Pentagon: North Korean Missiles Can Reach The United States

[DA60]

Alas, my heart fair breaks... :lol:

The guy says he dismisses what I type.

And then he responds - with another rather childish post - to the very next post I make.

Lol.


That's it Goshin...keep acting EXACTLY as I expect you will.

When you can have a straight up talk without hiding behind the Moderator moniker and in a place with actual freedom of speech - let me know.


have a nice day.

 

[Wiggen]

Neither North Korea being a victim nor support of North Korea using nuclear weapons have any bearing on how difficult it would be for the US to engage in a military operation against North Korea, mostly because of its alliance with the People's Republic of China.

If the US was to engage in such military operations, the PRC would intervene on North Korea's behalf in order to maintain a buffer state on the Korean Peninsula. In which case there would be war between the US and the PRC. Which would be quite catastrophic.

China will not risk it's survival as a nation for North Korea, especially if the North Koreans are clearly the agressors. Do you honestly believe the Chinese would risk everthing to assist a lunatic in North Korea.

 

[Wiggen]

They are that crazy.
And then we also have to deal with China if we respond.
So no they wouldn't be gone in a heartbeat.

And we likely wouldn't endanger South Korea either by responding Nukes.
So no, they would not be gone in a heart beat.

So if North Korea launched a nuclear warhead at the United States and killed say a quarter of a million americans, we wouldn't respond with nuclear weapons? Right.:lamo

 

[Wiggen]

Those people are insane. They talk like insane people. They behave like insane people. I had a patient once who was known for trashing the offices of her providers. She trashed my office one day. I had a lot of plants in it and there wasn't one inch on the sofa, chairs, floor, or my desk that didn't have flower pot dirt on it. But she didn't damage one certificate or mess up anything costly. That is N Korea. They will lob a nuke at the US, but they will make it hit where nothing is really harmed except the air. When that happens, we blow them off the planet.

I'm glad you trust their targeting capablities. I don't.

 

[Wiggen]

To be honest, I wonder how quick China would be to jump in on the side of North Korea once again.

Remember, they did so once before, and basically had their keisters handed to them because of it. And at that time, their economy was not dependent on export like it is today. If North Korea attacked South Korea again, it would once again not be a US operation (although the US would likely provide most of the firepower), but a UN operation. I would expect it would follow along these lines:

1. The US quickly mobilizes it's forces and responds to the conflict.
2. The UN starts having emergency meetings, issues a condemnation.
3. NATO mobilizes and responds to the conflict.
4. The UN has more meetings, issues an ultimatum.
5. Australia and other nations will respond to the conflict.
6. The UN finally gets involved, and more forces come to the aid of South Korea.

And considering the buying power of the US (not to mention the NATO nations and others that would likely come to help), the PRC will likely sit it out other then providing some covert aid. This is no longer 1950, and do not expect China to send 1.3 million troops into the grinder. And if they were foolish enough to try, expect nation after nation to place an internal embargo on China and see most of their trade come to a crashing halt.

China knows this, and they are not stupid. If they do assist N. Korea, it would be along the lines that the Soviets did 60 years ago. Some equipment, some advisors, maybe some pilots, but that is about all. They simply have to much to loose this time.



That would be nothing to the effect of the loss almost immediately of over 1/3 of their import-export market. And since there are many other nations that would likely jump in as well (NATO for one), China would soon be almost completely crippled economically.

Most do not realize the house of cards that China has built itself. The majority of their economy is based upon taking or importing raw materials, and exporting finished products. The US alone is almost 1/3 of that figure, and Europe is another 1/3. So with the US and a big chunk of NATO involved in a conflict with China, do you think they will continue to trade with China?

There is an old saying, "If you owe the bank $100 that's your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem."

In 1950, China could alienate most of the world, because their economy was small and almost entirely internal. 60 years later this is no longer the case, their economy is almost entirely dependent on foreign trade. And none of this "trade" is of critical importance to the rest of the world. COSCO furniture, ePhones, and lots of other consumer and light-luxury goods that a nation can do without and other nations can build.

Compared to what they would loose in trade and asset removal and "brain drain", the loss of "debt cancellation" is nothing.

Great post. People who think China would risk everything it has for the loon in Pyongyang simply don't understand the Chinese leadership.

 

[Wiggen]

it's time for us to be a country again. we aren't the world's police force. we've been in a state of perpetual war for most of the twentieth century, and for all of the twenty first. enough.

