Discussion:
BBC: Lib-prog sissies quaking in fear over N. Korea question
(too old to reply)
RichA
2017-08-11 00:42:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Don't worry, pussies; Trump isn't going to bomb them unless they do it first. In fact, reign-in your consternation before you are accused of "aid and comforting" the enemy. And make no mistake; if America was hit by a nuke, no matter what administration was in-charge, the enemy would be reduced to glass slag. There would BE no N. Korea left.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40894529
Adam H. Kerman
2017-08-11 03:17:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by RichA
Don't worry, pussies; Trump isn't going to bomb them unless they do it
first.
Again: Japan is to the east. We're not pre-emptively nuking them.
Post by RichA
In fact, reign-in your consternation before you are accused of
"aid and comforting" the enemy. And make no mistake; if America was hit
by a nuke, no matter what administration was in-charge, the enemy would
be reduced to glass slag. There would BE no N. Korea left.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40894529
And what about Japan?
RichA
2017-08-11 04:43:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by RichA
Don't worry, pussies; Trump isn't going to bomb them unless they do it
first.
Again: Japan is to the east. We're not pre-emptively nuking them.
Post by RichA
In fact, reign-in your consternation before you are accused of
"aid and comforting" the enemy. And make no mistake; if America was hit
by a nuke, no matter what administration was in-charge, the enemy would
be reduced to glass slag. There would BE no N. Korea left.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40894529
And what about Japan?
Allies now. Enemies then.
Adam H. Kerman
2017-08-11 04:48:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by RichA
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by RichA
Don't worry, pussies; Trump isn't going to bomb them unless they do it
first.
Again: Japan is to the east. We're not pre-emptively nuking them.
Post by RichA
In fact, reign-in your consternation before you are accused of
"aid and comforting" the enemy. And make no mistake; if America was hit
by a nuke, no matter what administration was in-charge, the enemy would
be reduced to glass slag. There would BE no N. Korea left.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40894529
And what about Japan?
Allies now. Enemies then.
The thing is: If we nuke North Korea, the Japanese will no longer be allies.
This would be very very bad.
Rhino
2017-08-11 05:37:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by RichA
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by RichA
Don't worry, pussies; Trump isn't going to bomb them unless they do it
first.
Again: Japan is to the east. We're not pre-emptively nuking them.
Post by RichA
In fact, reign-in your consternation before you are accused of
"aid and comforting" the enemy. And make no mistake; if America was hit
by a nuke, no matter what administration was in-charge, the enemy would
be reduced to glass slag. There would BE no N. Korea left.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40894529
And what about Japan?
Allies now. Enemies then.
The thing is: If we nuke North Korea, the Japanese will no longer be allies.
This would be very very bad.
Why do you think Japan would no longer be a US ally if the US nuked
North Korea? They might actually be relieved and grateful that the Kims
were finally out of their hair, even if it cost them some major
casualties from fallout. Also, if the North Koreans *do* launch an
attack on Guam or the US, they might also launch one on Japan, a
traditional enemy who they've despised ever since Japan occupied the
Korean Peninsula for decades ending in 1945. Remember too that a North
Korean attack on Japan might very well be nuclear, not just
conventional. There's little doubt that some fallout from a US attack on
North Korea would be less damaging than North Korean nukes landing right
on Japanese cities.
--
Rhino
Adam H. Kerman
2017-08-11 11:58:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rhino
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by RichA
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by RichA
Don't worry, pussies; Trump isn't going to bomb them unless they do it
first.
Again: Japan is to the east. We're not pre-emptively nuking them.
Post by RichA
In fact, reign-in your consternation before you are accused of
"aid and comforting" the enemy. And make no mistake; if America was hit
by a nuke, no matter what administration was in-charge, the enemy would
be reduced to glass slag. There would BE no N. Korea left.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40894529
And what about Japan?
Allies now. Enemies then.
The thing is: If we nuke North Korea, the Japanese will no longer be allies.
This would be very very bad.
Why do you think Japan would no longer be a US ally if the US nuked
North Korea?
Again: North Korea is immediately to the west.
Post by Rhino
They might actually be relieved and grateful that the Kims were finally
out of their hair, even if it cost them some major casualties from
fallout.
Uh, no. There's never been a nation nor peoples in this world that has
volunteered to be collateral damage.
Post by Rhino
Also, if the North Koreans *do* launch an attack on Guam or the US, they
might also launch one on Japan, a traditional enemy who they've despised
ever since Japan occupied the Korean Peninsula for decades ending in 1945.
Yeah, well, Japan has stopped invading other countries.
Post by Rhino
Remember too that a North Korean attack on Japan might very well be
nuclear, not just conventional.
Anything is possible, but North Korea is quite capable of wreaking havoc
in other ways. I was listening to an interview with a retired Air Force
colonel who had run war games for decades at military college. He pointed
out that North Korea has massive chemical weapons capabilities, and the
assumption is that they'd just wipe out Seoul with such weapons. They might
do the same to Tokyo or any major Japanese city.
Post by Rhino
There's little doubt that some fallout from a US attack on North Korea
would be less damaging than North Korean nukes landing right on Japanese
cities.
Fallout from a pre-emptive nuclear strike would be so very devastating
that there's no scenario in which the United States would strike first.

