North Korea

langster said:
That has been discussed in his own thread, he can act on his own if he wants.
Click to expand...
Only in theory. He can act on his own in the same way that Putin could technically invade Ukraine tomorrow. Neither will happen. In the first case because he can't actually act on his own in practice, in the second case because though Putin is more dictator than president, he still has internal factions and world opinion to consider.

I agree with your second paragraph. Although I'm not sold on the mentally ill part.
 
RedSky said:
It'd probably start China preparing for war against America tbh. I'm sure they're already doing that as a precaution.
Click to expand...
It would be a world war should a war on the Peninsula break out. Which is why it won't/can't happen.
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
It would be a world war should a war on the Peninsula break out. Which is why it won't/can't happen.
Click to expand...

Normally I'd agree, Trump however seems the type to do it. Didn't Bannon also say that war with China was inevitable? You've got someone in power who will disagree with the majority and will agree with the minority to feed his ego. He's just as dangerous as any other dictator IMO. He shows a complete disregard for human life.
 
RedSky said:
Normally I'd agree, Trump however seems the type to do it. Didn't Bannon also say that war with China was inevitable? You've got someone in power who will disagree with the majority and will agree with the minority to feed his ego. He's just as dangerous as any other dictator IMO. He shows a complete disregard for human life.
Click to expand...
It's one of those rare occasions where people should take comfort in the fact that Trump's cabinet consists of billionaires. War is profitable, nuclear world war, not so much.
 
langster said:
I'm beginning to think maybe you are after your comment about his Tweets. :p

You really should make a point of reading them, they are comedy gold and seriously you won't actually believe what you are reading 90% of the time.
Click to expand...
:lol:

I have read a few when I've been in the Trump thread and some are comedy gold, I just try to avoid them if that makes sense. I'd rather read about policy than Trump/Person writing for Trump tweeting about petty celebrity nonsense.

langster said:
Yup, indeed, and Trump will profit massively from one. Also, as you pointed out, so will his entire cabinet.

http://www.hangthebankers.com/trump-owns-shares-company-syria-raytheon/
Click to expand...
Conventional war, though. That doesn't surprise me as anyone's who lived through the Bush administration can't be shocked at high level officials profiting from wars they initiate. However, everyone dies in a nuclear war and billionaires have more to lose than most.
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
Conventional war, though. That doesn't surprise me as anyone's who lived through the Bush administration can't be shocked at high level officials profiting from wars they initiate. However, everyone dies in a nuclear war and billionaires have more to lose than most.
Click to expand...

Yes I completely and utterly agree mate, but I guarantee you 100% that Trump doesn't understand that at all. Maybe he did, but he sure as feck doesn't now. He sees nukes as a giant bomb that makes a big bang, I don't think he understands everything that comes after that or what firing one would actually mean. May I remind you of this.........

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/03/trump-asks-why-us-cant-use-nukes-msnbcs-joe-scarborough-reports.html

THREE times he asked why the USA can't use nuclear weapons. None of anything he is doing or saying should come as a surprise, that's why so many people are worried, because of what he's said and done previously.
 
People have to realise two things.

1) Even if the DPRK show a live video of Kim hovering his finger above the nuclear button they aren't going to launch knowing that it'll absolutely mean the end of their existence.

2) Even though Trump is everything bad about a human being, it's important to remember that he can't just launch a nuke on his own. The safety factors in play mean he'll never get the chance to do it.
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
And do you believe Bejing will give the US reassurances about starting a potentially nuclear conflict on its border? Sorry, but :lol:.
Click to expand...
It wont come to that yet, and may it never will, but we'd be foolish to exclude the possibility.

He has a very primitive, 18th/19th century idea of geopolitics. It doesnt matter a jot to him if 'allies' halfway around the world are in the shit. It's entirely feasible that he'd see ceding US interest in Asia Pacific in exchange for ridding of NK as a good deal. The Chinese have tentatively shown their willingness to distance themselves from the fat kid.

I find the thinking that 'it won't happen' deeply troubling. Great wars of the past always started from regional conflicts and leaders of the time always thought that they can contain the conflict to their needs.
 
matherto said:
Even though Trump is everything bad about a human being, it's important to remember that he can't just launch a nuke on his own. The safety factors in play mean he'll never get the chance to do it.
Click to expand...
I've posted it on here before, but essentially... yes, the president can do exactly that.

The POTUS has the ability to single handedly start nuclear war without any consent or counsel from anyone else in the government.
 
matherto said:
People have to realise two things.

