What i dont understand, why is this very public. We tested and were successful, seems a bit odd if you have intentions other than scare mongering why unveil your hand?? doesn't make sense to me.
It is all a very big dilemma and far too complex for the likes of Trump to comprehend. I hope he has some smart advisers.
On the one hand he could fairly easily take some preemptive action. Lob some JDAM bombs at the target sites. (According to Wiki, Boeing are making JDAM guidance systems at the rate of 130 a day.)
But that would just allow NK to say "see, told you so the USA is the aggressor and we were right to be building a nuclear deterrent capability." On the other hand, well, do nothing and hope for the best, knowing that neither pressure form China nor UN sanctions appear to have any impact on NK's thought processes. But would that embolden NK and make them think they could strike against South Korea with impunity?
I'm for the do nothing option. (Do I get a vote?) Surely, surely NK must know that one single B-2 Spirit can carry at 50,000 ft a payload of 16 B83 nuclear bombs (each one with the yield of 75 times the Hiroshima bomb) and that these would not make their country any prettier?
It is all a very big dilemma and far too complex for the likes of Trump to comprehend. I hope he has some smart advisers.
On the one hand he could fairly easily take some preemptive action. Lob some JDAM bombs at the target sites. (According to Wiki, Boeing are making JDAM guidance systems at the rate of 130 a day.)
But that would just allow NK to say "see, told you so the USA is the aggressor and we were right to be building a nuclear deterrent capability." On the other hand, well, do nothing and hope for the best, knowing that neither pressure form China nor UN sanctions appear to have any impact on NK's thought processes. But would that embolden NK and make them think they could strike against South Korea with impunity?
I'm for the do nothing option. (Do I get a vote?) Surely, surely NK must know that one single B-2 Spirit can carry at 50,000 ft a payload of 16 B83 nuclear bombs (each one with the yield of 75 times the Hiroshima bomb) and that these would not make their country any prettier?
It is all a very big dilemma and far too complex for the likes of Trump to comprehend. I hope he has some smart advisers.
On the one hand he could fairly easily take some preemptive action. Lob some JDAM bombs at the target sites. (According to Wiki, Boeing are making JDAM guidance systems at the rate of 130 a day.)
But that would just allow NK to say "see, told you so the USA is the aggressor and we were right to be building a nuclear deterrent capability." On the other hand, well, do nothing and hope for the best, knowing that neither pressure form China nor UN sanctions appear to have any impact on NK's thought processes. But would that embolden NK and make them think they could strike against South Korea with impunity?
I'm for the do nothing option. (Do I get a vote?) Surely, surely NK must know that one single B-2 Spirit can carry at 50,000 ft a payload of 16 B83 nuclear bombs (each one with the yield of 75 times the Hiroshima bomb) and that these would not make their country any prettier?
One would hope that there are quite a few options in between preemptive bombing and doing nothing?!?
It is all a very big dilemma and far too complex for the likes of Trump to comprehend. I hope he has some smart advisers.
On the one hand he could fairly easily take some preemptive action. Lob some JDAM bombs at the target sites. (According to Wiki, Boeing are making JDAM guidance systems at the rate of 130 a day.)
But that would just allow NK to say "see, told you so the USA is the aggressor and we were right to be building a nuclear deterrent capability." On the other hand, well, do nothing and hope for the best, knowing that neither pressure form China nor UN sanctions appear to have any impact on NK's thought processes. But would that embolden NK and make them think they could strike against South Korea with impunity?
I'm for the do nothing option. (Do I get a vote?) Surely, surely NK must know that one single B-2 Spirit can carry at 50,000 ft a payload of 16 B83 nuclear bombs (each one with the yield of 75 times the Hiroshima bomb) and that these would not make their country any prettier?
Or the whole damn world.
Only the human world and I'm not too bothered about that - do we deserve anything other than extinction. It seems wildlife is flourishing in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone.
It is all a very big dilemma and far too complex for the likes of Trump to comprehend. I hope he has some smart advisers.
On the one hand he could fairly easily take some preemptive action. Lob some JDAM bombs at the target sites. (According to Wiki, Boeing are making JDAM guidance systems at the rate of 130 a day.)