I love how Kim is being threatened with the people of North Korea being
wiped out. The Kims have been starving their own people for decades.
It's only gotten worse under the current one.

There are no viable scenarios here if the Korean War turns hot once again.
Trump's sabre rattling might be an effective strategy. I have no clue.
But it's Trump, so there is no strategy of any kind.
A Friend
2017-08-11 13:32:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Fallout from a pre-emptive nuclear strike would be so very devastating
that there's no scenario in which the United States would strike first.
'

I can't find a cite now, but I remember a story back during Obama's
second term that had him agreeing with U.S. allies that any retaliatory
attack on North Korea, even in retaliation for a nuclear strike, would
be conventional. This was mostly because of Japan's vulnerability.
Adam H. Kerman
2017-08-11 13:54:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by A Friend
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Fallout from a pre-emptive nuclear strike would be so very devastating
that there's no scenario in which the United States would strike first.
I can't find a cite now, but I remember a story back during Obama's
second term that had him agreeing with U.S. allies that any retaliatory
attack on North Korea, even in retaliation for a nuclear strike, would
be conventional. This was mostly because of Japan's vulnerability.
The retired air force colonel said that North Korea has extensive
underground facilities. We can bomb an entrance or an airshaft, but
it won't take out the facility if we don't know what its underground
footprint is, so they are not especially vulnerable to conventional
weapons attacks. A retaliatory strike would have to be nuclear for that
reason. Anyway, the Japanese are kidding themselves that North Korea
would somehow not attack them at the same time as the United States.

It's impossible to believe that Obama abandoned the principle of
Mutually Assured Descruction. There's no other way to fight a
nuclear war. They are, of course, the most impractical weapons for anything
other than total anihilation.

There are no acceptable scenarios here.
RichA
2017-08-12 02:51:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by A Friend
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Fallout from a pre-emptive nuclear strike would be so very devastating
that there's no scenario in which the United States would strike first.
I can't find a cite now, but I remember a story back during Obama's
second term that had him agreeing with U.S. allies that any retaliatory
attack on North Korea, even in retaliation for a nuclear strike, would
be conventional. This was mostly because of Japan's vulnerability.
The retired air force colonel said that North Korea has extensive
underground facilities. We can bomb an entrance or an airshaft, but
it won't take out the facility if we don't know what its underground
footprint is,
Thanks to the U.S. not proceeding with production of bunker-buster nukes.
RichA
2017-08-12 02:50:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by A Friend
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Fallout from a pre-emptive nuclear strike would be so very devastating
that there's no scenario in which the United States would strike first.
'
I can't find a cite now, but I remember a story back during Obama's
second term that had him agreeing with U.S. allies that any retaliatory
attack on North Korea, even in retaliation for a nuclear strike, would
be conventional. This was mostly because of Japan's vulnerability.
SWEDEN got more radioactivity from Chernobyl than Japan would from nuking N. Korea.
Ed Stasiak
2017-08-11 16:35:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Adam H. Kerman
There are no viable scenarios here if the Korean War turns hot once again.
If the N.Koreans hit Guam (or anybody) with a nuke, (or chemical or bio weapons)
the U.S. has no choice but to respond with a full-out nuclear strike to finish them off.

That’s the name of the game and the N.Koreans know this as well, which means
that unless they’re truly crazy, they’re just bluffing and if they are crazy, they’ll have
to go all-out also; launching all their nukes (at everybody) and invading S.Korea
right out of the gate.

And even if the N.Koreans use conventional explosives against Guam, we simply
don’t have enough conventional forces in and around Korea to carry out an invasion
off-the-cuff and the N.Koreans know this also, which puts them in a do or die position,
as they can’t allow the U.S. to do a “Korean Storm” and bomb them for weeks, while
we to build up our forces for an invasion.
The Horny Goat
2017-08-11 20:29:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 09:35:03 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
If the N.Koreans hit Guam (or anybody) with a nuke, (or chemical or bio wea=
pons)
the U.S. has no choice but to respond with a full-out nuclear strike to fin=
ish them off.
Kim hasn't said he wants to nuke Guam - he has claimed to want to
bracket Guam on all 4 sides with missiles to show he could do it at
any time.