So if the North Koreans launch a missile, nuclear or otherwise at the United States, what would your response be? 'We're tired of war, so bomb away all you want?'

 

[Excon]

So if North Korea launched a nuclear warhead at the United States and killed say a quarter of a million americans, we wouldn't respond with nuclear weapons? Right.:lamo

If it was able to get through our defenses, sadly, most likely not.
Too much at stake.

 

[samsmart]

China will not risk it's survival as a nation for North Korea, especially if the North Koreans are clearly the agressors. Do you honestly believe the Chinese would risk everthing to assist a lunatic in North Korea.

That may be true.

But I also think China won't allow the US to have anymore influence in Asia than possible.

And especially won't allow a united Korea under the auspices of the US.

So the question really is would the US risk a war with both China and North Korea?

 

[Helix]

So if the North Koreans launch a missile, nuclear or otherwise at the United States, what would your response be? 'We're tired of war, so bomb away all you want?'

would our response (and the global response) to a nuclear attack be preemptive war?

 

[Oozlefinch]

They're getting some kind of payments, in actual cash, right? At least the interest, I presume. That is ~30%? of the total trade US to China. You noted the trade loss (I'll presume Europe stays out of a minor/indirect conflict). That trade, 2012, was ~110b. The interest alone on ~1.2t+ is what I presume China is paid in cash, as interest on debt.

Are you gonna tell me we never give them actual cash payment on debt? They can't be that gullible.

Interest on bonds or notes is paid at the maturity of the bond or note.

Look, these are mostly 10 to 20 or 30 years Treasury Notes. Paid only at the maturity of the note. Until that 10 or 20 or 30 years has passed, the holder gets nothing.

 

[Maenad]

That may be true.

But I also think China won't allow the US to have anymore influence in Asia than possible.

And especially won't allow a united Korea under the auspices of the US.

So the question really is would the US risk a war with both China and North Korea?

When I was in China in 2002, there were magzines out in the hotel lobby in English which states that China is going to reclaim all the territories that were once theirs. I don't really know if Korea was ever part of China during any dynasty. But if it was, you could be wrong about that.

 

[Wiggen]

would our response (and the global response) to a nuclear attack be preemptive war?

If there is a nuclear attack, any war would not be pre-emptive. It would be the Second and final act of a war that had already begun.

 

[Wiggen]

If it was able to get through our defenses, sadly, most likely not.
Too much at stake.

I disagree. Any nuclear attack on the United States by any nation would bring an immediate and devastating response. To not do so would invite yet another attack.

 

[Helix]

If there is a nuclear attack, any war would not be pre-emptive. It would be the Second and final act of a war that had already begun.

i think war is a piss poor way to solve problems, but i don't envision a scenario in which we could avoid responding to a nuclear missile attack on US soil. that being said, it's a far cry from the preemptive war that hawks seem to feel is the solution to every new global threat.

 

[MarineTpartier]

N Korea's been beating this drum for years. They won't do it. And if they do, they'll get wiped off the face of the earth. They know that and it's what prevents this threat from ever being credible.

 

[Excon]

I disagree. Any nuclear attack on the United States by any nation would bring an immediate and devastating response. To not do so would invite yet another attack.

There is too much at stake for that to be the actual response.

 

[Wiggen]

So in your world, a nuclear attack on the United States calls for no nuclear response from us? what do you think the response would be to a quarter of a million dead americans, courtesy of a nuclear attack from North Korea? A strongly worded protest to the United Nations?

 

[Wiggen]

i think war is a piss poor way to solve problems, but i don't envision a scenario in which we could avoid responding to a nuclear missile attack on US soil. that being said, it's a far cry from the preemptive war that hawks seem to feel is the solution to every new global threat.

Yes, but we're not talking about pre-emtive wars here. We're talking about the likely American response to a nuclear attack from North Korea on American soil. It's a no-brainer. North Korea would cease to exist as a nation.

 

[Helix]

Yes, but we're not talking about pre-emtive wars here. We're talking about the likely American response to a nuclear attack from North Korea on American soil. It's a no-brainer. North Korea would cease to exist as a nation.

yep, pretty much.

 

[blackjack50]

Sounds nice.

To bad you never know what you may end up with after the dust falls.

Are you willing to be responsible for a repeat of the Iraqi mass graves if it fails?

