is a no-go.
Trump's bluster is just that but I'm not sure why anything apart from lying down and taking this nonsense is a no-go.
Beyond the fact that pre-sighted artillery can get off a crap load of shells in a very short amount of time, if NK has figured out tactical nuclear artillery shells... or if NK fires biological or chemical warfare artillery shells... then the damage possible isn't being overstated at all.
This part happens as well?
Next book. Japan develops nukes too.
Now that I think of it... isn't Korea unified in the Clancy universe without it ever being part of the story how that came about?
With the president being Commander-in-Chief, I see the only hope is the invokation of Article 4 of the 25th amendment.
My post is based on a paper (trying to find it) that also mentioned that the North can't bust their load shelling Seoul without being vulnerable at the border once they run out of supplies and their supply networks are cut off.
Haha, god knows about the second part but thanks for the info on the first!
This is the kind of overreach that causes blind panic. They have had nukes for years and nothing has changed now, except Trump's rhetoric. Just leave it to UN/China to maintain status quo. The less US involvement is, better for the world as a whole.
If they start shelling Seoul it's because they've hit their endgame. I doubt they'll be too concerned about being vulnerable at the border because they will already know that an overwhelming US retaliatory strike is inbound because they'll have also killed members of the 2nd Infantry Division
I still think it's a prudent protocol. There could easily be a scenario (Indo/Sino, Indian/Pakistani tensions for instance) where a decision will have to made immediately. NK is unlikely to ever require such a decision as they won't initiate a conflict with the US. No country will, but the above doomsday scenarios might require the US to pick a side (and obliterate the other side).
In practice, no president can actually order a nuclear attack. In theory, yes. In practice, no. Bush, Eisenhower, and co found that out at different times. It's similar to the Queen being able to dissolve the Canadian parliament on her own initiative without it being requested by the Canadian prime minister. It won't ever happen, but, in theory, it could.
Stating the obvious isn't overreach.
We figured out how to make nuclear artillery in the 1950s. So did the USSR.
North Korea is known to have stockpiled thousands of tons of chemical weapons and is believed to have a biological weapons production capacity as well.
A few months ago people were protesting and panicking because they thought Trump alone had the power to press the button, weren't they ? Anyway, unless things have changed, there are two soldiers in charge of actually pressing the launch button for one missile, they cannot launch it alone they have to do it in unison, which is a second control mechanism. All very sound in my view.
Bit of a stretch given our current circumstances and the personalities involved.