north korea..threat of nuclear weapons use

vipervillain

i saw the recent threats made by north korea to both the usa and its neighbour south korea. north korea saying they will wage nuclear war on the states if it doesnt stop its military exercises...it got me wondering, exactly how real of a threat would this be and is it possible for korea to attack the states with nuclear weapons at any time it wishes....?

ChristopherUno

There last year (or the start of this year?) the DPRK* launched a rocket under the guise of trying to launch a satellite but widely regarded by the West as testing their progress on a missile capable of delivering a nuclear payload. It passed over Japan but landed in the Pacific somewhere. As far as I remember it didn't travel far enough to hit any US states, including Hawaii and Alaska. So that threat is just hot air. But the threat of attacking South Korea is more valid, as Seoul lies only something like 50 km south of the DMZ, well within range of conventional artillery fire even if they don't possess nuclear capabilities just yet. Plus the North maintains a standing army of over 1 million, so standard warfare is still a threat (the two are technically still at war).

And China's dealings with the West would be very much damaged by the foolishness of the North. Any attack on the South or the US will lead to US, S. Korean and Japanese counter-attacks and the elimination of the North without Chinese intervention. But Chinese intervention would prompt action from the aforementioned countries of a financial nature, which China can't afford. China's domestic growth is too weak still to sustain the 8% goal year-on-year if it both goes to war and loses the impetus that the huge injection of foreign investment has spurred. So to my understanding speaking with my friends over here (Chinese and S. Korean) China has let N. Korea know in no uncertain terms that it won't be coming to the rescue if things turn sour. Though none of them could point me in the direction of anything specific confirming this so I dunno how true this is.

One scary thing I saw over here was a Chinese message board (Chinese "netizens" as they're called over here can be extremely racist and virulently nationalistic at times) posed the question "North Korea in ruins is still North Korea. Is South Korea in ruins still South Korea?"

* I'm in China, they refer to it here as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the official title of the country, I'm assuming it's out of irony.

vipervillain

i did read something about that before in that the north did not have range missiles to reach the west...i wondered too if it was a case that the north were to launch against the south would it be as sudden as lets say us here waking up one particular day and seeing on the news that a nuclear bomb has exploded in the south....

ChristopherUno

They could reach Japan, South Korea and, if Western predictions are correct, not much else. And they're not even sure that the rocket fired would be capable of carrying a nuclear warhead so far as I know. It could theoretically happen like that, we're 7/8 hours ahead of Ireland over here depending on daylight savings. But I find it unlikely that the North will attack to be honest, and especially with nuclear weapons. In my opinion it doesn't have the capabilities nor the stupidity to launch an attack. This rhetoric is for the home audience methinks.

Killer Wench

We still have military presence in South Korea, Japan, and I believe other areas within their range. While they may not be able to directly engage with us on the continent, they are still within distance of harming many Americans.

But, I think a lot of the talk is just posturing. I don't think that they will want to directly engage with the US but they'll continue to bully South Korea.

Einhard

The only things that motivate Kim Jong-Il and his regime are maintaining power, and sustaining their lavish lifestyles. There's not a chance that they would risk open war with the South, because they know that they'd be annihalted.

Also, China wouldn't countenance any such move because it would cause turmoil on her borders and lead to a massive influx of refugees.

Their constant announcements and threats of war are little more than sabre rattling, designed to keep the international community on its toes, and for use as propoganda on the domestic front.

vipervillain

thats what i couldnt understand in that why would one country threaten another nuclear power where if they did they would end up probably annihilated as a result.

Mr. K

vipervillain wrote: »

thats what i couldnt understand in that why would one country threaten another nuclear power where if they did they would end up probably annihilated as a result.

Because they're just bullies. I hope their talk is all empty threats. If not, they're extremely foolish!

flogen

Moved to Politics.

pablo_escobar

China are conducting their own military excercises at the moment, i presume in response to the US

funny thing is, the US don't see anything wrong with having military excercises in Chinese sea...

i can imagine the welcome, were china to send submarines and war ships to the florida coast for military excercises... :rolleyes:

briany

The idea of North Korea waging nuclear war on the states is absolutely laughable. As bad as the US can be, if NK are serious then they're really starting to believe their own hype. I picture them launching their one rocket at the states, seeing it run out of fuel/malfunction over the pacific and NK being taken to the international court because the leaky rocket poisoned the fishing waters of an archipelego island nation.

