Justification For US Military Attack On North Korea

ecofarm said:

Seriously?

Click to expand...

Yes and read the edit


Deception on Capitol Hill - NYTimes.com

Saddam Hussein committed plenty of atrocities, but not, apparently, this one. The teen-ager's accusation, at first verified by Amnesty International, was later refuted by that group as well as by other independent human rights monitors. But the issue is not so much the accuracy of the testimony as the identity and undisclosed bias of the witness.
How did the girl's testimony come about? It was arranged by the big public relations firm of Hill & Knowlton on behalf of a client, the Kuwaiti-sponsored Citizens for a Free Kuwait, which was then pressing Congress for military intervention. Mr. Lantos knew the girl's identity but concealed it from the public and from the other caucus co-chairman, Representative John E. Porter of Illinois

Click to expand...

Not mentioned as a CIA operation, but to be able to get AM to believe it, would have required a good backstory

Lord Tammerlain said:

Yes and read the edit


Deception on Capitol Hill - NYTimes.com


Not mentioned as a CIA operation, but to be able to get AM to believe it, would have required a good backstory

Click to expand...

Did the CIA manage to get a fake news report broadcast on NK state news, or did the CIA convince every other country to pretend that broadcast exists?

Do you believe no one monitors that broadcast?

ecofarm said:

Did the CIA manage to get a fake news report broadcast on NK state news, or did the CIA convince every other country to pretend that broadcast exists?

Do you believe no one monitors that broadcast?

Click to expand...

My mistake I was going by the title from renae's thread yesterday of a strike on Guam.

From the link above

The North Korean Strategic Force of the Korean People's Army is "seriously examining the plan for an enveloping strike at Guam through simultaneous fire of four Hwasong-12 intermediate-range strategic ballistic rockets in order to interdict the enemy forces on major military bases on Guam and to signal a crucial warning to the US," the statement said.
The Hwasong-12 rockets to be launched by the KPA would cross the sky above Shimane, Hiroshima and Koichi prefectures of Japan, and would fly 3,356.7 kilometers for 1,065 seconds and hit the waters 30 to 40 kilometers away from Guam, according to the statement

Click to expand...

Dragonfly said:

IYHO, what would reasonably justify a US military attack on North Korea?

Not just a warning shot, but an actual planned and orchestrated strike using deadly force.

Words alone?

Outright attempt at strike on US mainland?

Strike against South Korea?

Attempt to hit Guam?

Are we justified as of today (August 9th, 2017)?

Click to expand...

We are justified as of today, as North Korea has issued credible threats to the United States of America, is in violation of their agreements to cease pursuing nuclear weapons.

This justification is due partly to the fact that the threshold is lower than in other scenarios, for a series of reasons including but not limited to:

1. The Kim Regime has used strategic insanity as a means of pursuing goals, meaning no one can trust them not to take a destructive action simply because not doing so would be wise
2. We are still, technically, authorized to be at war with them, as the Korean War has never ended; we are still merely in a ceasefire.

MaggieD said:

Yeah, that's the ticket. He is a psychopath. You are a hyperbolic personality.

And, while Im thinking of it, this situation has developed over 15 or 20 years with each POTUS kicking the can. We should be furious with our gvmt for allowing this to happen at all. NOW it's a crisis.

Click to expand...

Gosh I'm so glad there aren't other, dangerous, say, middle-eastern nations where-persia-used-to-be that we are currently pursuing the same brilliant strategy with.

Lord Tammerlain said:

To prevent NK from responding from a US military strike. It would have to a surprise and large enough to take out the artillery the missile sites and all the potential bunker sites. That would require a build up of forces. The minute Chinese or Russian intel see the US attack I am sure they would inform NK. Leading NK to use its nukes in whatever way it can as a last ditch FU to the US, SK and Japan.

The only realistic way to limit deaths to NK is to use a nuclear surprise attack, or expect to see mass deaths among SK and probably Japanese

Click to expand...

NKorean LRA is the big, hairy problem there, no doubt. Short of deploying our own nuclear, I don't think eliminating that is a possibility, at least, not in the first day of firing.

I'm not so positive of the bolded, however.

