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

[JackA]

Means + Credible threat = act of war.

Not a good equation. Without means, a threat wouldn't be credible. Also, if by threat you are including the threatening statements coming out of North Korea, these are not acts of war.

 

[Tigerace117]

I feel like I have to keep reminds hawks that in any war scenario Seoul is hit by long range artillery. NK doesn't even need nukes to do that.

NK only wants nukes to defend itself from invasion. They have no plans to invade their neighbors. We're better off just leaving them alone until some NK general has the balls to shoot Kim and take over.

Umm......they've had plans to take over South Korea for more than fifty years. The whole point of nuclear weapons is to try and use them to hold off the rest of the world while their conventional forces try to overrun South Korea.

 

[Tigerace117]

People need to stop freaking out every time NK does something we did sixty+ years ago.

Kim Jong Un does not want to attack us and start a war, nor does he want to invade South Korea, or attack Japan. All of that is just fantasy - from the people that predicted his program was nowhere near this level no less. He simply wants to deter the US and others from trying what we've done all over the world - a military coup. The list of countries we've overthrown because we didn't like their leadership is endless, and we've got an extensive track record of double crossing people after they agree to disarmament. KJU and the NK military are sending us a message: 'don't try any of that **** you try with other regimes' nothing else.

Attacking them would be insane as it would result in a retaliation towards SK, and the loss of life would be on scales not seen in decades.

Better option: Try diplomacy and if that doesn't work, we put missiles in SK, and conduct our own missile tests as a flex of muscle.

Yeah, the list of brutal regimes which oppress their own people mercilessly that we've overthrown is rather long, so I can totally see why Kim Jong Un would be scared.

Are you kidding? "Reunification"--- by any means necessary--- has been the main North Korean goal for the entirety of their existence. Add to that the bad memories left over from the time when Japan was in control, and, well.....can you say "powder keg"?

 

[Tigerace117]

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?

Other than the one they started that's still ongoing, you mean?

 

[X Factor]

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?

Spud, if you don't think threats coupled with nuclear capabilities poses a credible threat to the US, then nothing, in your mind, will ever justify US action, so, if they, at least, kill a few of us, would you support the US then, instead of NK?

 

[joG]

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?

I'm afraid that isn't how international security works or domestic for that matter. You cannot rely on a hope and a prayer. That is, what you are proposing, when you say NK will not attack. Appeasing a ruthless dictator does not work and showing him that extortion works is tantamount to asking for more.

 

[X Factor]

Extra like. Well said.

Mistake

 

[Serenity]

Mistake

What does this mean?

 

[ocean515]

Except that it does illustrate that the lives was referring to were pretty much every one but American.

And the one question you asked that I was interested in reading was, how many American deaths will it take before the US is justified in attacking? That question remained unanswered.

For me, that omission removes the credibility of the argument and the person making it.

 

[X Factor]

What does this mean?

I was mistaken in what I posted.

 

[JackA]

I'm afraid that isn't how international security works or domestic for that matter. You cannot rely on a hope and a prayer. That is, what you are proposing, when you say NK will not attack. Appeasing a ruthless dictator does not work and showing him that extortion works is tantamount to asking for more.

It rather is the way "international security" works. It is not appeasement to defer dropping bombs on a country that hasn't attacked you, and there has been no extortion. What is happening are inflated arguments like yours.

 

[X Factor]

And the one question you asked that I was interested in reading was, how many American deaths will it take before the US is justified in attacking? That question remained unanswered.

For me, that omission removes the credibility of the argument and the person making it.

I'd like an answer too but I made a mistake in that post. I had missed that he did refer to millions in the U.S.. I'd just hope the number would be somewhat less than that before it would be understood that we have a right to defend ourselves.

 

[ocean515]

I'd like an answer too but I made a mistake in that post. I had missed that he did refer to millions in the U.S.. I'd just hope the number would be somewhat less than that before it would be understood that we have a right to defend ourselves.

I think it would be unconscionable, and in fact a treasonous dereliction of duty, for the President of the United States to allow millions to die before responding to a clear and present danger.

That missile NK fired OVER Japan could have been equipped with an EMP. The results could have been devastating.