Overheal

pablo_escobar wrote: »

funny thing is, the US don't see anything wrong with having military excercises in Chinese sea...

Aren't they operating in International Water? Russian Nuclear submarines have been pinged off the East Coast several times in recent years: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/05/world/05patrol.html

pablo_escobar

Overheal wrote:

Aren't they operating in International Water? Russian Nuclear submarines have been pinged off the East Coast several times in recent years: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/05/world/05patrol.html

Russia != China

Although, I can understand the confusion within US media.

Here's a list of US bases around the world

Dang..can't find any Chinese or Russian bases, care to help?

How many countries have China and Russia invaded in recent years?

Here's an interesting piece of history where the US overthrew a democratically elected leader of Iran

History repeating itself?

Overheal

pablo_escobar wrote: »

Russia != China

Although, I can understand the confusion within US media.

No need to be so obtuse. You know exactly what I'm getting at is the fact that it's not illegal to conduct these exercises in the Chinese Sea.

Here's a list of US bases around the world

Dang..can't find any Chinese or Russian bases, care to help?

Well there was Cuba but that didn't really pan out.

Currently China does not operate outside its own border and given its history of isolation that is far from unsurprising. Currently, Russia operates 25 according to one source as recently as 2007. This may of course fluctuated after the South Ossetia War. India meanwhile, operates just one.

Taken as excerpt from that source,

At the moment Russia has 25 military bases beyond its borders; the US, for comparison, has more than 800, while China does not have a single base on foreign soil. In general, a country's interest in maintaining a presence abroad is an indicator of its government's overall geopolitical strategy and of the degree of its military orientation. Russia, however, does not seem to have a clear approach either to the former or the later.

Taking a look at a map of military bases, it is impossible not to notice a seeming randomness in their dispersal. This appears to be part of a larger problem faced by Russia's armed forces: a lack of a clear grasp on the tasks facing the military and on ideas for how to achieve them. Bases abroad (like everything else in the army) are an instrument, not a goal in and of themselves. However, at the moment neither politicians nor military officials can answer the key question: why we need that instrument and how will it be used "just in case."

How many countries have China and Russia invaded in recent years?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_South_Ossetia_war

Here's an interesting piece of history where the US overthrew a democratically elected leader of Iran

History repeating itself?

Wasn't it Winston Churchill who lead that idea? As your own article even says plainly, Iran was Britain's economic endeavour; it went bad; and Britan under Winston Churchill acted to correct the situation for themselves. By virtue of asking their post WWII bum chums to help them out, yes, the United States profited from the deal. However this short-sightedness by both Western Superpowers eventually birthed modern day Iran.

In 1951 with near unanimous support of Iran's parliament, Mosaddegh nationalized the British-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC). "The 1933 agreement under which it was operating was widely regarded as exploitative and an infringement on Iran's sovereignty.[5][6] Iran's oil was the British government's single largest overseas investment.[7] Moreover, the AIOC had consistently violated the terms of the 1933 agreement and was reluctant to renegotiate, even as Iran's movement for nationalization grew in the late 1940s.[8] Even though AIOC was highly profitable, "its Iranian workers were poorly paid and lived in squalid conditions." The AIOC, which was 51 percent owned by the British government, bankrolled disruptive tribal elements in Iran, some politicians and clergy with the purpose of bringing down the government. Iranians blamed Britain for most of its problems and public support for nationalization was strong.[9] Despite Mosaddegh's popular support, Britain was unwilling to negotiate its single most valuable foreign asset, and instigated a military blockade of Iran and worldwide boycott of Iranian oil to pressure Iran economically.[10] Initially, Britain mobilized its military to seize control of the Abadan oil refinery, the world's largest, but Prime Minister Attlee opted instead to tighten the economic boycott.[11] With a change to more conservative governments in both Britain and the United States, Churchill and Dwight D. Eisenhower decided to overthrow Iran's government.[12]