But that would just allow NK to say "see, told you so the USA is the aggressor and we were right to be building a nuclear deterrent capability." On the other hand, well, do nothing and hope for the best, knowing that neither pressure form China nor UN sanctions appear to have any impact on NK's thought processes. But would that embolden NK and make them think they could strike against South Korea with impunity?
I'm for the do nothing option. (Do I get a vote?) Surely, surely NK must know that one single B-2 Spirit can carry at 50,000 ft a payload of 16 B83 nuclear bombs (each one with the yield of 75 times the Hiroshima bomb) and that these would not make their country any prettier?
One would hope that there are quite a few options in between preemptive bombing and doing nothing?!?
Well, what? They've tried loads of stuff nothing has worked.
Would the North Koreans even respond to an American attack? Any generals who tried to fight back by launching a nuclear missile/shelling Seoul etc would be signing their own and in all likelihood their families death warrants. If tensions escalate too far the end game is always going to be a be a North Korean bullet in the head of Kim Jong-Un.
North Korea is a hideous crackpot regime that spends a huge amount of it's annual budget on the military and it's nuclear weapons programme - while a large part of it's population subsist on food aid from the UN, EU and elsewhere.
However, in it's own terms it is not entirely irrational. It believes that the only way it can ensure regime survival (which is it's priority) is by developing viable nuclear weapons; which it then believes will put it in a position to negotiate for more assistance to it's basket case economy.
I don't think it has any intention of 'first strike' nuclear weapons use against any of it's many perceived enemies (which it knows would lead to massive retaliation and destruction of the country - and regime) - but hopes to deter attempts at 'regime change' against itself.
As the attached wiki page describes an:
"Agreed Framework between the United States of America and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea was signed on October 21, 1994 between North Korea (DPRK) and the United States. The objective of the agreement was the freezing and replacement of North Korea's indigenous nuclear power plant program with more nuclear proliferation resistant light water reactor power plants, and the step-by-step normalization of relations between the U.S. and the DPRK. Implementation of the agreement was troubled from the start, but its key elements were being implemented until it effectively broke down in 2003".
Any attack on the North would almost certainly lead to it launching a conventional and possible nuclear retaliation against (at least) South Korea with the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives in it's capital Seoul (with around 25 million people living in the area around the capital).
So given that the regime in the North doesn't actually want to commit suicide then probably only the resurrection in some form or another of the 1994 Agreed Framework between the USA and the DPRK stands any chance of sorting it out without mass loss of life.
I cannot believe that US intelligence doesn't know the whereabouts of all missile silos, all nuclear manufacturing plants, the precise progress of their development and how long it would take the NK's to prepare and launch a nuclear/non-nuclear ICBM. At a point just before any launch (days, not minutes) a preemptive non-nuclear strike to destroy the sites would be the appropriate response.
Until then we need to let US/Russian/Chinese diplomatic efforts run their course and hope the situation can be diffused without any military action.
It is all a very big dilemma and far too complex for the likes of Trump to comprehend. I hope he has some smart advisers.
On the one hand he could fairly easily take some preemptive action. Lob some JDAM bombs at the target sites. (According to Wiki, Boeing are making JDAM guidance systems at the rate of 130 a day.)
But that would just allow NK to say "see, told you so the USA is the aggressor and we were right to be building a nuclear deterrent capability." On the other hand, well, do nothing and hope for the best, knowing that neither pressure form China nor UN sanctions appear to have any impact on NK's thought processes. But would that embolden NK and make them think they could strike against South Korea with impunity?
I'm for the do nothing option. (Do I get a vote?) Surely, surely NK must know that one single B-2 Spirit can carry at 50,000 ft a payload of 16 B83 nuclear bombs (each one with the yield of 75 times the Hiroshima bomb) and that these would not make their country any prettier?
Or the whole damn world.
Only the human world and I'm not too bothered about that - do we deserve anything other than extinction. It seems wildlife is flourishing in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone.
It is all a very big dilemma and far too complex for the likes of Trump to comprehend. I hope he has some smart advisers.