1) Even if the DPRK show a live video of Kim hovering his finger above the nuclear button they aren't going to launch knowing that it'll absolutely mean the end of their existence.

2) Even though Trump is everything bad about a human being, it's important to remember that he can't just launch a nuke on his own. The safety factors in play mean he'll never get the chance to do it.
Click to expand...
Even if Trump had his way, I doubt he will respond with nuclear weapons. There is no need for US to respond with that sort of force.

The realistic case right now (for the US and the entire world) is to keep fingering NK till it launches something towards Guam and the US to respond conventionally. Initially taking out the immediate threats to SK and Japan and in the medium term dismantling the NK regime. This should in the long term lead to a nuclear free unified Korea. Any fallout on/around Guam will be locally contained.

If this clusterfeckery is allowed to linger on as done by Obama and Bush, some day NK will have the ability to actually strike the continental US and Americans will have to live in constant fear. Not to mention the high likelihood of a much larger nuclear attack and a massive retaliation in the future.

Also, a conflict right now would help Trump get rid of the momentum built up against him internally and might even get him a second term depending upon the outcomes. Who knows.
 
Last edited:
AshfordLad said:
The best case right now (for the US and the entire world) is to keep fingering NK till it launches something towards Guam and the US to respond conventionally. Initially taking out the immediate threats to SK and Japan and in the medium term dismantling the NK regime. This should in the long term lead to a nuclear free unified Korea. Any fallout on/around Guam will be locally contained.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously suggesting that Trump should continue to goad, poke and prod at North Korea and entice them in to launching nuclear warheads? Is that really what you just said?
 
langster said:
Are you seriously suggesting that Trump should continue to goad, poke and prod at North Korea and entice them in to launching nuclear warheads? Is that really what you just said?
Click to expand...
It really looks that way.

It also ignores that before we could conventionally take out NK's forces targeting SK and Japan, they'd have already taken out millions of people.
 
langster said:
Are you seriously suggesting that Trump should continue to goad, poke and prod at North Korea and entice them in to launching nuclear warheads? Is that really what you just said?
Click to expand...

Ashford Red = John Bolton
 
Carolina Red said:
It really looks that way.

It also ignores that before we could conventionally take out NK's forces targeting SK and Japan, they'd have already taken out millions of people.
Click to expand...

I have read it a few times now and still can't get over that it says that. It's ridiculous for so many different reasons, and it not only doesn't make sense, it wouldn't work anyway. South Korea would be dead in minutes and as pointed out, if Kim does fire 4 missiles at Guam as he has threatened to do then it's highly likely 2 or more will get through. At least one is certain of getting through if it's on target. However none of that is even relevant really, what's more insane is the thought, let alone talk of actively goading a known lunatic in to firing nuclear missiles at a populated country. :wenger:
 
langster said:
Are you seriously suggesting that Trump should continue to goad, poke and prod at North Korea and entice them in to launching nuclear warheads? Is that really what you just said?
Click to expand...
Firstly, I am not suggesting shit. I am only commenting on what is likely to happen. Also, I stand corrected. calling it the best case is very poor use of words on my part. It would be horrible obviously as any war. That said, this wouldn't end well if allowed to drag on for another few years.

Any other country around the world (even Baathist Iraq or the Iranians) could have been better dealt with negotiations but the setup on NK means that it will come down to trading blows sooner or later. Bad as it is, I think that is what it will happen.
 
Last edited:
langster said:
For fecks sake, what a load of shite. They said they would fire FOUR missiles simultaneously because the defence systems weakness is that it can't deal with multiple threats at once. One missile, yeah fine it would stop it, but it can't handle four. Kim's done his homework again with this threat. Real or not, if he did fire four, at least one would get through.
Click to expand...
Where are you getting this from? Because it sounds like complete bullshit.

A THAAD battery like the one deployed on Guam consists of at least 6 launchers each holding 8 interceptors so in total a minimum of 48 interceptor missiles and an radar which locates the threat and guides the interceptors. The radar can track 60 objects simultaneously and with at least 48 interceptors ready to be fired at any time it would have no problem to intercept 4 incoming missiles. It would probably take at least 30-40 missiles to even have a small chance of getting one through. And that's only the land based THAAD system, you can be sure that there will be warships armed with the Aegis system in the area too.
 
the hea said:
Where are you getting this from? Because it sounds like complete bullshit.