If he actually did do that it's likely Trump wouldn't aim to bracket
Pyongyang - he'd go for Kim's palace.
Ed Stasiak
2017-08-11 22:29:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The Horny Goat
Post by The Horny Goat
Ed Stasiak
If the N.Koreans hit Guam (or anybody) with a nuke, (or chemical
or bio weapons) the U.S. has no choice but to respond with a full-
out nuclear strike to finish them off.
Kim hasn't said he wants to nuke Guam - he has claimed to want to
bracket Guam on all 4 sides with missiles to show he could do it at
any time.
Nukes or not, North Korea can’t be the one to drop the gloves, as they’ll
be destroyed by the massive and wholly justified U.S. retaliation, while
China stands on the sidelines and watches.

All Kim Jong Un can do is talk shit, just like the N.Koreans have always done.
The Horny Goat
2017-08-11 20:27:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
ROn Fri, 11 Aug 2017 11:58:57 +0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Anything is possible, but North Korea is quite capable of wreaking havoc
in other ways. I was listening to an interview with a retired Air Force
colonel who had run war games for decades at military college. He pointed
out that North Korea has massive chemical weapons capabilities, and the
assumption is that they'd just wipe out Seoul with such weapons. They might
do the same to Tokyo or any major Japanese city.
The United States defines poison gas weapons as 'weapons of mass
destruction' and has stated as a matter of policy that any nation
deploying WMDs is subject to US WMD counter-attack - and not
necessarily with the same type of WMD they used.

That was official US policy under Bush 43 and has not to my knowledge
ever changed.

If Kim did that it would mean recycling the old Iranian joke from late
1979 - "what's large, very flat, very quiet and glows in the dark?"
Answer: Teheran 10 minutes after Ronald Reagan is sworn in. (That was
if the US hostages were not immediately released on his inauguration
which they were)
FPP
2017-08-11 21:58:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Horny Goat
ROn Fri, 11 Aug 2017 11:58:57 +0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Anything is possible, but North Korea is quite capable of wreaking havoc
in other ways. I was listening to an interview with a retired Air Force
colonel who had run war games for decades at military college. He pointed
out that North Korea has massive chemical weapons capabilities, and the
assumption is that they'd just wipe out Seoul with such weapons. They might
do the same to Tokyo or any major Japanese city.
The United States defines poison gas weapons as 'weapons of mass
destruction' and has stated as a matter of policy that any nation
deploying WMDs is subject to US WMD counter-attack - and not
necessarily with the same type of WMD they used.
That was official US policy under Bush 43 and has not to my knowledge
ever changed.
If Kim did that it would mean recycling the old Iranian joke from late
1979 - "what's large, very flat, very quiet and glows in the dark?"
Answer: Teheran 10 minutes after Ronald Reagan is sworn in. (That was
if the US hostages were not immediately released on his inauguration
which they were)
And then he turned around and sold them arms. Taught THEM a lesson!
--
"Mike Pence will lead Trump's transition team. Which is weird, because
normally when people transition, Pence sends them to conversion
therapy." -Colin Jost
Rhino
2017-08-11 05:30:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by RichA
Don't worry, pussies; Trump isn't going to bomb them unless they do it
first.
Again: Japan is to the east. We're not pre-emptively nuking them.
Post by RichA
In fact, reign-in your consternation before you are accused of
"aid and comforting" the enemy. And make no mistake; if America was hit
by a nuke, no matter what administration was in-charge, the enemy would
be reduced to glass slag. There would BE no N. Korea left.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40894529
And what about Japan?
And then there's Seoul, just 30 odd kilometers from the border and well
within range of the North's huge artillery emplacements. I read that the
US military estimates that it would take a solid 4 days to knock out all
that artillery; in the meantime, it would pound the 20 or 30 million
residents of Seoul and do a LOT of damage to people and property. (Just
why *did* the South Koreans allow their capital to grow so big while
still being within easy range of the North Koreans weapons? It would
have made a lot more sense to "grow" the cities that were out of range
of the North Korean artillery and deliberately keep Seoul small. But
what's done is done so that is the situation they find themselves in.)

As for Japan, they'd obviously want to avoid being bombed by the North
Koreans if they could and they'd certainly want to avoid the fallout
from a nuclear strike by the US on North Korea. But they might
ultimately be grateful to remove the rogue Kim regime so that they have
no more nuclear-armed enemy at their doorstep. Or at least not *that*
enemy, given that China, a traditional enemy, is relatively close by.
--
Rhino
The Horny Goat
2017-08-11 20:22:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 01:30:32 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
As for Japan, they'd obviously want to avoid being bombed by the North
Koreans if they could and they'd certainly want to avoid the fallout
from a nuclear strike by the US on North Korea. But they might
ultimately be grateful to remove the rogue Kim regime so that they have
no more nuclear-armed enemy at their doorstep. Or at least not *that*
enemy, given that China, a traditional enemy, is relatively close by.
The biggest factor for world peace right now is that the Chinese have
told Kim they will stand by him if attacked but if he strikes he's on
his lonesome.