On the one hand he could fairly easily take some preemptive action. Lob some JDAM bombs at the target sites. (According to Wiki, Boeing are making JDAM guidance systems at the rate of 130 a day.)
But that would just allow NK to say "see, told you so the USA is the aggressor and we were right to be building a nuclear deterrent capability." On the other hand, well, do nothing and hope for the best, knowing that neither pressure form China nor UN sanctions appear to have any impact on NK's thought processes. But would that embolden NK and make them think they could strike against South Korea with impunity?
I'm for the do nothing option. (Do I get a vote?) Surely, surely NK must know that one single B-2 Spirit can carry at 50,000 ft a payload of 16 B83 nuclear bombs (each one with the yield of 75 times the Hiroshima bomb) and that these would not make their country any prettier?
One would hope that there are quite a few options in between preemptive bombing and doing nothing?!?
Well, what? They've tried loads of stuff nothing has worked.
I don't know mate.....but then again, I'm not a world leader.
One single nuclear strike, either by accident or design, whether made in haste or after deliberation, whether made by a nutter or a genius, whether the 52% of the planet decide it is justified or not will be an utter disaster for the planet. The planet. However the technology exists and can't be uninvented. If a nutter like Trump has it, then why not a nutter like Kim Jong Il? Is there supposed to be a scale of nutters, like approved nutters, taste the difference nutters? I know SHG understands the terrible threat of Nuclear power, but I wonder if the younger generation really get it. If they did they would surely not talk about strikes in such a casual way.
No chance that Trump would take the first strike option Seth.....so chill out.....though he would without doubt have no inhesitation striking back. Wouldn't you?
@seth plum I think the issue is that we cannot do anything and thus we opt fot the "If you can't change it, what's the point in worrying about it?" kind of thought process. Sure it's terrifying but we can do NOTHING.
I cannot believe that US intelligence doesn't know the whereabouts of all missile silos, all nuclear manufacturing plants, the precise progress of their development and how long it would take the NK's to prepare and launch a nuclear/non-nuclear ICBM. At a point just before any launch (days, not minutes) a preemptive non-nuclear strike to destroy the sites would be the appropriate response.
Until then we need to let US/Russian/Chinese diplomatic efforts run their course and hope the situation can be diffused without any military action.
Yeah but there are some problems. North Korea's nuclear programme is home-grown; they are not buying in. They'd just start again. Even if the US has the capability to strike at deep missile bunkers (HDBTs) which some doubt. It seems their regular "bunker buster" is less than successful. That means using a Massive Ordinance Penetrator and it is said the US has only 20, perhaps 28, MAPs which are hugely expensive. The only thing that can deploy them is the B-2 (even more hugely expensive) and they've only got 20 of those too! So, would the USA be able to take out even a high percentage of sites in North Korea, highly doubtful. And what if some actual missiles were hidden discreetly somewhere in a regular looking warehouse?
North Korea also has some other nasty tricks up its sleeve. Some experts suggest there may be as many as 600 missiles aimed at Seoul and armed with chemical weapons. Some could easily reach Japan. All this without moving one of its 1mn soldiers! Again some analysts suggest that the recent assassination of the dear leader's half-brother was a naked attempt to demonstrate that they are quite happy to use chemical weaponry; and use it in other countries.
I cannot believe that US intelligence doesn't know the whereabouts of all missile silos, all nuclear manufacturing plants, the precise progress of their development and how long it would take the NK's to prepare and launch a nuclear/non-nuclear ICBM. At a point just before any launch (days, not minutes) a preemptive non-nuclear strike to destroy the sites would be the appropriate response.
Until then we need to let US/Russian/Chinese diplomatic efforts run their course and hope the situation can be diffused without any military action.
Yeah but there are some problems. North Korea's nuclear programme is home-grown; they are not buying in. They'd just start again. Even if the US has the capability to strike at deep missile bunkers (HDBTs) which some doubt. It seems their regular "bunker buster" is less than successful. That means using a Massive Ordinance Penetrator and it is said the US has only 20, perhaps 28, MAPs which are hugely expensive. The only thing that can deploy them is the B-2 (even more hugely expensive) and they've only got 20 of those too! So, would the USA be able to take out even a high percentage of sites in North Korea, highly doubtful. And what if some actual missiles were hidden discreetly somewhere in a regular looking warehouse?
