|
|
Post by jrchico on Dec 9, 2017 22:07:30 GMT -5
We ran Saddam Insane out of town in 3 weeks. We ran the Taliban out of town in 7 days. How long do you think it would take us to run Rocketman out of town? The only way the US would use nukes is if someone else uses them on us.
|
|
|
|
Post by agog on Dec 9, 2017 22:35:17 GMT -5
We're in a much tougher situation with N.K. To it's North, N.K. has both China and Russia on it's border. To the South, S. Korea, more specifically Seoul, is in artillery range of a longstanding and very well dug in series of artillery batteries. Over ten thousand guns can fire three to ten rounds per minute into Seoul. That's thirty thousand to one-hundred thousand artillery rounds per minute. No city in history has ever experienced that.
The Chinese, who have kept N.k. as their barking dog for decades would not want a free, unified under the South, Korea on their border.
The only solution I see is Trump letting the Chinese know they have two weeks to depose Rocket Boy if they want any resemblance of the status quo. S.Korea could and would gladly overrun N. Korea if given the green light and American air support. I do not think China or Russia would deem N.Korea a reason to go full thermo-nuclear war with us.
And if they did? Well that Jackie Evancho sure could sing.
We could let the Chinese know if they deposed Kim, our incursion would be limited to destroying the threatening artillery batteries, by air mostly, and any necessary ground troops required for that limited mission would fall back to S.Korea after the neutralization of the threat.
|
|
|
|
Post by BOGC on Dec 9, 2017 22:41:04 GMT -5
I'm referring to what happened in the past at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that our resident anti-westerner/troll/wannabe jihadist mentioned, rather than any particular future event. Personally, I suspect we could take out North Korea's launch capability at this time (and without using nukes), but not a year from now (since they're working on ballistic missile submarines, too). Guarantee that nothing gets launched by them and hits its target? No, but worse would be to accept that they can hold us hostage. To get the Chinese out of the way, all we'd have to do is rattle North Korea into starting a conflict, and be maximally ready (we aren't, quite) to deal with it. China has said that if the North starts it, they'll stay neutral. Seoul is probably going to be in ruins if it happens, the North has enough conventional artillery (albeit old and decrepit) targeting Seoul. I hope the South has a darn good evacuation plan, as if such a thing ever could work for a large city. But I suspect that to be rid of the constant threat, they (although never those most directly affected, of course) would not be altogether unhappy to trade 100K or so for that. It's been a few years since I retired; before that, I knew more than most what's actually going on. And I haven't forgotten what correction (or attention to available but neglected details) can be applied to generally available news to get a more complete picture. So yes, what I suggest is indeed risky, but IMH(and reasonably informed)O substantially less risky than just de-escalating and making nice-nice noises that have never before yielded positive change. I can agree with your rebuttal that China would stay neutral if N. Korea started a conflict and it was non-nuclear. However, I don't trust that chubby little rutabaga to keep his fingers off the button. What would the US response be if a nuke or two were sent to S. Korea and perhaps Guam? Would there be a nuclear response in return? If so would China still sit back hoping that no nuclear fallout came their way?
N Korea will continue to ignore Trump and his threats regarding his nuclear deterrent program. Trump is either going need to chew his tongue or respond with military action. That means the US will initiate something in order to show the chubby little rutabaga the errors of his ways. That would open the door to China and Russia to choose to respond to a neighboring communist country. Would the rutabaga go nuclear if he felt his butt being whipped? This is the real crux of the matter......who will blink first .......both need to save face.
Bottom line is we can destroy them, and they can't destroy us...for now. And the Chinese have their cities near North Korea doing nuclear survival drills, meaning they know that fallout might come their way. ("If war breaks out, it is not possible to rule out the Korean peninsula producing nuclear contaminants, and countermeasures must be seriously researched and spoken openly about to let the common folk know.") They've only said they'd remain neutral if NK started it, and not if we started it; but AFAIK they've said _nothing_ implying that fallout on their territory would constitute an attack on them. They want the North as a buffer between them and the US-defended South; but what with the North not having given them advance notice of recent nuclear tests, they're not confident that the buffer is worth the hassle. And anyway, the prevailing wind tends to be from the northwest, meaning that fallout would tend to go more toward Japan (and eventually the west coast of the US, but vastly reduced by then) than toward China. At this point, the question is still what pressure will cause them to alter their behavior _without_ direct use of force. Once their achieving the ability to inflict not just serious but grave harm on us starts getting very close (less than some few months we might not be able to judge accurately), there won't be room for a peaceful settlement anymore...and they need to understand that before it gets there, which means putting ever-increasing pressure on them until either they snap or they back down. Now, there are ways they can back off a little without being humiliated, and even Trump is probably capable of understanding that it would do no good to twist the knife if they did. And if they scaled down, we could offer some gesture (that they could claim was due to their influence, but given our far better air transport capabilities, quickly enough reversible not to significantly impair our ability to react). And if they did something they have NEVER DONE BEFORE and established a pattern of reasonable behavior, things could get significantly better. You'd do better to have some barrels of water set aside, plastic sheeting, duct tape, food, etc, than to hold your breath expecting them to be that reasonable. Even a decent gas mask and some iodine pills (the ones to protect your thyroid by saturation are quite a bit stronger than usual supplements, and not to be taken casually) don't cost that much (I have both, since I don't trust anyone I don't know personally, and not all of them). Even if nobody lobs nukes, most precautionary measures would still be useful in the case of non-military natural or man-made disasters, which do happen from time to time; so it's not like a bit of personal readiness is a total waste. |
|
|
|
Post by agog on Dec 9, 2017 22:54:03 GMT -5
BOGC. The only thing I'll address now from your post is both the Americans and the Chinese can say Kim started it whether or not it's true. Who's to say what events triggered the action? That would cover any possible loss of face for the Chinese.