The United Kingdom took its anti-nationalization case against Iran to the International Court of Justice at The Hague; PM Mosaddegh said the world would learn of a "cruel and imperialistic country" stealing from a "needy and naked people." Representing the AIOC, the UK lost its case. In August 1952, Iranian Prime Minister Mosaddegh invited an American oil executive to visit Iran and the Truman administration welcomed the invitation. However, the suggestion upset British Prime Minister Winston Churchill who insisted that the U.S. not undermine his campaign to isolate Mosaddegh: "Britain was supporting the Americans in Korea, he reminded Truman, and had a right to expect Anglo-American unity on Iran."[47]

In the wake of the coup, Britain and the U.S. selected Fazlollah Zahedi to be the next prime minister of a military government. Pahlevi made the appointment but dismissed him two years later. Pahlevi ruled as an authoritarian monarch for the next 26 years, until he was overthrown in a popular revolt in 1979.[20] The tangible benefits the United States reaped from overthrowing Iran's elected government was a share of Iran's oil wealth.[21] Washington supplied arms to the unpopular ruler, Pahlavi, and the CIA trained SAVAK, his repressive police. In Foreign Policy magazine, former CIA agent Richard Cottam wrote that "The shah's defense program, his industrial and economic transactions, and his oil policy were all considered by most Iranians to be faithful executions of American instructions."[22] The coup is widely believed to have significantly contributed to the 1979 Iranian Revolution, which deposed the Shah and replaced the pro-Western royal dictatorship with the anti-Western Islamic Republic of Iran.[23]

Do you then imply that you support the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinijahd, even in light of the Green Revolution? Do you believe it was a Just Democratic Election?

Einhard

Is it possible to have a reasonable discussion about any international situation without someone using it to bash the US?

Overheal

Einhard wrote: »

Is it possible to have a reasonable discussion about any international situation without someone using it to bash the US?

It is, but in this case the United States is directly involved in the situation with North Korea, so it seems fairly operative for anti-US sentiment to be present in the thread.

alboco

Einhard wrote: »

Is it possible to have a reasonable discussion about any international situation without someone using it to bash the US?

The most powerful always attract the most criticism, the US's problem will be when people no longer criticise it ! Mind they will probably be afraid of china then to criticise china !:D

ChristopherUno

I would post links but as I'm in China they're blocked*. However, to pablo_escobar's objection that the US conducted a drill in the East China Sea, they (the US) also did so last October with little objection from the Chinese, it hardly even made the local news. Even the recent exercise was originally met with little or no objection, with the rhetoric getting stronger the more the PLA presence on all major political boards flexed their muscle and influenced foreign policy messages; their influence is a major part of the problem with Chinese politics.

True, the Chinese are conducting their own drills. Right now on TV they've also got about 20-30 PLA soldiers singing poppy Bolshevik songs and doing funny and slightly homo-erotic dances while playing accordions, so I wouldn't worry all that much about them. I've talked to a few recruits to the Chinese army and wouldn't exactly be shaking in my boots if I were an American soldier. Also given the level of incompetence over here due to the decades of reverse eugenics practised under the Communist regime it's not too worrying.

The Chinese are increasingly frustrated that the world, as they see it, isn't taking them seriously as a new superpower, they feel that everyone should be falling over themselves buddying up to China and switching to "socialism with Chinese characteristics". I put their rhetoric down to equal parts petulance towards the foreigners and posturing for the home market. Nothing will come of these drills but sporadic remonstrations and a souring of the relationship for a few months, until the next blip in relations. Fatty Kim (Kim Jong-Il's Chinese nickname) dying is the only thing that will fundamentally alter this situation.




* From the South China Morning Post print version. Probably available online in countries where the populace have some semblance of freedom (America, for instance). Check scmp.com (or .hk?).

old_aussie

What do you see if you look at Google Maps, Satellite view of North Korea?

Nothing

rccaulfield

Nuclear weapons are very cheap(free energy from mass) to make and are very easy to use. Anyone who doubts this and thinks NK isn't capable is naive imo.

Overheal

rccaulfield wrote: »

Nuclear weapons are very cheap(free energy from mass) to make and are very easy to use. Anyone who doubts this and thinks NK isn't capable is naive imo.

care to explain that one?

ChristopherUno

Overheal wrote: »

care to explain that one?