North Korea also has some other nasty tricks up its sleeve. Some experts suggest there may be as many as 600 missiles aimed at Seoul and armed with chemical weapons. Some could easily reach Japan. All this without moving one of its 1mn soldiers! Again some analysts suggest that the recent assassination of the dear leader's half-brother was a naked attempt to demonstrate that they are quite happy to use chemical weaponry; and use it in other countries.
All very good points. That said, when it comes to war, cost is not a prohibitive factor!!! But god forbid we try to give poor people health insurance...
To Bob's earlier point, I'm less convinced about US intel surrounding North Korea, just from the bits and bobs I've read about it. It's such a closed-off society and these things are kept in such small circles that it's really hard to gain intel. I'm sure we have a fair amount, but as cafcfan points out very well above, there is the huge problem of North Korea launching attacks against South Korea or Japan which could be catostrophic.
As the Cuban Missile Crisis taught us, for pre-emptive strikes, you have to be 100% correct. The US was not, there were a number of weapons up and ready that we didn't know about and which would have launched had we attacked. Fortunately, we had a very brave and very intelligent man in the White House, surrounded largely by brace and intelligent men prepared to stand-up to the anti-Communist hawks who would have loved nothing more than a second crack at a Cuban invasion.
I doubt we would have the same level of certainty with North Korea. And even if we did, we would need to take out all of the nuclear AND chemical weapons just to try to stave off the more horrendous attacks on neighboring countries. And still, you would probably see conventional weapons launched against the South and Japan.
It's a really ugly situation. And it's one where we in the west don't have a whole lot of options still on the table. We can try taking a harder stance with China, Russia, and even Iran on this. But the problem is, the US doesn't have much of a State Department. And this Administration, against the wishes of almost everyone, including top Military brass, has proposed cutting the State Department budget by 30%, which is ridiculous. And the Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, doesn't really seem to mind. He, along with the President, also seem to have little-to-no interest in the more mundane tasks of diplomacy, including strengthening ties with allies that could help to put pressure on countries like China and Russia.
One single nuclear strike, either by accident or design, whether made in haste or after deliberation, whether made by a nutter or a genius, whether the 52% of the planet decide it is justified or not will be an utter disaster for the planet. The planet. However the technology exists and can't be uninvented. If a nutter like Trump has it, then why not a nutter like Kim Jong Il? Is there supposed to be a scale of nutters, like approved nutters, taste the difference nutters? I know SHG understands the terrible threat of Nuclear power, but I wonder if the younger generation really get it. If they did they would surely not talk about strikes in such a casual way.
In my opinion no one more should have it and those that have it should more towards disarmament
The article below - written in 2004 by an Australian academic who is a long term specialist on SE Asia - sets what's going on at the moment in an historical context.
What he says about NK's nuclear weapon programme gives a good insight into it's motives for what it's doing now:
"For North Korea, the dilemma is that it has only one card to play. Once its nuclear weapons "threat" is eliminated, it becomes an insignificant, poor country at the mercy of its enemies. It therefore cannot afford to trade away that card lightly and remains unlikely to give up its weapons...dismantle its nuclear plant (peaceful and energy-related as well as weapons-related), and agree to intensive inspections - presumably anywhere in the country - unless its historic grievances are met and its relations with the U. S. and Japan normalized. It continues to insist it is no threat to anyone but that its security depends on possession of its own deterrent until such time as its security needs are otherwise guaranteed".
One single nuclear strike, either by accident or design, whether made in haste or after deliberation, whether made by a nutter or a genius, whether the 52% of the planet decide it is justified or not will be an utter disaster for the planet. The planet. However the technology exists and can't be uninvented. If a nutter like Trump has it, then why not a nutter like Kim Jong Il? Is there supposed to be a scale of nutters, like approved nutters, taste the difference nutters? I know SHG understands the terrible threat of Nuclear power, but I wonder if the younger generation really get it. If they did they would surely not talk about strikes in such a casual way.
