North Korea openly threatens EMP attack for the first time, changing the game

[spud_meister]

Well when he (or maybe china) starts threatening your home, serious threats that could maybe be carried out, we'd see how much you like it. My guess is, not so much.

http://www.news.com.au/world/north-...e/news-story/2cf2f736bf4e530e59f99e8d04d913b3

Australia gets threatened for being an ally of the US. Starting a war with NK is not going to result in just regime change and refugees heading to third world nations, there would be millions of civilian deaths from a conventional war, and orders of magnitude more from a nuclear strike. If only the US would face consequences from the folly you advocate, I wouldn't say a word against it, but you're willing to sacrifice allies to avoid facing a risk many other countries are forced to face, and that's just bull****.

 

[countryboy]

But a statement from the rogue regime took things to a whole new level. The North said it had tested an H-bomb that was “a multi-functional thermonuclear nuke with great destructive power which can be detonated at high altitudes for super-powerful EMP (electromagnetic pulse) attack according to strategic goals.”

This is the first time it has publicly mentioned its interest and ability in an EMP attack, a devastating weapon that could have catastrophic consequences for North America, the West and their closer neighbours.

An EMP attack, as I detail in my new book Pulse Attack, is a nuclear detonation that occurs in the atmosphere and creates a waveform that can take down the electrical grid below.

In the worst case scenario, this wouldn’t just shut off the power for minutes or hours, but weeks or even months, due to serious damage to transformer stations and other integral elements of our power infrastructure.

North Korea openly threatens EMP attack for the first time, changing the game |


When a person points a gun at you and threatens to shoot you, would you be justified to shoot him if you had the opportunity to do so?


And an EMP doesn’t even have to be particularly well aimed. 65,000 feet well spaced over the USA would put us back to the 1880’s lifestyle without 1880’s infrastructure. The Amish wouldn’t notice too much, but the rest of us would have a very, very bad problem.

The Amish rely on power much more than people realize. Not every Amish person is a farmer or rancher. They have jobs in the real world, they own vehicles and modern power tools they use for work. They just don't drive the vehicles they own. They also consume the same goods as we do. They shop at Walmart and Lowe's and Home Depot. So yes, the Amish would be heavily impacted by an EMP attack.

 

[countryboy]

Yes indeed the NK can claim anything they care to claim but there is no indication they have fusion bombs just to start with.

An given what we know about EMP it would take one hell of a big fusion bomb to do any wide spread harm to the US.

So all in all I would not loss a moment of sleep over such an attack by NK.

Um, yeah. They're referred to as hydrogen bombs. And on what do you base the above bolded comment?

 

[X Factor]

You're wanting to potentially end millions of lives over a threat?

I'm puzzled why you think we should be just ok with constant threats, Spud. Why is this all on us while NK gets a pass in your mind?

 

[countryboy]

This is what worries me about Trump.

Staff: It's not necessary Mr. President, we have a diplomatic solution.

Trump: Mr. Vice President, Mr. Secretary, the missiles are flying. Hallelujah, Halleluja!

Soooo, why aren't you worried about Kim Jong-un? :roll:

 

[spud_meister]

I'm puzzled why you think we should be just ok with constant threats, Spud. Why is this all on us while NK gets a pass in your mind?

Why does North Korea get a pass? Because NK's threats are just that, threats. North Korea doesn't have a history of starting wars. Why do you believe millions of innocent civilians deserve to die because your nation was threatened?

 

[X Factor]

North Korea threatens Australia with nuclear strike over US allegiance

Australia gets threatened for being an ally of the US. Starting a war with NK is not going to result in just regime change and refugees heading to third world nations, there would be millions of civilian deaths from a conventional war, and orders of magnitude more from a nuclear strike. If only the US would face consequences from the folly you advocate, I wouldn't say a word against it, but you're willing to sacrifice allies to avoid facing a risk many other countries are forced to face, and that's just bull****.

So then what makes you condemn the U.S and not NK?

 

[BillRM]

Um, yeah. They're referred to as hydrogen bombs. And on what do you base the above bolded comment?

There is no indication at all that they have a hydrogen bomb other then their statements.

A 100 kilo ton blast is not proof of a hydrogen bomb.

 

[countryboy]

There is no indication at all that they have a hydrogen bomb other then their statements.

A 100 kilo ton blast is not proof of a hydrogen bomb.

So we just ignore the threats?

 

[X Factor]

Why does North Korea get a pass? Because NK's threats are just that, threats. North Korea doesn't have a history of starting wars. Why do you believe millions of innocent civilians deserve to die because your nation was threatened?

How many Americans would you like to see die before you think the US would be justified in not just being as cool with it as you are?

 

[spud_meister]

So then what makes you condemn the U.S and not NK?

Because I'm on a US message board, talking with US citizens about the US starting a war...

 

[spud_meister]

How many Americans would you like to see die before you think the US would be justified in not just being as cool with it as you are?

I don't want to see anyone die, unlike those advocating for war.

