Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
North Korea
Comments
-
I never said it was the answer I said more fun0
-
In theory, yes - but in practice the Secretary of State for Defense has the second 'key' and could disobey the command, as could (and in the case of North Korea would I hope if it was a first strike) the generals.gilbertfilbert said:
I'm sorry to say that it's the POTUS and he alone who has the power to command a nuclear strike, and there is no provision for any second opinion. Since Trump is unstable and a fucking moron, I am very worried.bobmunro said:
It's Trump's words that will do the damage, not his deeds. Thankfully he doesn't have complete control of the US nuclear/conventional arsenal. Mattis would almost certainly stop him doing anything stupid, and if not then the Generals would.MuttleyCAFC said:The Trump factor increases the risk tenfold here. He is just going to have enough of it at some point!
Authorization of a nuclear or strategic attack
Only the President can direct the use of nuclear weapons by U.S. armed forces, including the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP). While the President does have unilateral authority as commander-in-chief to order that nuclear weapons be used for any reason at any time, the actual procedures and technical systems in place for authorizing the execution of a launch order requires a secondary confirmation under a two-man rule, as the President's order is subject to secondary confirmation by the Secretary of Defense. If the Secretary of Defense does not concur, then the President may in his sole discretion fire the Secretary. The Secretary of Defense has legal authority to approve the order, but cannot veto it.1 -
I'm not sure that firing the Secretary rather than, say, A GBU-43B, aka, a Massive Ordnance Air Blast, aka Mother Of All Bombs is going to worry the North Koreans too much. Although he/she might get a headache.bobmunro said:
In theory, yes - but in practice the Secretary of State for Defense has the second 'key' and could disobey the command, as could (and in the case of North Korea would I hope if it was a first strike) the generals.gilbertfilbert said:
I'm sorry to say that it's the POTUS and he alone who has the power to command a nuclear strike, and there is no provision for any second opinion. Since Trump is unstable and a fucking moron, I am very worried.bobmunro said:
It's Trump's words that will do the damage, not his deeds. Thankfully he doesn't have complete control of the US nuclear/conventional arsenal. Mattis would almost certainly stop him doing anything stupid, and if not then the Generals would.MuttleyCAFC said:The Trump factor increases the risk tenfold here. He is just going to have enough of it at some point!
Authorization of a nuclear or strategic attack
Only the President can direct the use of nuclear weapons by U.S. armed forces, including the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP). While the President does have unilateral authority as commander-in-chief to order that nuclear weapons be used for any reason at any time, the actual procedures and technical systems in place for authorizing the execution of a launch order requires a secondary confirmation under a two-man rule, as the President's order is subject to secondary confirmation by the Secretary of Defense. If the Secretary of Defense does not concur, then the President may in his sole discretion fire the Secretary. The Secretary of Defense has legal authority to approve the order, but cannot veto it.2 -
As I understand it, he is the only one with the power to call it, but he can't actually do it without approval from his generals (as opposed to the generals who can advise it, but can't call it). Really hope I'm right, or we could all be in trouble!gilbertfilbert said:
I'm sorry to say that it's the POTUS and he alone who has the power to command a nuclear strike, and there is no provision for any second opinion. Since Trump is unstable and a fucking moron, I am very worried.bobmunro said:
It's Trump's words that will do the damage, not his deeds. Thankfully he doesn't have complete control of the US nuclear/conventional arsenal. Mattis would almost certainly stop him doing anything stupid, and if not then the Generals would.MuttleyCAFC said:The Trump factor increases the risk tenfold here. He is just going to have enough of it at some point!
1 -
I now have this image of Mattis sitting atop an ICBM!cafcfan said:
I'm not sure that firing the Secretary rather than, say, A GBU-43B, aka, a Massive Ordnance Air Blast, aka Mother Of All Bombs is going to worry the North Koreans too much. Although he/she might get a headache.bobmunro said:
In theory, yes - but in practice the Secretary of State for Defense has the second 'key' and could disobey the command, as could (and in the case of North Korea would I hope if it was a first strike) the generals.gilbertfilbert said:
I'm sorry to say that it's the POTUS and he alone who has the power to command a nuclear strike, and there is no provision for any second opinion. Since Trump is unstable and a fucking moron, I am very worried.bobmunro said:
It's Trump's words that will do the damage, not his deeds. Thankfully he doesn't have complete control of the US nuclear/conventional arsenal. Mattis would almost certainly stop him doing anything stupid, and if not then the Generals would.MuttleyCAFC said:The Trump factor increases the risk tenfold here. He is just going to have enough of it at some point!