Actually...Donald Trump is nowhere near the nutter that I expect Kim Jong Il is. The reason we have nuclear deterrents is to try and deter the likes of North Korea who crave global domination.
It's pretty naive to think that if we all dropped ours, then they would stop and drop the development of theirs' - they wouldn't.
The article below - written in 2004 by an Australian academic who is a long term specialist on SE Asia - sets what's going on at the moment in an historical context.
What he says about NK's nuclear weapon programme gives a good insight into it's motives for what it's doing now:
"For North Korea, the dilemma is that it has only one card to play. Once its nuclear weapons "threat" is eliminated, it becomes an insignificant, poor country at the mercy of its enemies. It therefore cannot afford to trade away that card lightly and remains unlikely to give up its weapons...dismantle its nuclear plant (peaceful and energy-related as well as weapons-related), and agree to intensive inspections - presumably anywhere in the country - unless its historic grievances are met and its relations with the U. S. and Japan normalized. It continues to insist it is no threat to anyone but that its security depends on possession of its own deterrent until such time as its security needs are otherwise guaranteed".
It's an excellent article, and this is something I've heard repeated many times down the years. Disarmament is incredibly, incredibly unlikely to happen. As the except points out, nuclear weapons are basically what keeps North Korea relevant.
Our policy toward them has to reflect that, at least to some extent. While decommission and/or UN inspections should be the ultimate goal, the short term goal must remain containment. The problem with that is that it has been the strategy for a long time now, and it hasn't really worked.
I wish I had better answers to this. It all comes back around to the fact that we're at the mercy of China and the whims of a crazy man.
Kim Jong-Un and Donald Trump having a pissing competition or has this problem just been ratcheted up a notch ?
It's always a pissing contest but it is getting towards the concerning state now. NK just scare the shit out of me....I've read a couple of books and it's staggering they get away with the censorship and things they do to their own people
Not much different to what's been said before. I'm still just not worried about anything coming of this. I think a conflict will eventually arise over the horrid regime in charge there and when it does I hope all major powers are together on it. Unite Korea and let them sort it out once it is.
A book I can thoroughly recommend about North Korea, very thought provoking and a great insight into a truly crackpot and highly dangerous piece of real estate!
I think it is only a matter of time before the military overthrow the nutter. Just a question if they will grab power themselves or try to join the south.
Comments
I remember watching that as a kid and absolutely shitting myself.
On the one hand he could fairly easily take some preemptive action. Lob some JDAM bombs at the target sites. (According to Wiki, Boeing are making JDAM guidance systems at the rate of 130 a day.)
But that would just allow NK to say "see, told you so the USA is the aggressor and we were right to be building a nuclear deterrent capability." On the other hand, well, do nothing and hope for the best, knowing that neither pressure form China nor UN sanctions appear to have any impact on NK's thought processes. But would that embolden NK and make them think they could strike against South Korea with impunity?
I'm for the do nothing option. (Do I get a vote?) Surely, surely NK must know that one single B-2 Spirit can carry at 50,000 ft a payload of 16 B83 nuclear bombs (each one with the yield of 75 times the Hiroshima bomb) and that these would not make their country any prettier?
Well, what? They've tried loads of stuff nothing has worked.
However, in it's own terms it is not entirely irrational. It believes that the only way it can ensure regime survival (which is it's priority) is by developing viable nuclear weapons; which it then believes will put it in a position to negotiate for more assistance to it's basket case economy.
I don't think it has any intention of 'first strike' nuclear weapons use against any of it's many perceived enemies (which it knows would lead to massive retaliation and destruction of the country - and regime) - but hopes to deter attempts at 'regime change' against itself.
