North Korea

[DrunkMonkey81488]

What do you think should be done to handle the problem with North Korea??

[DrunkMonkey81488]

Also if other, tell what you think should happen instead. ;)

[Saranof]

The US wouldn't dare attack a country that actually can DEFEND itsself.

[DrunkMonkey81488]

Right, right...During World War II, the Germans couldnt defend theirself and thats why we fought against them right...I mean, the Germans were helpless.

And Iraq couldnt defend itself...they didnt fire any missles over toward Kuwait and we never risked having chemical weapons used as a defense against us.

[Saranof]

Right, right...During World War II, the Germans couldnt defend theirself and thats why we fought against them right...I mean, the Germans were helpless.

And Iraq couldnt defend itself...they didnt fire any missles over toward Kuwait and we never risked having chemical weapons used as a defense against us.

Well, since the 2:nd WW, the US hasn't really been up against much resistance.

Cemical weapons btw? Who mean the ones you gave him? The ones he destroyed?

[duck]

A North Korean reaction to a obvious U.S buildup in the ROK could be anything from a new will to negotiate to a pre-emptive attack on the south. The PRK might also try to shoot a nuclear-or chemical-tipped medium-range-missile at Japan, maybe Osaka or similar. So the death toll might range from 0 ( negotiations ) to several million ( Seoul destroyed, nuclear attack on Japan, full-scale war with possible chinese intervention).

[DrunkMonkey81488]

Well, since the 2:nd WW, the US hasn't really been up against much resistance.

Cemical weapons btw? Who mean the ones you gave him? The ones he destroyed?

We havent been up against much resistance becasue we havent needed to...what; should we attack a powerful country so that we can say that we attacked some one that put up resistance??

[Ratamacue]

Haven't been up against much resistance? How about the Korean War? We lost about 55,000 good servicemen and women. Vietnam? 58,000.

No resistance my ass.

[Saranof]

Well, since the 2:nd WW, the US hasn't really been up against much resistance.

Cemical weapons btw? Who mean the ones you gave him? The ones he destroyed?

We havent been up against much resistance becasue we havent needed to...what; should we attack a powerful country so that we can say that we attacked some one that put up resistance??

Well, your goverment has mostly been attacking small, poor countrys, sponsoriing coups, killing rebels, stuff like that. oh, and supporting around 80% of the countrys that use torture.
No no, I don't expect the US to attack a country that can defend itself.

[Duke]

Well, since the 2:nd WW, the US hasn't really been up against much resistance.

Cemical weapons btw? Who mean the ones you gave him? The ones he destroyed?

We havent been up against much resistance becasue we havent needed to...what; should we attack a powerful country so that we can say that we attacked some one that put up resistance??

Well, your goverment has mostly been attacking small, poor countrys, sponsoriing coups, killing rebels, stuff like that. oh, and supporting around 80% of the countrys that use torture.
No no, I don't expect the US to attack a country that can defend itself.

My God, were you born before the Gulf War when the US led the assault on one of the largest and experienced (Iran Iraq War) armies at the time.

[Duke]

BTW, Ramsey Clarke is a liberal/Red who defends people like the Liberian dictator Charles Taylor. His opinion means very little in the US.

[martinexsquaddie]

Err the first gulf war was one of the most one sided conflicts in History.
But back to North Korea we have a nutjob who just threatened to nuke Australia even the russians did'nt go around threating to nuke people:)
Perhaps its time for the B2 Crews to finally see if there Expensive toy can work and get medival on his Ass we some JDAMS ;)
This guy makes saddam look like the tooth fairy.

[Duke]

Yes, the GW was an easy win due to great military/political leadership; but going into the Gulf War no one was certain of the outcome.