|
|
|
|
Post by agog on Dec 9, 2017 22:59:35 GMT -5
With his negotiating skills, I wouldn't be surprised if Trump could sell the Chinese on the idea that a unified Korea would not be as bad as they thought it would be during the cold war. After all, Korea has no designs on China and would become a valuable trading partner.
We could offer to begin talks for the reuniting of Taiwan with the mainland. That is a prize the Chinese have wanted since the success of the revolution in 1949.
|
|
|
|
Post by BOGC on Dec 9, 2017 23:05:42 GMT -5
We're in a much tougher situation with N.K. To it's North, N.K. has both China and Russia on it's border. To the South S, Korea, more specifically Seoul, is in artillery range of a longstanding and very well dug in series of artillery batteries. Over ten thousand guns can fire three to ten rounds per minute into Seoul. That's thirty thousand to one-hundred thousand artillery rounds per minute. No city in history has ever experienced that. The Chinese, who have kept N.k. as their barking dog for decades would not want a free, unified under the South, Korea on their border. The only solution I see is Trump letting the Chinese know they have two weeks to depose Rocket Boy if they want any resemblance of the status quo. S.Korea could and would gladly overrun N. Korea if given the green light and American air support. I do not think China or Russia would deem N.Korea a reason to go full thermo-nuclear war with us. And if they did? Well that Jackie Evancho sure could sing. If we were to quietly (not publicly) tell the Chinese that should NK fall, we'd be fine with keeping all militarily significant quantities of our forces south of the former border between north and south, I suspect they'd be not entirely discontent with that. They've dealt with keeping Hong Kong and Macau more open than the rest of their society, they could deal with South Korea on their border as long as the nearby part was demilitarized enough to give them some extra warning time. Assuming the North fell and the South was still functional, the latter would be very busy with a vast relief program for those of the then-former North. Nobody would have time for further adventurism, notwithstanding MacArthur's onetime argument to push for attacking the Chinese directly (or Patton's to take out the Soviets). I doubt that China wants ten million parasite-ridden refugees overwhelming their cities near the border. |
|
|
|
Post by agog on Dec 10, 2017 18:54:30 GMT -5
BOGC Says: I doubt that China wants ten million parasite-ridden refugees overwhelming their cities near the border. BUILD THE WALL!  |
|
|
|
Post by agog on Dec 10, 2017 19:24:58 GMT -5
We ran Saddam Insane out of town in 3 weeks. We ran the Taliban out of town in 7 days. How long do you think it would take us to run Rocketman out of town? The only way the US would use nukes is if someone else uses them on us. I agree we would not need to resort to nuclear bombs to eliminate Rocket Boy. Conventional bombs would keep his head down denying the opportunity to launch a ballistic missile while we destroyed the artillery on the DMZ that threatens Seoul. Both Russia and China would not resort to nukes to protect Kim. He is no longer a prize for either of them. The diplomacy could be worked out in a week or less. Russia and China recognize the existential threat Kim poses to us. They understand this is an untenable situation for us. We three principles, could work out whatever face saving public scenario it would take to make it seem like Russia and China were holding us back to only the objectives they approve of. The S. Koreans would provide the lion's share of the ground troops necessary. The S. Koreans want very much to liberate their kinsman relatives in the North. This is a doable thing diplomatically and militarily. |
|
|
|
Post by jrchico on Dec 10, 2017 20:10:37 GMT -5
BOGC Says: I doubt that China wants ten million parasite-ridden refugees overwhelming their cities near the border. BUILD THE WALL! Dosen't China already have a wall? I thought they already have one that would put The Donald's to shame.  |
|
gordy
Full Member
Posts: 246
|
Post by gordy on Dec 10, 2017 21:21:35 GMT -5
Although the US's weapon arsenal vastly out-numbers N. Korea and is of modern/current design, N. Korea still has close to 500 fighters and fighter bombers within easy reach of total S. Korea. By the time the US could neutralize the N.K. airforce, they will have obliterated Seoul and moved through the DMZ with whatever remains of there massive artillery. One should not dismiss the fact that they have a current active standing army of 1.2 million and 600k reserves plus 4.8 million fit for service. If they initiate an offensive the US will be unable to stop the total destruction of S. Korea before it finally destroys N. Korea. If the US initiates an assault, I believe Seoul will be sacrificed and China and Russia will involve themselves to ensure that S. Korea and the US do not take over N. Korea to enable them to gain strategic positioning closer to both super powers.