A THAAD battery like the one deployed on Guam consists of at least 6 launchers each holding 8 interceptors so in total a minimum of 48 interceptor missiles and an radar which locates the threat and guides the interceptors. The radar can track 60 objects simultaneously and with at least 48 interceptors ready to be fired at any time it would have no problem to intercept 4 incoming missiles. It would probably take at least 30-40 missiles to even have a small chance of getting one through. And that's only the land based THAAD system, you can be sure that there will be warships armed with the Aegis system in the area too.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about intercepting cruise missiles or ballistic missiles? I don't believe the US has any defence that could intercept an ICBM.
 
the hea said:
Because it sounds like complete bullshit.
Click to expand...

Nice.

Many ex Generals, defence secretaries and military experts have been saying it since Kim issued the threat. All said multiple threats from North Korea would be a problem due to close proximity to Guam and trajectory and various other reasons including lack of real world testing, especially on the defences used in Guam. They also all said that the Guam defence would struggle to intercept more than one ICBM and it would be a real problem if 4 were fired simultaneously.



https://warontherocks.com/2017/05/missile-defense-cant-save-us-from-north-korea/

Also, regarding THAAD

The army's Theater High Altitude Area Defense system, or THAAD, is projected to be the most versatile and sophisticated hit-to-kill system in use. Although it remains less developed than the Patriot, THAAD is intended to intercept the longest-range theater ballistic missiles, both inside and outside the atmosphere. Yet in its short history, THAAD has shown more than any other system the difficulties of developing effective missile defenses: in its first seven intercept tests,which started in 1995, THAAD hit only a single target missile.

Theodore A. Postol is professor of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT.
Click to expand...

Admittedly it has come a long way since then, but it's still not capable of stopping multiple ICBM threats at a time for reasons stated in above articles. Although I'm no expert, just going on what I have seen and read.
 
Nanook said:
Are you talking about intercepting cruise missiles or ballistic missiles? I don't believe the US has any defence that could intercept an ICBM.
Click to expand...

The US has the GMD system for ICBMs, based in Alaska and California. It's not been 100% reliable in tests but it is there.

Otherwise, the THAAD system is thought to be capable of ICBM defence with a few small upgrades. Their true capability will certainly be kept secret in the face of Korea's sabre rattling.

I don't think it will come to it though. N Korea know a preemptive strike on the US would be the end of them.
 
11101 said:
The US has the GMD system for ICBMs, based in Alaska and California. It's not been 100% reliable in tests but it is there.

Otherwise, the THAAD system is thought to be capable of ICBM defence with a few small upgrades. Their true capability will certainly be kept secret in the face of Korea's sabre rattling.

I don't think it will come to it though. N Korea know a preemptive strike on the US would be the end of them.
Click to expand...

From what I've read the technology for reliable missile defence is still many decades away. All tests the US has conducted have been in heavily scripted scenarios where the defending missile knows the exact location and time the ICBM was fired, often it still fails under these perfect conditions. Even if the US had a system that could hit a target 100% of the time there are a number of incredibly simple countermeasures NK could use to overwhelm any missile defence, something as simple as heated mylar balloons would be able to fool any radar.

 
Nanook said:
Are you talking about intercepting cruise missiles or ballistic missiles? I don't believe the US has any defence that could intercept an ICBM.
Click to expand...
Ballistic missiles of course that is what the THAAD system has been built for.

Intercepting cruise missiles is extremely hard and I don't think there is any system in the world that can take down a modern cruise missile with any good accuracy. The main problem being that they fly so low so the radar has to be based on an elevated platform to be able to see them.

The only system the US has and that I'm aware of that could intercept an ICBM is the Ground Based Midcourse Defense but I'm not sure if it's operational yet.
https://missilethreat.csis.org/system/gmd/
 
the hea said:
Ballistic missiles of course that is what the THAAD system has been built for.

Intercepting cruise missiles is extremely hard and I don't think there is any system in the world that can take down a modern cruise missile with any good accuracy. The main problem being that they fly so low so the radar has to be based on an elevated platform to be able to see them.

The only system the US has and that I'm aware of that could intercept an ICBM is the Ground Based Midcourse Defense but I'm not sure if it's operational yet.
https://missilethreat.csis.org/system/gmd/
Click to expand...
We've had GBMD operational for awhile now as well as THAAD.

We also have the Aegis guided SM-3 missiles on board several of our destroyers, which can provide mid stage ballistic missile defense.

The rest of our destroyers, equipped with SM-2 missiles also now have, thanks to upgrades, the capability to provide a terminal stage ballistic missile defense shield as well.
 
langster said:
Nice.