[vryhpyammoadded]

We should do everything possible to assist North Korea in becoming a stable free market republic and deter any desires it might have for aggression towards anyone. As always, we should strive for the diplomatic answer but never shy away from deterrence and armed force if necessary.
I think constant diplomatic, economic and military pressure will eventually break North Korea’s will towards aggression and bring them back to reality seeing they are currently digging their own grave and should be burying themselves shortly.
If their leadership attempts to go out with a bang we, and quite possibly the Chinese, will simply bomb them back out of the Stone Age and roll over them with the Army.

[duck]

The south koreans have appr. seven million relatives living in the north, how great would their will to co-operate in "bombing the north back to the stone age" be? I would not be surprised if the result would be an armed uprising against american forces in the ROK including parts of the ROK armed forces.

China considers PRK a vassal state since ancient times and would never let the United States occupy it, a surgical strike on nuclear facilities, however, might be negotiable. They want to keep the american market but are paranoid about being surrounded.

Why not let the chinese do the dirty work and organize a coup in PRK? They are the ones that have the best connections and combined with CIA and ROK intelligence might be able to dispose of the "great leader".

A unified Korea would still strive after nuclear weapons, mind you.

[Cpl Stumps]

Saranof,

On the post about NK threatening Australia with Nuclear weapons you cursed the leader of NK. But on this post you say The US wouldn't dare attack a country that actually can DEFEND itsself.

So are you saying that Sweden would attack a country that could defend itself? Are you volunteering to run off to South Korea, Australia or Japan and defend them from North Korea's aggression? Or are you just trying to be an instigator and therefore should be ignored!

[martinexsquaddie]

I remember sitting in cyprus setting up an NBC cas clearing station
and seeing the frankly barking plans to seize the Greek airport at Limassol if the RAF Base was taken out by persistant NBC or a nuke :roll:
a couple of very scary months then we all laughed like drains when we were give the gulf medal :lol:

[ScoutRanger]

Saranof is just mad we have better movies and fast food. Let the little Swede rant and rave, it will make em feel better.

[martinexsquaddie]

I never suggested bombing north kore back to the stone age (not that it would take much)
Just the nuke sight and the great leader

[Trigger]

Saranof wrote:

The US wouldn't dare attack a country that actually can DEFEND itsself.
...so I guess Sweden is next on the list?
you moron.

duck wrote:

"bombing the north back to the stone age"
I think we would actually be bombing them forward to the stone age!

[Seiyuuki]

Would it leave much of a power gap if Kim Jong Il were to be taken out?

I wonder...would it be simpler just to get an executive order to have the man snipe?

[duck]

Didn't mean you in the first place, but even targeting the "great leader" openly and not by covert means could trigger an artillery bombardment of Seoul and that long-awaited blitzkrieg into the ROK. Koreans are one of the toughest people on this earth and have an enormous national pride. That's why I would not be so sure how they would react in a war, be it in the north or south.

[DrunkMonkey81488]

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2672

This may also influence your decisions

[budanski]

When the Soviet Union first developed nuclear weapons they had hoped that this would terrify the Americans into becoming isolationists. Watching the discovery civilization channel I saw an interview with one Soviet General during the cold war. I found his outlook fascinating. He said he and his colleagues were shocked that American's were not only willing to hold and defend Western Europe but had actively provoked them time and time again. He said that while most Russians wouldn't admit it they were terrified of these fanatical American's, willing to irradiate the entire planet in the name of freedom and democracy. I have to admit I was surprised by his views.

American's are as fanatical about their Freedom as Iranian clerics are about their god. We are as devoted to the constition and the bill of rights as they are to the Qu'ran. I think Kim Jong thinks we are going to give in to his saber rattling, threats, and ultimate blackmail.

[MEGR]

I dont think that military action would be the best solution to NK. I see it that NK (if we started a war) aint gonna be like a GW2. I believe that the NK will fight much harder, and will probably infilict more casualties than the Iraqis did to us and the Brits.

[GazB]

"I have to admit I was surprised by his views.
American's are as fanatical about their Freedom as Iranian clerics are about their god."