If it works, do you want to see a possibly even more fanatical government take it's place? It is easy to start a civil war, much harder to guide it. Remember, some in "The West" gave initial support to the Bolsheviks and National Socialists in Russia and Germany, because either one was seen as an improvement over the current or other potential groups. And look how those decisions turned out.

I mean, look at that wonderful Civil War in Cambodia a few decades ago. I sure as hell do not ever want to see a repeat of anything like that.

Honestly. North Korea is an example of why you need a foreign service department like the CIA. It is also the reason you guide someone into leadership...specifically someone not in the NK military and someone a part of the resistance against the current opposition.

Civil wars suck. Sometimes they are necessary when dealing with a saber rattling nuke having whacko rogue state like NK. How would you feel if they detonated a suitcase nuke in the US or South Korea.

 

[Oozlefinch]

Great post. People who think China would risk everything it has for the loon in Pyongyang simply don't understand the Chinese leadership.

Thanks.

One thing I do when considering something like this is analyze. And in this case, people do not seem to understand that the China of 2013 is not the China of 1950.

In the Korean War, China lost far more troops and equipment then it could afford to loose. They lost an entire generation of their youth, and soured relations with the other nations for decades. It was over 20 years until they finally got at least cordial relations with the United States, and many other Western nations.

And while China can be very belligerent, it also knows that if their economy took the sudden crash that would result from the loss of US and other nations boycotting their goods, they might very well have a serious internal revolt. Mass unemployment that would result from a loss of over 1/3 of their GDP could very well spell the end of the current regime, and I seriously doubt that they would be willing to risk that for North Korea.

 

[Oozlefinch]

i think war is a piss poor way to solve problems, but i don't envision a scenario in which we could avoid responding to a nuclear missile attack on US soil. that being said, it's a far cry from the preemptive war that hawks seem to feel is the solution to every new global threat.

Can you name any sane "hawks" that suggest pre-emptive nuclear strikes in the current age?

The only ones I hear of are the odd nutjobs that absolutely nobody takes seriously.

 

[Helix]

Can you name any sane "hawks" that suggest pre-emptive nuclear strikes in the current age?

The only ones I hear of are the odd nutjobs that absolutely nobody takes seriously.

mostly keyboard commandos. i have yet to hear someone in power actually promoting preemptive war against NK.

 

[Oozlefinch]

That may be true.

But I also think China won't allow the US to have anymore influence in Asia than possible.

And especially won't allow a united Korea under the auspices of the US.

So the question really is would the US risk a war with both China and North Korea?

Actually, I think I would question that a bit. And with several good reasons.

First, I think that North Korea has become somewhat of an embarrassment for China. They are unpredictable, antagonistic, and the source of a fair amount of refugees. And like Cuba during the days of the Soviet Union, they are having to spend large amounts of money to keep them propped up.

Then secondly, look at the history of the last major reunification, Germany. When the "wall came down", Germany had to spend over a decade actually absorbing the former East Germany. Over a decade of internal strife, adjustments in absorbing a nation that was entirely Marxist based so currency, income, housing, and everything else was totally different from that in West Germany. Even the internal power and phone systems were different, costing tens of billions of US dollars in trying to tie the two systems together.

And even today over 20 years later, many former East German citizens tend to think of themselves as "second class citizens".

And also the absorption caused the German Government to swing even further to the Left then it had been before. Because even though many East Germans were soured on Marxism, they still believed in a great many Socialist beliefs, so their voting block caused a shift in internal politics.

Do not think this would be any different in a "New Korea". Korea would have to easily spend a decade or more absorbing North Korea into South Korea. A decade in which Korean production would likely be reduced, and China could expand both in overseas markets, as well as in exports to a Korea that now has a greater GDP and more money to spend.

 

[VanceMack]

N Korea's been beating this drum for years. They won't do it. And if they do, they'll get wiped off the face of the earth. They know that and it's what prevents this threat from ever being credible.

Absolutely. Kim wants attention and most importantly he wants someone to pay him to make nice. IF he launched he would launch against South Korea. The most likely response would be a controlled counterattack by the SK with the US and China's approval. They will strike back at a NK military facility, and then everyone will sit back and let the dust settle. Europe will cluck their tongues a few times but will be as ineffective as usual, the US will issue a condemnation of North Koreas actions and express their commitment to the people of South Korea. China will issue some milk toasty response that will basically say it was a bad thing but will stop short of an outright condemnation. The UN will make overtures that will amount to buying Kim off with an agreement to do some site inspections that will get blown off. And that will be the end of it.