Authorization of a nuclear or strategic attack
Only the President can direct the use of nuclear weapons by U.S. armed forces, including the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP). While the President does have unilateral authority as commander-in-chief to order that nuclear weapons be used for any reason at any time, the actual procedures and technical systems in place for authorizing the execution of a launch order requires a secondary confirmation under a two-man rule, as the President's order is subject to secondary confirmation by the Secretary of Defense. If the Secretary of Defense does not concur, then the President may in his sole discretion fire the Secretary. The Secretary of Defense has legal authority to approve the order, but cannot veto it.1 -
Just waiting to hear command and conquer bellow out "missile launch detected"
closely followed by "unable to comply building in progress"
2 -
bobmunro said:
I now have this image of Mattis sitting atop an ICBM!cafcfan said:
I'm not sure that firing the Secretary rather than, say, A GBU-43B, aka, a Massive Ordnance Air Blast, aka Mother Of All Bombs is going to worry the North Koreans too much. Although he/she might get a headache.bobmunro said:
In theory, yes - but in practice the Secretary of State for Defense has the second 'key' and could disobey the command, as could (and in the case of North Korea would I hope if it was a first strike) the generals.gilbertfilbert said:
I'm sorry to say that it's the POTUS and he alone who has the power to command a nuclear strike, and there is no provision for any second opinion. Since Trump is unstable and a fucking moron, I am very worried.bobmunro said:
It's Trump's words that will do the damage, not his deeds. Thankfully he doesn't have complete control of the US nuclear/conventional arsenal. Mattis would almost certainly stop him doing anything stupid, and if not then the Generals would.MuttleyCAFC said:The Trump factor increases the risk tenfold here. He is just going to have enough of it at some point!
Authorization of a nuclear or strategic attack
Only the President can direct the use of nuclear weapons by U.S. armed forces, including the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP). While the President does have unilateral authority as commander-in-chief to order that nuclear weapons be used for any reason at any time, the actual procedures and technical systems in place for authorizing the execution of a launch order requires a secondary confirmation under a two-man rule, as the President's order is subject to secondary confirmation by the Secretary of Defense. If the Secretary of Defense does not concur, then the President may in his sole discretion fire the Secretary. The Secretary of Defense has legal authority to approve the order, but cannot veto it.
2 -
Kim Jong-un is estimated to have a personal fortune equivalent to $5billion USD.
Sounds rather simplistic and James Bond villain-like, but for example in theory, (before or after most likely before!) couldn't he H-Bomb the US then before anyone has time to retaliate, he has managed to get an overwhelming amount of facial surgery and has got a completely new identity to the point where he is absolutely unidentifiable and unrecognizable.
He hasn't attacked yet due to it being an obvious ineivitable suicide move.
0 -
This is one in the long line of things we've discovered in the last seven months where there isn't really precedent.JiMMy 85 said:
As I understand it, he is the only one with the power to call it, but he can't actually do it without approval from his generals (as opposed to the generals who can advise it, but can't call it). Really hope I'm right, or we could all be in trouble!gilbertfilbert said:
I'm sorry to say that it's the POTUS and he alone who has the power to command a nuclear strike, and there is no provision for any second opinion. Since Trump is unstable and a fucking moron, I am very worried.bobmunro said:
It's Trump's words that will do the damage, not his deeds. Thankfully he doesn't have complete control of the US nuclear/conventional arsenal. Mattis would almost certainly stop him doing anything stupid, and if not then the Generals would.MuttleyCAFC said:The Trump factor increases the risk tenfold here. He is just going to have enough of it at some point!
I'm inclined to side with Bob on this, while theoretically there is no check on the ability to launch nuclear weapons, in practice there are approvals needed and there is the Sec. of Defense and various others who would actually need to carry out the order. I don't think that order would be executed. There are more checks in place for a traditional Military strike, and I think there are enough people who understand this game that would potentially talk the President out of it.
Now, if North Korea gains the ability, as predicted, in the next six months to a year to launch a nuclear warhead at the US that *might* change.