Many ex Generals, defence secretaries and military experts have been saying it since Kim issued the threat. All said multiple threats from North Korea would be a problem due to close proximity to Guam and trajectory and various other reasons including lack of real world testing, especially on the defences used in Guam. They also all said that the Guam defence would struggle to intercept more than one ICBM and it would be a real problem if 4 were fired simultaneously.



https://warontherocks.com/2017/05/missile-defense-cant-save-us-from-north-korea/

Also, regarding THAAD
Click to expand...


North Korea wouldn't use an ICBM to attack Guam since it's only 3500km away. They would use an Intermediate range ballistic missile for it. ICBM's are missiles with an flight range of at least 5500km.

Both those links are about the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system which is designed to protect the US mainland and Canada from ICBM's by taking them out in the midcourse phase. It has nothing to do with the protection of Guam.

The THAAD, Aegis and Patriot systems are more local systems that are designed to take out incoming missiles in the terminal phase and these are the systems that would be intercepting missiles fired towards Guam, Japan or South Korea. All 3 of these systems have been tested a lot and successfully too and are now deployed in various parts of the world.

When it comes to taking out missiles there is never a 100% accuracy to it. There is always something that could go wrong and even if they fired just 1 missile there is always a small probability that it could get through.

If you want to read more about the US and South Korean defenses against an missile attack from North Korea I can recommend this PDF
https://www.38north.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/2016-03-10_THAAD-What-It-Can-and-Cant-Do.pdf
 
the hea said:
North Korea wouldn't use an ICBM to attack Guam since it's only 3500km away. They would use an Intermediate range ballistic missile for it. ICBM's are missiles with an flight range of at least 5500km.

Both those links are about the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system which is designed to protect the US mainland and Canada from ICBM's by taking them out in the midcourse phase. It has nothing to do with the protection of Guam.

The THAAD, Aegis and Patriot systems are more local systems that are designed to take out incoming missiles in the terminal phase and these are the systems that would be intercepting missiles fired towards Guam, Japan or South Korea. All 3 of these systems have been tested a lot and successfully too and are now deployed in various parts of the world.

When it comes to taking out missiles there is never a 100% accuracy to it. There is always something that could go wrong and even if they fired just 1 missile there is always a small probability that it could get through.

If you want to read more about the US and South Korean defenses against an missile attack from North Korea I can recommend this PDF
https://www.38north.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/2016-03-10_THAAD-What-It-Can-and-Cant-Do.pdf
Click to expand...
Additionally the systems have been developed mostly to counter Russian missiles with MIRV capability. There is no indication towards NK missiles having any such ability. It should be straight forward to intercept 4 (or even 10) non-MIRV missiles with 100% accuracy.

However its absolutely certain that NK would be frantically working towards getting this ability to as well as increasing the range to be able to target the west coast.
 
“The U.S. should clearly face up to the fact that the ballistic rockets of the Strategic Force of the KPA are now on constant standby, facing the Pacific Ocean and pay deep attention to their azimuth angle for launch.”

This bit worries me.

Fatty has his nuke and thinks this makes NK immune and he can now gain importance by showing that the US is toothless.

He has decided to show this by firing missiles into various parts of the Pacific to prove the US won't react because of the Nuke threat.

The problem is that dropping a missile or missiles anywhere near Guam means firing it over South Korea and or Japan.

So when this missile fires how does anyone know it isn't carrying a Nuke rather than just a test and from a counter measure reaction point of view can you afford to wait and see where it is heading or do you have to hit the counter launch button immediately? Also what if the NK missiles aren't that reliable and one falls short?
 
Am I the only one who assumes that China won't stand by NK if any military conflict breaks out? All the ww scenarios disregard that China isn't happy with NK and they won't do anything foolish to save the regime.
 
PedroMendez said:
Am I the only one who assumes that China won't stand by NK if any military conflict breaks out? All the ww scenarios disregard that China isn't happy with NK and they won't do anything foolish to save the regime.
Click to expand...
I'm of the same opinion. This isn't the 1950s. They won't be happy with millions of half starved refugees crossing their border but the PRC is hands in fists with the US when it comes o making money now, they won't risk a full on conflict.

Their preferred outcome is of course no war and Pyongyang back to being obedient puppet, hence the increasing aloofness to heap pressure on Kim.
 
PedroMendez said:
Am I the only one who assumes that China won't stand by NK if any military conflict breaks out? All the ww scenarios disregard that China isn't happy with NK and they won't do anything foolish to save the regime.
Click to expand...

I don't think it necessarily has anything to do with being happy with him.