And yet - Guam isn't freaking the F out....

Guam residents stoic in the face of North Korean missile threat - CNN

Arriving on the island Wednesday, life appears to be proceeding as normal.

Asian travelers, mainly Japanese and South Koreans, are still landing at the airport and it's tough to find a room at one of the vacation resorts dotted around the island. Tourist arrivals in July hit a record for that month.

"Welcome to Ground Zero," a US customs official joked on arrival, aware of the North Korean threat but laughing it off with a bit of gallows humor.

Click to expand...

Instead of a public "dick waving" competition, should the US just ignore that little tubby bastard in NK?

Isn't giving NK all this global attention exactly what they want?

cpwill said:

Gosh I'm so glad there aren't other, dangerous, say, middle-eastern nations where-persia-used-to-be that we are currently pursuing the same brilliant strategy with.

Click to expand...

Right.you.are.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40883372

"The Hwasong-12 rockets to be launched by the KPA [Korean People's Army] will cross the sky above Shimane, Hiroshima and Koichi [Kochi] Prefectures of Japan," state news agency KCNA said, quoting army chief General Kim Rak Gyom.

"They will fly 3,356.7km for 1,065 seconds and hit the waters 30-40km away from Guam."
The Hwasong missiles are North Korea's domestically produced medium and long-range weapons.

Click to expand...

Interesting tidbit from Guam's Governor:

The governor of Guam addressed the North's new statement on Thursday, telling Reuters news agency that North Korea usually likes to be unpredictable and has fired surprise missiles in the past.

"They're now telegraphing their punch, which means they don't want to have any misunderstandings. I think that's a position of fear," said Governor Eddie Calvo.

Click to expand...

And some other points worth considering beyond just the rhetoric:

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has sought to reassure Americans that North Korea does not pose an imminent threat.
On Wednesday, he said the situation had not dramatically changed over the past few days, and that Americans "should sleep well at night".

South Korea's military says it has not seen any unusual action in the North that might indicate a provocation.

Click to expand...

North Korea: Guam strike plan to be ready in days - CNNPolitics

A South Korean military official says that there have been no indications that Pyongyang is readying a strike."Currently, there is no unusual movement related to a direct provocation," South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff spokesman Roh Jae-cheon said in a press briefing.

Click to expand...

North Korea is "trying to ratchet up the threat to create political pressure in the US and elsewhere to get talks," says Carl Schuster, a Hawaii Pacific University professor and former director of operations at the US Pacific Command's Joint Intelligence Center."They've noticed that we've never sought conflict with an adversary who can hit our territory (and they) hope that this (threat) will force a more diplomatic line."

Click to expand...

Meredith Sumpter, Asia director of the Eurasia Group and a long-time Asia analyst, says that despite the escalation in tensions, "we are no closer to actual military confrontation now then we were before."Kim Jong Un says a lot of things and he makes a lot of threats, but at the end of the day he knows that if he should undertake any kind of military strike against the US and its allies, the counter response will likely be the end of his regime," she told CNN.

Click to expand...

This is an absolutely no win situation.

Strategic patience has brought us to the current "crisis" A military strike will result
in at least many thousands dead if not more. A missile hitting the United States.
9-11 a thousand time over!

Common Sense 1 said:

This is an absolutely no win situation.

Strategic patience has brought us to the current "crisis" A military strike will result
in at least many thousands dead if not more. A missile hitting the United States.
9-11 a thousand time over!

Click to expand...

So the only question is, who has the moral high ground?
Who strikes first?
Who starts the blood bath?

Or, like the decades before, do we each do nothing but shake our phallic sabers and claim a verbal victory?

According to at least one set of analysts, if you look at their public statements, they are suggesting a four-missile launch bracketing Guam.

cpwill said:

According to at least one set of analysts, if you look at their public statements, they are suggesting a four-missile launch bracketing Guam.

Click to expand...

Yes. It appears they are potentially going to send 4 missiles into the ocean. They're announcing it in advance.

Again, into the ocean.

So they might prove they can fly some rockets far enough to hit Guam, but the target is technically water at this point.

Not sure that justifies any kind of military retaliation from the USofA.