For what it's worth, and I think it's clear I'm no fan, but I don't think Trump is here to start wars, particularly nuclear wars. Let's break it down to why he's President, he wants to be loved and admired and applauded. Starting a war with North Korea doesn't really achieve any of that. Of course it's hard to say because his outlook on foreign policy seems to change week to week, but to me a pre-emptive strike isn't him.
Somewhat ironically, his Administration doesn't have the hardline hawks like Cheney and Rumsfeld and Bremer and various others that the W. Bush Administration had. His Administration mostly has former Goldman guys. None of them particularly want war with North Korea.2 -
Read it a few years back, really interesting look into a few people's lives that managed to escape. Great recommendationSoundAsa£ said:I would like to take the opportunity to once again recommend a book by Barbara Demick called..... Nothing to Envy.
Anyone interested in knowing more and getting first hand insight into life in the crazy world of NK should read this superb eye opening book.1 - Sponsored links:
-
I heard a very good description of this a couple of weeks ago. The worrying part is that, eventually, the President decides.SDAddick said:
This is one in the long line of things we've discovered in the last seven months where there isn't really precedent.JiMMy 85 said:
As I understand it, he is the only one with the power to call it, but he can't actually do it without approval from his generals (as opposed to the generals who can advise it, but can't call it). Really hope I'm right, or we could all be in trouble!gilbertfilbert said:
I'm sorry to say that it's the POTUS and he alone who has the power to command a nuclear strike, and there is no provision for any second opinion. Since Trump is unstable and a fucking moron, I am very worried.bobmunro said:
It's Trump's words that will do the damage, not his deeds. Thankfully he doesn't have complete control of the US nuclear/conventional arsenal. Mattis would almost certainly stop him doing anything stupid, and if not then the Generals would.MuttleyCAFC said:The Trump factor increases the risk tenfold here. He is just going to have enough of it at some point!
I'm inclined to side with Bob on this, while theoretically there is no check on the ability to launch nuclear weapons, in practice there are approvals needed and there is the Sec. of Defense and various others who would actually need to carry out the order. I don't think that order would be executed. There are more checks in place for a traditional Military strike, and I think there are enough people who understand this game that would potentially talk the President out of it.
Now, if North Korea gains the ability, as predicted, in the next six months to a year to launch a nuclear warhead at the US that *might* change.
For what it's worth, and I think it's clear I'm no fan, but I don't think Trump is here to start wars, particularly nuclear wars. Let's break it down to why he's President, he wants to be loved and admired and applauded. Starting a war with North Korea doesn't really achieve any of that. Of course it's hard to say because his outlook on foreign policy seems to change week to week, but to me a pre-emptive strike isn't him.
Somewhat ironically, his Administration doesn't have the hardline hawks like Cheney and Rumsfeld and Bremer and various others that the W. Bush Administration had. His Administration mostly has former Goldman guys. None of them particularly want war with North Korea.
In the normal course of affairs, if the President woke up tomorrow and decide to nuke them, it wouldn't happen immediately. There's a whole process that would need to be followed, which would involve a lot of people trying to talk him out of it. But in the end it's either his decision, or you need to replace the President somehow.
However, if he gets woken up at 2am in the morning by his Defense staff, and they advise here the US is in danger, he has about 30 minutes to decide, and nobody will stop him.2 -
Yeah from what I understand that's a good way to frame it. So Trump nuking North Korea tomorrow is very unlikely.SomervilleAddick said:
I heard a very good description of this a couple of weeks ago. The worrying part is that, eventually, the President decides.SDAddick said:
This is one in the long line of things we've discovered in the last seven months where there isn't really precedent.JiMMy 85 said:
As I understand it, he is the only one with the power to call it, but he can't actually do it without approval from his generals (as opposed to the generals who can advise it, but can't call it). Really hope I'm right, or we could all be in trouble!gilbertfilbert said:
I'm sorry to say that it's the POTUS and he alone who has the power to command a nuclear strike, and there is no provision for any second opinion. Since Trump is unstable and a fucking moron, I am very worried.bobmunro said:
It's Trump's words that will do the damage, not his deeds. Thankfully he doesn't have complete control of the US nuclear/conventional arsenal. Mattis would almost certainly stop him doing anything stupid, and if not then the Generals would.MuttleyCAFC said:The Trump factor increases the risk tenfold here. He is just going to have enough of it at some point!