I can't see China (a superpower/ budding superpower) being happy with US forces being stationed on the border. I also imagine they wouldn't be too ecstatic with a reunited Korea, population of 80 million, potentially US leaning, again on their border.

Whether that means they'd be willing to actually go to war with the USA over it I don't know. But a war (especially one in which I'm sure Trump wouldn't be in for the long haul) is not something they'll countenance easily.
 
Last edited:
Neither Russia nor China will accept a westernized, US friendly reunited Korea on their border.

This is not just about Kim's idiocy, NK is the only non-landlocked country in the world with borders to both Russia and China, It is one , if not the, most strategic positions in global geopolitics.

And trump is lumbering about in the middle of it like the uninformed moron that he is.There is no scenario anywhere that ends in a reunited Korea, an attempt to do so simply ensures both Russian and Chinese military involvement.
 
Nanook said:
From what I've read the technology for reliable missile defence is still many decades away. All tests the US has conducted have been in heavily scripted scenarios where the defending missile knows the exact location and time the ICBM was fired, often it still fails under these perfect conditions. Even if the US had a system that could hit a target 100% of the time there are a number of incredibly simple countermeasures NK could use to overwhelm any missile defence, something as simple as heated mylar balloons would be able to fool any....
Click to expand...

If you're specifically to long range, high velocity, multi entry vehicle ICBMs then you are right in part. They're extremely difficult to shoot down. The US does have defences against them (GMD, Aegis) but they're not fully reliable. Luckily NK seems to be a long way from those.

There are many systems to shoot down the short to medium range missiles NK would be aiming at Guam. Aegis, THAAD and others are all well tested and as reliable as it gets for missile defence, although there is no such thing as 100% protection. Even Israel's Iron Dome misses sometimes.
 
PedroMendez said:
Am I the only one who assumes that China won't stand by NK if any military conflict breaks out? All the ww scenarios disregard that China isn't happy with NK and they won't do anything foolish to save the regime.
Click to expand...

China doesn't like NK any more than the US does. They're a good trade partner and an important geographical buffer, but that's as far as it goes. They are frequently put down in Chinese state media. If it came down to it I can't see them taking NK's side, they know being friendly with the US is more important than being friendly with North Korea. I think they would just stand aside and let it play out providing the US stayed away from their border.
 
11101 said:
China doesn't like NK any more than the US does. They're a good trade partner and an important geographical buffer, but that's as far as it goes. They are frequently put down in Chinese state media. If it came down to it I can't see them taking NK's side, they know being friendly with the US is more important than being friendly with North Korea. I think they would just stand aside and let it play out providing the US stayed away from their border.
Click to expand...

That's exactly my opinion as well. The us would give them assurances that protects their interests and they'd just sit it out. Nobody is going to start a ww over NK.
The danger is Kim answering any intervention with all out warfare against SK/Japan.
 
PedroMendez said:
Am I the only one who assumes that China won't stand by NK if any military conflict breaks out? All the ww scenarios disregard that China isn't happy with NK and they won't do anything foolish to save the regime.
Click to expand...
We wont prop up the regime thats for sure - equally sure is that we wont allow American troops on our borders... it either needs to be a multi national effort (led by china) or its a non starter... we could mobilise troops to the region several months quicker than the USA so I suspect we wait and see- and if the USA strikes Pyongyang independently (missile, bombers, special ops etc) and takes out the regime then quickly we will flood NK with troops for "humanitarian" reasons as a multi national operation takes shape... (and it will be a humanitarian disaster)

But 100% not happening is USA putting troops on the Chinese border (and defacto russian border close to one of their big sea ports) but as I say it would probably take 6 months of build up / logistics to be ready for that and there is no way Kim allows that to happen without a pre preemptive strike so if the USA want to go with the military option they need Chinese (and probably Russian) Co-operation...
 
PedroMendez said:
Am I the only one who assumes that China won't stand by NK if any military conflict breaks out? All the ww scenarios disregard that China isn't happy with NK and they won't do anything foolish to save the regime.
Click to expand...
It's not that China wants to help NK, so much that China can't be seen to allow a war to kick off on its border. They'd have to have some involvement.
 
sun_tzu said:
But 100% not happening is USA putting troops on the Chinese border (and defacto russian border close to one of their big sea ports) but as I say it would probably take 6 months of build up / logistics to be ready for that and there is no way Kim allows that to happen without a pre preemptive strike so if the USA want to go with the military option they need Chinese (and probably Russian) Co-operation...
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.