Which was the evil empire again?

[budanski]

So my opinion makes the U.S. the evil empire? Coming from a Kiwi (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/afp/20030620/od_afp/nzealand_farming_offbeat_030620072145&e=2), I wouldnt be surprised.

...just as absurd :roll:

[butkus]

The US wouldn't dare attack a country that actually can DEFEND itsself.

Typical... :roll:

[Duke]

North Korea's military poses an incredible obstacle for peace on the pennisula. Their previous dictator Kim Il Sung, a Soviet trained SOF himself, created the largest Special Operations Force back in the 70's and 80's.
Numbering somewhere between 70 000 to 110 000, Korean Peoples Army SOF is the largest in the world. Their training resembles US doctrine of UW, but on a massive scale. What is scary about KPASOF is their numerous tunnels that cross the DMZ. Their doctrine calls for a second front(conventional is first) after exiting the tunnels. A very credible threat to ROK.

[digitalghost]

Take a look at that kim jim yu's face. Does he look like a guy who will cooperate-- We should liberate the korean people like we did in Iraq-- Rebuild their country etc.. Thtas what US should do to every infidel country including Iran becuase sadams hiding there eventually there will be peace like theres peace in germany and japan and england---WE KICK THEIR ASS AND THEY'LL BE OUR ALLY---Its all a matter of time dudes

[theGHOST]

Shut up DigitalGhost, nobody has the right to invade the a country thinking there liberating them. By you saying "we should liberate"........thats soo ignorant. You think most Koreans like Americans? Cause they sure dont in IRAQ.

[digitalghost]

It doesnt matter if they like us or not-- I bet Japanest/English/Germans didnt like us either--- But they'll learn to like us-- They "JUST DONT KNOW IT YET" any country which causes instablity and a lack of peace by doing nuclear weapons programs is just asking for trouble-- The big boy USA will intervene kick ass and take names-- Then rebuild the country and there'll be stability

[theGHOST]

In Japan we never removed there leader, we did it diplomatically. Sure they dropped the bombs but we didnt use force to remove Emperor Hiro****o, we kept him there worked with him......like what we should do with Kim Jong Il. Maybe not keep him there but work with to exile or something, war is the last answer and i do not believe we need a to use military action against North Korea.

[Chet Mystery]

So basically Digital, you want the US to play the aggressor to nations we feel are below us to help spread our ideals and ways to their culture and make them like us. Doing so all by violent and forceful action.

I think thats been tried before buy some guy, oh damn, what was his name....
I think it was Adolf something....
...Oh well...

[digitalghost]

no adolf did it to democratic countries--- thats command and coquer style.. thats hey lets rule the world-metnatlity

us should kick any countries asses who violates any democratic reules like nuclear weapons programs nad horboring terrists----- we should start with iran and korea

[Chet Mystery]

Ok, so the US should go after other countries who are trying to build nukes. You forget the US has more nukes than anybody.

Its like you, digital, making fun of others and calling them gay, when you are yourself a raging fenatical homo****** mantoy. Now thats really the pot calling the kettle black.

[RealUltimatePower]

Well aside from the current argument I believe that military action should be held off until diplomacy fails. One very good indicator that diplomacy has failed is if NK detonates an atom bomb either in it's own borders as a test or as an act of war. Then we should hit them hard but not with nukes. Invade them and bomb the hell out of em. Then we'll see what Kim Jong Il says.
And also I doubt it'd be only the US, UK and Australia attacking NK. You'd have Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, a ****load of European nations like Poland or Italy perhaps and maybe even Canada and France. Because Kim Jong Il does pose a larger threat than Saddam did. And the world can see that without much debate. Hell even China don't like em much.

[Duke]

NK dictates diplomatic initiative by their military stance. Due to their nuclear program and 1 000 000 strength armed forces, they dictate the give and take of diplomacy. Just by the military numbers both historical and today, NK have shown they would rather starve their popluation than decrease their military strength. They want economic credit or else.