I'm inclined to side with Bob on this, while theoretically there is no check on the ability to launch nuclear weapons, in practice there are approvals needed and there is the Sec. of Defense and various others who would actually need to carry out the order. I don't think that order would be executed. There are more checks in place for a traditional Military strike, and I think there are enough people who understand this game that would potentially talk the President out of it.
Now, if North Korea gains the ability, as predicted, in the next six months to a year to launch a nuclear warhead at the US that *might* change.
For what it's worth, and I think it's clear I'm no fan, but I don't think Trump is here to start wars, particularly nuclear wars. Let's break it down to why he's President, he wants to be loved and admired and applauded. Starting a war with North Korea doesn't really achieve any of that. Of course it's hard to say because his outlook on foreign policy seems to change week to week, but to me a pre-emptive strike isn't him.
Somewhat ironically, his Administration doesn't have the hardline hawks like Cheney and Rumsfeld and Bremer and various others that the W. Bush Administration had. His Administration mostly has former Goldman guys. None of them particularly want war with North Korea.
In the normal course of affairs, if the President woke up tomorrow and decide to nuke them, it wouldn't happen immediately. There's a whole process that would need to be followed, which would involve a lot of people trying to talk him out of it. But in the end it's either his decision, or you need to replace the President somehow.
However, if he gets woken up at 2am in the morning by his Defense staff, and they advise here the US is in danger, he has about 30 minutes to decide, and nobody will stop him.
That said, it is expected that within six months to a year the North will have the ability to launch an ICBM with a mounted nuclear warhead on it at the US. And that changes the calculations in all kinds of ways.
Something I didn't touch on earlier is, despite not thinking Trump the type to start Nuclear War, his tweeting is incredibly unhelpful, and the moves his Administration is making are counter-productive.
1) It was announced last week that the Administration wants to review/end the free trade policy with South Korea because we have a trade deficit with them and trade deficits bother the President immensely. As you can imagine, this would strain relations with South Korea. WHY NOW?!?!?!?!?! Weakening the alliance between the US and South Korea and Japan is almost certainly one of the things at the top of Kim's list. This literally hands that to him on platter.
2) The tweets threatening South Korea and China are incredibly fucking stupid, let alone unprofessional.
There's nothing better than taunting an ally directly in the path of North Korea's wrath.
And taunting China. Here's the laughable thing, we couldn't ever stop trade with China. Our economy would collapse. This is a man who has no grasp that his words have consequences now.2 -
I'd also recommend 'North Korea: State of Paranoia' by Paul French for an insight into the history of how we got to where we are, and in particular how and why previous talks failed.moutuakilla said:
Read it a few years back, really interesting look into a few people's lives that managed to escape. Great recommendationSoundAsa£ said:I would like to take the opportunity to once again recommend a book by Barbara Demick called..... Nothing to Envy.
Anyone interested in knowing more and getting first hand insight into life in the crazy world of NK should read this superb eye opening book.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/North-Korea-State-Paranoia-Arguments/dp/17803294740 -
There is zero chance that the USA would undertake a preemptive strike unless it was certain that North Korea were on the brink of doing so themselves.
I'm convinced that Kim Jong-Un has no intention of starting a war. For him. Nuclear capability is a way to shore up his dynasty and secure NK from external threats. He's joined a club that commands respect on the world stage at least in military terms. Short of assassination or coup he will be secure from being another victim of American regime change.
The world now needs to take stock of the situation and step back. There are other countries with nuclear capability that although perhaps are undesirable to "the west" are monitored, tolerated and left to polish their toys in peace. We need to apply that policy to North Korea also.
China has its own agenda as does Russia. They always do. Tell KJU that his might is being closely watched and certainly beef up South Korean defences and those of Guam but do this openly and in plain sight.
Any other solution apart from an improbable diplomatic one is sure disaster.
This crisis will in my opinion rumble on for perhaps a couple of years then fizzle out.
5 -
A perfect summary, imo, @ShootersHillGuru , I'd say NK is a lot more stable than say, Pakistan0
-
A few months back I recall China were making noises about cutting their support for North Korea - I wonder if this is a factor as well.0
-
The Chinese Doves who have been in the majority are quickly becoming the minority in Beijing and a notable change in attitudes towards North Korea is expected soon. President Xi has been noted to highly dislike Kim Jung Un but up until now has tolerated his actions for the documented reasons of using north Korea as a buffer zone and 'bargaining chip' with the west. But with the last test creating tremors within the Chinese borders the patience is being severely tested.0
-
Ooh, you noticed big boy!Dave2l said:Kim Jong-un is estimated to have a personal fortune equivalent to $5billion USD.