As the attached wiki page describes an:
"Agreed Framework between the United States of America and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea was signed on October 21, 1994 between North Korea (DPRK) and the United States. The objective of the agreement was the freezing and replacement of North Korea's indigenous nuclear power plant program with more nuclear proliferation resistant light water reactor power plants, and the step-by-step normalization of relations between the U.S. and the DPRK. Implementation of the agreement was troubled from the start, but its key elements were being implemented until it effectively broke down in 2003".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreed_Framework
Any attack on the North would almost certainly lead to it launching a conventional and possible nuclear retaliation against (at least) South Korea with the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives in it's capital Seoul (with around 25 million people living in the area around the capital).
So given that the regime in the North doesn't actually want to commit suicide then probably only the resurrection in some form or another of the 1994 Agreed Framework between the USA and the DPRK stands any chance of sorting it out without mass loss of life.
Until then we need to let US/Russian/Chinese diplomatic efforts run their course and hope the situation can be diffused without any military action.
Wouldn't you?
North Korea also has some other nasty tricks up its sleeve. Some experts suggest there may be as many as 600 missiles aimed at Seoul and armed with chemical weapons. Some could easily reach Japan. All this without moving one of its 1mn soldiers! Again some analysts suggest that the recent assassination of the dear leader's half-brother was a naked attempt to demonstrate that they are quite happy to use chemical weaponry; and use it in other countries.
To Bob's earlier point, I'm less convinced about US intel surrounding North Korea, just from the bits and bobs I've read about it. It's such a closed-off society and these things are kept in such small circles that it's really hard to gain intel. I'm sure we have a fair amount, but as cafcfan points out very well above, there is the huge problem of North Korea launching attacks against South Korea or Japan which could be catostrophic.
As the Cuban Missile Crisis taught us, for pre-emptive strikes, you have to be 100% correct. The US was not, there were a number of weapons up and ready that we didn't know about and which would have launched had we attacked. Fortunately, we had a very brave and very intelligent man in the White House, surrounded largely by brace and intelligent men prepared to stand-up to the anti-Communist hawks who would have loved nothing more than a second crack at a Cuban invasion.
I doubt we would have the same level of certainty with North Korea. And even if we did, we would need to take out all of the nuclear AND chemical weapons just to try to stave off the more horrendous attacks on neighboring countries. And still, you would probably see conventional weapons launched against the South and Japan.
It's a really ugly situation. And it's one where we in the west don't have a whole lot of options still on the table. We can try taking a harder stance with China, Russia, and even Iran on this. But the problem is, the US doesn't have much of a State Department. And this Administration, against the wishes of almost everyone, including top Military brass, has proposed cutting the State Department budget by 30%, which is ridiculous. And the Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, doesn't really seem to mind. He, along with the President, also seem to have little-to-no interest in the more mundane tasks of diplomacy, including strengthening ties with allies that could help to put pressure on countries like China and Russia.
The South Koreans really don't worry about any of what's going on, I suppose having the threat there for 50yrs makes them quite relaxed.
What he says about NK's nuclear weapon programme gives a good insight into it's motives for what it's doing now:
"For North Korea, the dilemma is that it has only one card to play. Once its nuclear weapons "threat" is eliminated, it becomes an insignificant, poor country at the mercy of its enemies. It therefore cannot afford to trade away that card lightly and remains unlikely to give up its weapons...dismantle its nuclear plant (peaceful and energy-related as well as weapons-related), and agree to intensive inspections - presumably anywhere in the country - unless its historic grievances are met and its relations with the U. S. and Japan normalized. It continues to insist it is no threat to anyone but that its security depends on possession of its own deterrent until such time as its security needs are otherwise guaranteed".
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Asia/MakingSense_NKoreaCrisis.html
It's pretty naive to think that if we all dropped ours, then they would stop and drop the development of theirs' - they wouldn't.
Our policy toward them has to reflect that, at least to some extent. While decommission and/or UN inspections should be the ultimate goal, the short term goal must remain containment. The problem with that is that it has been the strategy for a long time now, and it hasn't really worked.
I wish I had better answers to this. It all comes back around to the fact that we're at the mercy of China and the whims of a crazy man.
Consider my jimmies rustled
I don't think it will work though and will press on with its nuclear programme. It will get there before too much longer. What then ?
Nothing to Envy....Barbara Demick.
Not sure about North Korea though.