[digitalghost]

Chet Mystery: BEcuase USA can do whatever they want becuase were democratic and not radicalistic terroristic commusist country like korea or any nuclear building country that wont meet our demands---

[theGHOST]

You say Korea like the whole country is a communist, and that there's terrorist.

[cut]

just a thought: I think the so called sabre rattling by kim jong il is to justify his massive military spending just like another country I can think of which has a 400billion deficit.

[budanski]

To put those figures into real life perspective here are some quick points:

Even at the higher numbers. The deficit is approximately 4% of the GDP.

Some deficit numbers as percentage of GDP for the past twenty years:

Clinton:
1992 .....................4.7%
1993......................4.0%

Reagan:
1983.....................6.%
1985.....................5.1%

Carter
1976....................4.2%

In terms of constant dollars and real money the shortfall is acceptable and in line. Considering the US is in the middle of a major global war a 4% budget deficit is doing quite well.

[cut]

Bush:
2003....1.6%

but let's not get to far off topic

don't you think that if north koreans things there is a outside threat they are more likely to forget about not having food, electricity etc....

[theGHOST]

Digital your the AMerican that every1 hates. You just disrespecting your country by saying all that nonsense fo real.

The Japanese are humble people, they had no reason to hate the U.S back in the day, when McArthur came to JApan after the war they embraced him. You have no idea what your talkin about. I dont understand when you say the English hated the Americans.


any country which causes instablity and a lack of peace by doing nuclear weapons programs is just asking for trouble-- The big boy USA will intervene kick ass and take names-- Then rebuild the country and there'll be stability

I think the good ole USA needs some stability. The USA has more problems on the homefront maybe ya'll should fix that.

[crazyface]

it would be a hard fight but......**** north korea lets kick the **** out of them

[RealUltimatePower]

YEa I'm up for that solution

[GazB]

"So my opinion makes the U.S. the evil empire? Coming from a Kiwi, I wouldnt be surprised.

...just as absurd"


Sounds absurd, but think about it...

""I have to admit I was surprised by his views.
American's are as fanatical about their Freedom as Iranian clerics are about their god."
"

The US and Iran, both hated by some other countries, but I believe only one has installed a despotic leader in the other... can you guess which?

"To put those figures into real life perspective here are some quick points:"

Yes, lets introduce some figures from the real world into this...

North Korea: population = 22,224,195 (July 2002 est.)
South Korea: population = 48.324 million (July 2002 est.)

or more than 2 to 1 in favour of the South.
But raw population is not useful, the South probably has an aging western style population, while the north has a young, fit third world pop...

North Korea : males age 15-49: 6,032,376 (2002 est.) (available manpower)

South Korea : males age 15-49: 14,194,960 (2002 est.)

Hmm still more than double, how about only those fit for military service

North Korea : males age 15-49: 3,619,535 (2002 est.)

South Korea : males age 15-49: 8,990,488 (2002 est.)

Still more than double, not matter how you cut it...

North Korea Spends more on Weapons though doesn't it?

No.

It spends a higher percentage of its GDP, but still much less than the South spends.

North Korea : Percentage 31.3% (FY01) and amount $5,124.1 million (FY01) of a GDP of (purchasing power parity) - $22 billion (2002 est.)

South Korea : Percentage 2.8% (FY00) and amount $12.8 billion (FY00) of a GDP of (purchasing power parity) - $931 billion (2002 est.)

So the truth is that without a few million Chinese to back them up the North Koreans are outnumbered 2:1 without any American troops being included. The South also spends more than double what the North spends on weapons and that can only be hidden by making it a percentage of GDP, which is of course rather biased because the Souths economy is roughly 41 times bigger than the Norths. So what if the North has nukes, the US has far more and more importantly the means to put them exactly where it wants, when it wants.