Sounds rather simplistic and James Bond villain-like, but for example in theory, (before or after most likely before!) couldn't he H-Bomb the US then before anyone has time to retaliate, he has managed to get an overwhelming amount of facial surgery and has got a completely new identity to the point where he is absolutely unidentifiable and unrecognizable.
He hasn't attacked yet due to it being an obvious ineivitable suicide move.
4 -
Just to add to the fun, I read a report the other day that if North Korea conduct another nuclear test at their current test site there is a strong possibility that the entire mountain will collapse, showering east Asia with millions of tons of radioactive dust and crap. Another reason for China to finally put their foot down on this.0
-
Just lobbed another long range missile over Japan.0
- Sponsored links:
-
Kim Wrong-un0
-
Just took out a whale, two sea turtles and a shoal of tuna.
What is with this guy and his hatred of sealife?0 -
Roughly translated as 'taking the piss'1StevieG said:Just lobbed another long range missile over Japan.
and China and Russia are laughing at Donald.0 -
Your next for a bomb be careful the crazy fucka is watchingcafcfan said:
Ooh, you noticed big boy!Dave2l said:Kim Jong-un is estimated to have a personal fortune equivalent to $5billion USD.
Sounds rather simplistic and James Bond villain-like, but for example in theory, (before or after most likely before!) couldn't he H-Bomb the US then before anyone has time to retaliate, he has managed to get an overwhelming amount of facial surgery and has got a completely new identity to the point where he is absolutely unidentifiable and unrecognizable.
He hasn't attacked yet due to it being an obvious ineivitable suicide move.2 -
Exactly. Can't imagine the fall out if one missile failed and fell into Japan. They can't feed there own people yet confident of clearing missiles over nearby countries.Baldybonce said:
Roughly translated as 'taking the piss'1StevieG said:Just lobbed another long range missile over Japan.
and China and Russia are laughing at Donald.0 -
Do you ever wonder what SD does with his free time? Well, one of the answers is spend about 30 minutes last night reading this article from 538 on Game Theory and "How to win a nuclear stand off." It's quite interesting, and includes a fun little activity to help you better understand how this stuff works. My grasp of game theory is not great, so I recommend reading this instead of my ham fisted attempts to explain it.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-to-win-a-nuclear-standoff/2 -
I certainly think that both China and Russia are secretly enjoying seeing the USA stuck between a rock and a hard place over this.Baldybonce said:
Roughly translated as 'taking the piss'1StevieG said:Just lobbed another long range missile over Japan.
and China and Russia are laughing at Donald.
I think that "the west" needs to accept that sanctions or talks are not going to deter Kim Jong-Un from reaching his goal of North Korea becoming a fully fledged nuclear power. Half the population are starving and the other half are the elite who will be able to ride out any economic pressure. A fully functioning ICBM programme is now only a few years away. Until that programme is fully functioning there will be many more missile tests and the world has to suck it up.
Military intervention is not an option. Diplomacy is the only avenue but limited by the unalterable goals set by Pyongyang.
I think Japan stating that missile tests over its territory won't be tolerated is in this case unhelpful. Yes of course it's unacceptable but what action can Japan actually take ? Just makes for hollow words.
2 -
Yes he is crazy and probably somewhat paranoic (and who wouldn't be with crazy entirely self serving leaching fuckers around you 24/7)........but I think you'll find a significant number of his generals and hangers on are even more crazy and IMHO at least as potentially dangerous if not more so.nth london addick said:
Your next for a bomb be careful the crazy fucka is watchingcafcfan said:
Ooh, you noticed big boy!Dave2l said:Kim Jong-un is estimated to have a personal fortune equivalent to $5billion USD.
Sounds rather simplistic and James Bond villain-like, but for example in theory, (before or after most likely before!) couldn't he H-Bomb the US then before anyone has time to retaliate, he has managed to get an overwhelming amount of facial surgery and has got a completely new identity to the point where he is absolutely unidentifiable and unrecognizable.
He hasn't attacked yet due to it being an obvious ineivitable suicide move.
He wouldn't appear to be that intelligent, so just who are the faceless minions who are 'really' pulling the strings?
What if anything do we outsiders know about them........I suspect very very little and I am convinced that therein lies the main problem?0