Again - there is no way to "solve" the problem of North Korea with
nuclear weapons without also eliminating large parts of South Korea
and Japan.

Would Trump love to see Kim's head on a spike? You bet - so would
plenty of other people would too.But that doesn't happen without the
deaths of millions of others too. (I suspect the Chinese wouldn't mind
that much as he's a complication they don't need - but they'll never
ever say that in public!)
h***@bbs.cpcn.com
2017-08-11 20:33:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Horny Goat
The biggest factor for world peace right now is that the Chinese have
told Kim they will stand by him if attacked but if he strikes he's on
his lonesome.
The Chinese have the capability of eliminating Kim if they really
wanted to. Various news reports say they don't want to as it would
send thousands of Korean refugees into China, which they don't want.

China should be getting the blame for this mess. North Korea's
existence is totally dependent on China.

At least China supported the UN sanctions.

Unfortunately, a conflict with China would be a much, much harder
than a conflict with Korea.
The Horny Goat
2017-08-12 02:21:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@bbs.cpcn.com
Post by The Horny Goat
The biggest factor for world peace right now is that the Chinese have
told Kim they will stand by him if attacked but if he strikes he's on
his lonesome.
The Chinese have the capability of eliminating Kim if they really
wanted to. Various news reports say they don't want to as it would
send thousands of Korean refugees into China, which they don't want.
More importantly they don't want South Koreans on the Yalu. When the
Russians pulled out of Germany in 1993-94 they still had Poland
between them!
Post by h***@bbs.cpcn.com
China should be getting the blame for this mess. North Korea's
existence is totally dependent on China.
For sure when the Chinese government says 'jump' Kim must say 'how
high' - he tries really hard to avoid saying so in public though.
Post by h***@bbs.cpcn.com
At least China supported the UN sanctions.
aka "Divorce with Bed privileges" with respect to Kim
Post by h***@bbs.cpcn.com
Unfortunately, a conflict with China would be a much, much harder
than a conflict with Korea.
Adam H. Kerman
2017-08-12 02:51:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@bbs.cpcn.com
Post by The Horny Goat
The biggest factor for world peace right now is that the Chinese have
told Kim they will stand by him if attacked but if he strikes he's on
his lonesome.
The Chinese have the capability of eliminating Kim if they really
wanted to. Various news reports say they don't want to as it would
send thousands of Korean refugees into China, which they don't want.
China should be getting the blame for this mess. North Korea's
existence is totally dependent on China.
Russia, too.
Post by h***@bbs.cpcn.com
At least China supported the UN sanctions.
Not in any practical way by not making money from North Korean coal
sales available to them.
Post by h***@bbs.cpcn.com
Unfortunately, a conflict with China would be a much, much harder
than a conflict with Korea.
Didn't bug MacArthur.
Dimensional Traveler
2017-08-12 03:57:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by h***@bbs.cpcn.com
Post by The Horny Goat
The biggest factor for world peace right now is that the Chinese have
told Kim they will stand by him if attacked but if he strikes he's on
his lonesome.
The Chinese have the capability of eliminating Kim if they really
wanted to. Various news reports say they don't want to as it would
send thousands of Korean refugees into China, which they don't want.
China should be getting the blame for this mess. North Korea's
existence is totally dependent on China.
Russia, too.
Post by h***@bbs.cpcn.com
At least China supported the UN sanctions.
Not in any practical way by not making money from North Korean coal
sales available to them.
Post by h***@bbs.cpcn.com
Unfortunately, a conflict with China would be a much, much harder
than a conflict with Korea.
Didn't bug MacArthur.
MacArthur had issues that affected his ability to perceive reality.
There's also a big difference between China 2017 and China 1950.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
The Horny Goat
2017-08-11 20:18:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 03:17:31 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Again: Japan is to the east. We're not pre-emptively nuking them.
Post by RichA
In fact, reign-in your consternation before you are accused of
"aid and comforting" the enemy. And make no mistake; if America was hit
by a nuke, no matter what administration was in-charge, the enemy would
be reduced to glass slag. There would BE no N. Korea left.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40894529
And what about Japan?
Same as Canada in the event of a US - Soviet exchange in the 60s or
70s. Collateral damage. Probably the same happens to at least half of
South Korea as well.

I don't think the apanese would like it very much particularly if/when
Trump claimed credit for "eliminating global warming".

It would be a real life Tom Clancy scenario and as you know none of
those scenarios work out well.
Loading...