Might be cool to see if Japan shoots down the missiles if/as they fly over Japan.

Dragonfly said:

Yes. It appears they are potentially going to send 4 missiles into the ocean. They're announcing it in advance.

Again, into the ocean.

So they might prove they can fly some rockets far enough to hit Guam, but the target is technically water at this point.

Not sure that justifies any kind of military retaliation from the USofA.

Might be cool to see if Japan shoots down the missiles if/as they fly over Japan.

Click to expand...

It absolutely justifies military action - the question is whether or not it is the wise course of action. Incrementalism and allowing the Kims to take "just another step further because - we promise! - the next time, boy howdy, we are really gonna stop them" has gotten us to the point where they have miniaturized nukes, have declared their intent to use them on the U.S., and are shooting missiles at us.

cpwill said:

It absolutely justifies military action - the question is whether or not it is the wise course of action. Incrementalism and allowing the Kims to take "just another step further because - we promise! - the next time, boy howdy, we are really gonna stop them" has gotten us to the point where they have miniaturized nukes, have declared their intent to use them on the U.S., and are shooting missiles at us.

Click to expand...

No. They're not shooting missiles at us. They claim they might shoot some into the ocean. Near Guam.

We've shot all kinds of crap into all kinds of places. Were we shooting them "at someone"?

Dragonfly said:

No. They're not shooting missiles at us. They claim they might shoot some into the ocean. Near Guam

Click to expand...

"Hey, I have always dreamed of killing you, and just managed to buy a gun and some bullets. You mind standing over by that wall while I just sorta shoot 'around' you? LOLs, no worries, I'm an awful shot, but I super-duper intend to just draw an outline, maybe shoot an apple off your head."

No thanks.

When you shoot missiles at Guam from North Korea, not only are you shooting missiles into airspace that we are required by treaty to defend with our full military might, but you are shooting at American territory and American citizens. We absolutely have the right to shoot right back.

We've shot all kinds of crap into all kinds of places. Were we shooting them "at someone"?

Click to expand...

Absolutely - often people we were trying to kill. But we have never tested missiles by shooting them at (say) China or Russia, after threatening to nuke them. Because that would be considered an attack, and we don't want to attack those folks unless we are darn well ready to do so.

Lord Tammerlain said:

NK despite what people say will not just launch a nuclear weapon without a plan/reason for it. Just because it can is not one of the reasons it will.

So if NK was going to use one as a first strike, you would see a mobilization over and above what is normal for NK of its ground and missile forces. So for there to a real concern expect to see at the majority of NK missile launchers prepped and ready to go, its army massing at the SK boarder at an even higher ready state than already exists and so on.

It would have to part of plan that could result in the NK leadership not being wiped out from the counter attack

Take out Guam, US bases in Japan, and invade SK as quickly as possible. Then hope that China, Russia, and the rest of the world can somehow put enough pressure on the US not to nuke NK back. While hoping for more military supplies from China or Russia. None of which is likely so a NK first strike is extremely unlikely. Being nuclear gets NK to play at the big boys table however, and enjoy a higher level of freedom with lower fears of direct attacks on NK territory. In other words having the nukes but not using them helps make the Kim regime more stable and have a higher chance of remaining in power for much longer. Within 24 hrs of using one, the Kim regime will be removed from the face of the earth

Click to expand...

Just so.

Dragonfly said:

Yes. It appears they are potentially going to send 4 missiles into the ocean. They're announcing it in advance.

Again, into the ocean.

So they might prove they can fly some rockets far enough to hit Guam, but the target is technically water at this point.

Not sure that justifies any kind of military retaliation from the USofA.

Might be cool to see if Japan shoots down the missiles if/as they fly over Japan.

Click to expand...

I sure hope they don't accidentally hit Guam, or Japan.