No matter who initiates a non nuclear action, there will be a world of hurt on both sides of the DMZ.
|
|
|
|
Post by jrchico on Dec 10, 2017 21:58:45 GMT -5
No matter who initiates a non nuclear action, there will be a world of hurt on both sides of the DMZ I think every one is in agreement on that. |
|
|
|
Post by agog on Dec 10, 2017 22:44:40 GMT -5
No matter who initiates a non nuclear action, there will be a world of hurt on both sides of the DMZ I think every one is in agreement on that. Yes JR. I agree with Gordy also. This would be no stroll in the park. However, as I mentioned earlier, the current situation is untenable. We have a megalomaniac's megalomaniac on the hereditary totalitarian throne of an emerging nuclear state. He was raised to rule. No one has ever, or would ever dare to, tell him no. He has executed family members with anti-aircraft guns, ravenous dogs and poison mist. He has kidnapped Japanese schoolgirls for his harem. He has rudimentary nuclear weapons and soon will have a dependable ICBM delivery system. Submarine launched ballistic missiles are thought to be only a few Summers away. The cold war paradigm that would not allow a fellow Communist state to be invaded by the West has subsided/morphed into a quasi capitalist system in both Russia, and even more so in China. They now face the same mundane problems of keeping their populations employed as we in the West have been dealing with for a century or more. I think China could be persuaded of the benefits of a peaceful, prosperous, unified Korea as a trading partner bringing real value in place of the formerly useful and currently expensive, ever more out of control barking lapdog that is N. Korea today. Some creative diplomatic suggestions behind the scenes and perhaps the promise of a timed withdrawal of U.S. forces from the peninsula could be beneficial for all concerned as we and the South Koreans alleviate our untenable situation. |
|
|
|
Post by Beachguy on Dec 11, 2017 15:35:28 GMT -5
BOGC Says: BUILD THE WALL! Dosen't China already have a wall? I thought they already have one that would put The Donald's to shame. We have walls around rich people's homes all over this country , they have their own security also . |
|
|
|
Post by Beachguy on Dec 11, 2017 15:39:15 GMT -5
BOGC, Trump is not only worse than his predecessors, he is the worst American president in United States history. Incidentally, in that connection, one of Trump predecessors, Nixon went to China, a country with no formal diplomatic relations with the United States. This was unprecedented at the time. Should not Trump follow Nixon's example and go to North Korea? After all, Clinton, another Trump predecessor, went to North Korea to rescue that girl. No, Trump wants a war to become the greatest American president of all time. The cost will be millions of lives in America, Asia, and world. Incidentally, Lincoln is rated as a great president, because he killed over 600,000 lives in his war of Northern Aggression against Southern Independence. Americans want a big victory, one which they did not have since burning Japanese children alive in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. What price for glory? Human lives! fake news again , check out the real facts , MAGA , no one will mess with him , book it . no sick hearted  |
|
|
|
Post by Beachguy on Dec 11, 2017 15:41:13 GMT -5
I think you have it backwards Trump should tell the UN to take a hike. The United States funds way to much of that useless organization. Then pull out of every weapons agreement the US has because the other countries do not live up to their part of the bargain. What a pompous attitude you possess. You take a position that the US is always right and that it is correct for a businessman like Trump to place the entire world at risk of a nuclear war. Most of the western democracies are shying away from the US because they simply are tired of Trump's flip-flopping and bullying tactics. I agree that Kim Jong-un is a scary piece of work but matching him up with Trump is a recipe for disaster for many countries if not the entire world. An example of how the much of the western world is out of step with the US will be seen by the number of embassies that actual move to Jerusalem..... I bet they will be counted on one hand and still have fingers to spare. Immediately following Trump's announcement of recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and stating the US will move it's embassy there, Canada announced that its' embassy will remain in Tel Aviv and remain in keeping with the UN 1948 accord regarding Jerusalem. Just another example of Trump walking out of agreements made by better US leaders and diplomats.
He is the only one with guts to do what the others wanted to do , the other leaders were weak |
|