Don't get me wrong I don't think the North would fold like cards. The Koreans are good fighters and both North and South are Koreans. But the threat has been real but it is the opposite of what the Whitehouse would have you believe... and Pyongyang too.

[FuzziWuzzi]

Strong reasons why Australia may go nuclear
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2718

[Jooglae]

First of all, I'm a Korean, and I even though I served in the military, I have my own reasons of being against the war.

For most of you reading and writing in this forum, the current crisis may seem far away, but to us(and to the japs and the chinks), it's a matter of life and death. The massive deployment of long-range artillery near the DMZ line could barrage Seoul, Uijungbu, and the rest of the strategic positions and commercial/business/industrial centers in less than an HOUR. Civilian casualties would be huge.
(By theway, an American hawk strategist named Richard Pearl once said that full-scale warfare between the DPRK and the ROK-US forces would result in some collateral damage, but "that's for the South Koreans to take care of." Some SON OF A BITCH, I had to admit)

And we can't ignore the chances of North Korea using ABC weapons on South Koreans and other allies. And the recent news reports that North Korea already finished reprocessing it's diplinished uranium. Imagine a nuclear bang on the Korean Peninsula, followed by a thick layer of nuclear winter that would cover the whole of Northeast Asia.

The Korean terrain is mostly mountainous, making it easy for waging guerrila warfare, and massive deployment of armor and air strike would be harder than it was in Iraq. Also, strong resistance and urban warfare could be waged by the die-hard North Korean troops, thereby raising the casualty rate up to a 4-digit number.

Also, Koreans have been seperated by the 38th parallel for so long that sometimes it's hard for we South Koreans to understand what they are saying. The North Koreans have been living under their commuinist ideology for so long, that the cultural gap between them and us is, in fact, quite wide. The North Koreans would have a hard time being incorporated into a brand new society, that requires them to accept capitalism, urbanization, competitiveness, and Americans.

Rebuilding North Korea and settling a South Korean rule their would also be a problem. Rebuilding a country that has been long undernourished, and has suffered a decade-long famine and poverty would acquire billions of dollars.

These are some of the reasons why I'm against the military option. As many people have already put it, I believe that the diplomatic solution would be the best solution that we have on the table. Use of force is only the last resort.

Peace.

[RealUltimatePower]

You know it really doesn't matter that the South is more prepared militarily than the North. In fact that is a good thing, it shows how a democratic nation is willing to defend it's freedom.

However, if the North had nukes that would make numbers pretty ireelevant. Recall if you will the strategy for dealing with the overwhelming tank superiority of the Warsaw Pact. Feild deployed atomic shells. Fired from long range artillery. Go on Kazza and search for "nuclear bomb fired from a cannon" and you'll see how that works.

The North with such an ability could then breach the landmines and lay waste to the South. Do you REALLY think that them having atomic weapons is a good thing? It would only destabilize the region and put lives at risk.

From what China has been saying over the past few months it seems unlikely that they would want to help the North or for the North to have nukes. If anything China is involved with talks to end the standoff.

[Jooglae]

I never said that the North should develop and keep nukes.....My point was that the situation has to be diffused by diplomacy. You don't understand us because you don't live some 80 kms under the DMZ

[gaboki]

remember guys, were not officialy not with war with them, all we did during the korean war was sign a cease fire...same with iraq

[Seiyuuki]

Wait!!!...If it's a cease-fire...doesn't that necessary mean that the war has not been officially declare over yet...and that it's still on, it's just merely mean that there's a hold in the fighting??????

What the official rule on cease-fire and situation like this??????

And is the situation in the peninsula qualify as the longest cease-fire in history?

[Duke]

A ceasefire is an simple agreement between belligerents to temporarily suspensed hostilities.
Since this agreement, North Korea has maintained a formidible military force, and now has the largest standing army, not to mentioned their impressive SOF.
The ROK would be utterly sacked if North Korea choose to break the ceasefire.