+1, I'd also like to know how nuclear weapons are cheap and easy to use. If they were so cheap and easy to make and to deliver to their target every self-respecting terrorist organisation would have one.

monosharp

ChristopherUno wrote: »

I've talked to a few recruits to the Chinese army and wouldn't exactly be shaking in my boots if I were an American soldier. Also given the level of incompetence over here due to the decades of reverse eugenics practised under the Communist regime it's not too worrying.

You seem to have a rather high opinion of American troops then. I've met more than my fair share and I wouldn't be shaking in my boots if I was a Chinese soldier :pac:

Honestly the amount of complete total retards I have met in the US military abroad is frightening especially considering many of them are NCO's with an actual ounce of responsibility. To put it very very mildly, the US army's hiring standards are very very low.

ChristopherUno

monosharp wrote: »

You seem to have a rather high opinion of American troops then. I've met more than my fair share and I wouldn't be shaking in my boots if I was a Chinese soldier :pac:

Honestly the amount of complete total retards I have met in the US military abroad is frightening especially considering many of them are NCO's with an actual ounce of responsibility. To put it very very mildly, the US army's hiring standards are very very low.

Having never met any American soldiers I can't comment on their level of competency, I wouldn't say I have a high opinion of them though. I was just saying that based on the serious lack of initiative, critical thinking etc that is inherent in the Communist system over here, their army would, in my opinion, be crippled by inaction and lack of decision making skills on the ground and even higher in the chain of command. I don't think people really realise how much living in this regime has stifled ingenuity and mental capacity. I saw a guy on an airplane in his uniform push the light bulb seven times to try turn it off, the airhostess had to come over and show him it was the little yellow button with the light bulb on it right beside it.

That said, perhaps the Americans are as bad, as I said I haven't met any American soldiers and so can't make a direct comparison.

Overheal

ChristopherUno wrote: »

I don't think people really realise how much living in this regime has stifled ingenuity and mental capacity. I saw a guy on an airplane in his uniform push the light bulb seven times to try turn it off, the airhostess had to come over and show him it was the little yellow button with the light bulb on it right beside it.

Thats a terrible example; you don't fly much, do you. Depending on who you're flying with you could very easily have to press the light itself to turn it on or off. Sometimes your call host/hostess button is above your head or in your armrest. Its like a game to these airlines, the sick bastards

Head The Wall

You don't attempt to drive through a wall seven times before you realise you cant do it.

Rosahane

alboco wrote: »

The most powerful always attract the most criticism, the US's problem will be when people no longer criticise it ! Mind they will probably be afraid of china then to criticise china !:D

So true.

Compared to the much criticised US there is not much internal criticism of their regimes from within China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Syria etc. etc. etc.

...not unless they are addicted to electric shock treatment or want an extreme manucure;)

Overheal

Head The Wall wrote: »

You don't attempt to drive through a wall seven times before you realise you cant do it.

I dunno man, I let myself get shocked by a bare contact on my vacuum cleaner 3 times yesterday before I decided to go into the shed and find the electrical tape. You'd think "Dont hold it there" would have been enough but Noooo it was right on a perfect spot for your hand to go when you're cleaning under vanities and sinks. My pinky still tingles a bit.

ChristopherUno

Overheal wrote: »

Thats a terrible example; you don't fly much, do you. Depending on who you're flying with you could very easily have to press the light itself to turn it on or off. Sometimes your call host/hostess button is above your head or in your armrest. Its like a game to these airlines, the sick bastards

This was merely the most recent and hence most fresh in my memory. Actually I fly quite a lot, most recently several hours ago. And one thing I've noticed is that five year old kids generally get it on the 3rd or 4th try, especially when there's a big yellow button right beside the light with a light bulb symbol on it, as there was on the plane in question. So if I were a citizen of China I'd like my army's soldiers to have the same level of initiative as a five year old child, or preferably higher. And that after seven attempts he called over the air hostess to help was sadly unsurprising.

But anyway, the thread isn't about China's military capacity, I'm sorry I dragged this a little off topic. I heard something in the news about North Korea firing shells across the sea border a day or two ago but the report was in Chinese so I didn't catch it all, anyone know what happened there? What was the South Korean/American response (and China too)?