I choose “already justified - hit them now - hit them hard”. I guess I would be considered a war hawk which I find a bit silly as my interest is peace and responsibility reductions to our military industrial complex. The reality however is North Korea is a very dangerous threat set to destabilize key assets for the United States. Her actions promotes excesive defensive spending and international deployment. In this case in South Korea/Japan not to mention sours our relationship with china. Rogue allies have a history of starting wars - NK is one such candidate. Diplomacy has a long record of setting us back further with this type of threat and our military is capable of a decisive strike/war at this time but it is unknown if that situionation will always be the case. There is a reason paying kidnappers hurts ones longterm safety. The longterm plan on this one is bolster with a strategic ally in South Korea who can lead redevlopment in the aftermath.

International law is the only problem I see here and I have nothing to add on that matter it likely not legal. Any decisive strike though is almost certain to cost less now then allow this threat to grow and cause untold damage down the road. We have other matters in this arena to focus on: the south china sea, tension with Russia and failed middle eastern offensives leaves us needing to clean house. The tredies however are what they are....

This talk of possible casualties being on our hands though seem almost disgusting from my point of view. We know the regime is killing and torturing millions everyday it goes on and only likely to increase the toll with time and hit mor americans and our allies….we are not the worlds police men and we have no obligation to help these people. Evil though is evil and to pretend we’re the aggressors is absurd. It easy to be pulled in to something worse, like intervening with domestic violence, but sometimes a hard stand is the best stance, and in this context I'd think it would be, even if we must be very vigilent of very real dangers whenever taking such bold action and good skeptical allies and patriots is an important part of that vigilence.

Who amped this situation up?

iguanaman said:

Or we could just let N. Korea be and eliminate all the deaths. They are the least likely to start a war with us of all our enemies.

Click to expand...

Doesn't it make you feel good knowing we have such a knowledgeable, experienced person in the White House that will navigate us through this potential crisis with great skill? /snark

NIMBY said:

Rewriting history is a fruitless process accentuated by Rumsfeld. Dictators don't have to worry about blaming their predecessors or transitional administrative overlap.

Don't you find it unusual that I don't blame IKE and GHWB for NK's nukes but that you blame Clinton and Obama for damn near everything ?

Click to expand...

Nope. Because Bush did not escape my usual suspects list the first time. Bush may not have extremely followed the failed extortion victim and appeasement policies that clinton and obama used but naming NK as a problem in the "axis of evil" was never going to be enough.

Three Presidents Facing North Korea - A Review of U.S. Foreign Policy | HuffPost

Laying the "I told you so" down now is pointless anyway. Tagging KJI with a lase and dropping an aeronautic iphone on him from space wont be enough either....It is going to get messier before it gets better.

Kicking the can down the road has reached the near end of the road.

NK is on the doorstep of China and Russia but does not threaten them. Ever wonder why? They know the appeasment safe space people are over here and much safer to extort. History has taught them that.

cpwill said:

NKorean LRA is the big, hairy problem there, no doubt. Short of deploying our own nuclear, I don't think eliminating that is a possibility, at least, not in the first day of firing.

I'm not so positive of the bolded, however.

Click to expand...

What is the big rush all of a sudden? Do you even know? I am at a loss to see what is new here. The military never stated it was a viable option either. The civilian casualties will be far too high to justify any invasion with out an all out assault from the North first. That is most certainly not going to happen. The North is a paranoid nation not an aggressive one.

akyron said:

Nope. Because Bush did not escape my usual suspects list the first time. Bush may not have extremely followed the failed extortion victim and appeasement policies that clinton and obama used but naming NK as a problem in the "axis of evil" was never going to be enough.

Three Presidents Facing North Korea - A Review of U.S. Foreign Policy | HuffPost

Laying the "I told you so" down now is pointless anyway. Tagging KJI with a lase and dropping an aeronautic iphone on him from space wont be enough either....It is going to get messier before it gets better.

Kicking the can down the road has reached the near end of the road.

NK is on the doorstep of China and Russia but does not threaten them. Ever wonder why? They know the appeasment safe space people are over here and much safer to extort. History has taught them that.

Click to expand...

Tell me why we should fear N. Korea's weak unproven weaponry when Russia and China have 1000's of sophisticated ICBM's tipped with far more powerful H-Bombs targeted at us right at this moment? N. Korea has had the a-bomb since 2006 and we are still here. N. Korea is the least likely of our ICBM equipped enemies to start a war with us. Leave them alone with their useless toys, nothing to see here.