 

[X Factor]

So we just ignore the threats?

Not just threats, apparently. Let'em kill off a few of us, because US life is not innocent and is, therefore, worth less.

 

[X Factor]

I don't want to see anyone die, unlike those advocating for war.

Are American lives worth less, since we're not as innocent as you perceive NK to be? Was that your implication earlier?

 

[countryboy]

Not just threats, apparently. Let'em kill off a few of us, because US life is not innocent and is, therefore, worth less.

Yeah, I love the "if they strike first, then we're really gonna give them the what for". :roll:

 

[spud_meister]

Are American lives worth less, since we're not as innocent as NK? Was that your implication earlier?

No. American lives are worth just as much as North Korean lives, in general anyway, obviously Kim's life has negative value. Again, why should millions die because your country was threatened? I'm answering your questions, have a go at answering mine.

 

[X Factor]

Yeah, I love the "if they strike first, then we're really gonna give them the what for". :roll:

I don't buy that for a minute because every single reason why we shouldn't ever respond to anything NK does will apply no matter what they do. Now it's don't do anything about threats, then it would become, ok, they launched a missile at you, no big deal, then, ok, they killed a few of you, you want millions of people to die just over a few dead Americans?

 

[Serenity]

Not just threats, apparently. Let'em kill off a few of us, because US life is not innocent and is, therefore, worth less.

Stop it. Spud never said that at all.

 

[BillRM]

So we just ignore the threats?

abil

No we give a known liar credibility on his claims of ownership of super weapons without any indication that he have such weapons and in the case of a wide spread EMP weapon no indication that such a weapon exist in any nation arsenal including the US.

 

[countryboy]

abil

No we give a known liar credibility on his claims of ownership of super weapons without any indication that he have such weapons and in the case of a wide spread EMP weapon no indication that such a weapon exist in any nation arsenal including the US.

Yeeeah, sorry, I only speak English.

 

[X Factor]

No. American lives are worth just as much as North Korean lives, in general anyway, obviously Kim's life has negative value. Again, why should millions die because your country was threatened? I'm answering your questions, have a go at answering mine.

Sorry, which millions? If I understand your argument, we respond to threats, then NK kills millions of people, but that's fine if they do that because that would actually be the US's doing? You didn't answer how many dead Americans it should take before you think the US would be justified in responding. Is there some point where enough Americans would justify a response to you or would your argument be still in favor doing nothing no matter what?

 

[X Factor]

Stop it. Spud never said that at all.

Sorry, you're right, but he does refer often to "innocent" lives and he's not referring to American lives, right? So it isn't about worth more/less, but rather about guilt/innocence.

 

[spud_meister]

Sorry, which millions? If I understand your argument, we respond to threats, then NK kills millions of people, but that's fine if they do that because that would actually be the US's doing? You didn't answer how many dead Americans it should take before you think the US would be justified in responding. Is there some point where enough Americans would justify a response to you or would your argument be still in favor doing no matter what?

Which millions? The millions of Koreans, both north and south, as a direct result of armed conflict between the US and NK. The millions of Chinese as a result of the displaced Korean population fleeing north from war, and the resulting waves of famine and disease. The millions in Japan, if NK decides to strike at US allies. The millions in the US, if NK can launch a nuclear ICBM.

North Korea gains nothing from striking the US, it's chasing nuclear weapons solely as a deterrent factor, to ensure it can maintain its independence as a sovereign nation. The threats are just that, threats, so Kim's regime can look tough.

The US would be justified in responding when NK posed a real and credible threat to the US, at the moment, and for the foreseeable future, that is not the case.

Now Xy, why do you believe threats, just threats, from NK warrant starting a war that would cause so much misery and suffering, potentially to your fellow countrymen and allied nations?

 

[Serenity]

Sorry, you're right, but he does refer often to "innocent" lives and he's not referring to American lives, right? So it isn't about worth more/less, but rather about guilt/innocence.

He's referring to all innocent lives that may be affected if a peaceful resolution is not found. Mine, yours, his, anyone who could be affected by serious escalations. Which would also obviously include NK citizens whose only crime is to be unfortunate enough to live in a Country who happens to be under the rule of King Jong Un.

 

[Serenity]

Which millions? The millions of Koreans, both north and south, as a direct result of armed conflict between the US and NK. The millions of Chinese as a result of the displaced Korean population fleeing north from war, and the resulting waves of famine and disease. The millions in Japan, if NK decides to strike at US allies. The millions in the US, if NK can launch a nuclear ICBM.

North Korea gains nothing from striking the US, it's chasing nuclear weapons solely as a deterrent factor, to ensure it can maintain its independence as a sovereign nation. The threats are just that, threats, so Kim's regime can look tough.

The US would be justified in responding when NK posed a real and credible threat to the US, at the moment, and for the foreseeable future, that is not the case.

Now Xy, why do you believe threats, just threats, from NK warrant starting a war that would cause so much misery and suffering, potentially to your fellow countrymen and allied nations?

Extra like. Well said.