It seems to me China is running out of excuses to reign in it's puppet. Perhaps the Trump Administration is sending enough signals to get Xi to take care of NK.

That would be preferable to what is becoming more and more inevitable in the absence of China taking action.

 

[X Factor]

Umm......they've had plans to take over South Korea for more than fifty years. The whole point of nuclear weapons is to try and use them to hold off the rest of the world while their conventional forces try to overrun South Korea.

Eh, whatever NK does is fiiiiiiiiine. They're innocent, we're not.

 

[joG]

It rather is the way "international security" works. It is not appeasement to defer dropping bombs on a country that hasn't attacked you, and there has been no extortion. What is happening are inflated arguments like yours.

It is appeasement to allow a country with which one is technically at war to develop nuclear weapons in contradiction to a Security Council Resolution. It's dictator has threatened to use them on our allies and on us. To propose accepting this proliferation is reminiscent of Chamberlain's folly. And American citizens and our allies arguing as you do makes it more probable that the dictator will persist, as he will believe in his impunity. We saw this happen in Iraq, when Saddam thought that two Vetos in the Security Council plus Germany would protect him.

Nope. If the global community does not enforce the Security Council Resolution the SC is irrelevant. The precedent of allowing proliferation means nuclear war becomes probable earlier than would otherwise be the case.

 

[WCH]

So when the US tested H bombs was that a shot across the bow of the world hat deserved the us being attacked?

Yes it was but, our "enemies" were doing it also.

 

[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.

Let me ask you this, Spud. Why are you fine with NK, or anyone, threatening the US?

 

[X Factor]

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

...and blaming the U.S. exclusively.

 

[JackA]

It is appeasement to allow a country with which one is technically at war to develop nuclear weapons in contradiction to a Security Council Resolution. It's dictator has threatened to use them on our allies and on us. To propose accepting this proliferation is reminiscent of Chamberlain's folly. And American citizens and our allies arguing as you do makes it more probable that the dictator will persist, as he will believe in his impunity. We saw this happen in Iraq, when Saddam thought that two Vetos in the Security Council plus Germany would protect him.

Nope. If the global community does not enforce the Security Council Resolution the SC is irrelevant. The precedent of allowing proliferation means nuclear war becomes probable earlier than would otherwise be the case.

False analogies are dangerous when it comes to arguments about war, particularly nuclear war. Chamberlain caved into a territorial demand. North Korea has only flexed its nuclear muscle. We used to flex ours. Your Saddam reference is more to the point. Iraq did nothing to us but we attacked anyway much to our grief and the grief of the people of Iraq.

 

[Goshin]

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****.

Ok.

I got annoyed and spoke without thinking; yeah you're right there, of course you're under threat.


So, what do you suggest? Do we just sit on our thumbs and accept that Kim could pop an H-bomb on or over the US, Japan, Australia, Guam, etc anytime something upsets him sufficiently?

You say he's sane and knows it would be suicide, or at least some are saying that.... I'm not so sure but ok.... what about the next guy?

What about your kid's kids? Is it ok if they end up paying tribute to NK to avoid nuclear blackmail?


Do you want the US to just withdraw from the region and let you and Japan figure out how to handle it?


What's the plan?

 

[PirateMk1]

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.

You don't know any Amish. They would notice. This is why I keep telling people we need to get our buts in gear and get the Reagan style SDI in place.

 

[Flouncy Magoo]

NK is no threat to the US or our allies near them. Stop buying the MSM warmongering BS. They're playing you.

This is pure nonsense:

"America has warned that North Korea is "begging for war" amid fears Kim Jong-un's regime is preparing to launch a ballistic missile.

Nikki Haley, the US Ambassador to the United Nations, on Monday afternoon told an emergency meeting of the Security Council that "enough is enough", adding that while America does not want war, "our country's patience is not unlimited".

Military leaders in South Korea claim to have seen indications that the North is preparing an attack and believe it has successfully miniaturised a nuclear weapon to fit onto an intercontinental ballistic missile."

North Korea nuclear test: US says Kim Jong-un is 'begging for war' as he 'prepares to launch missile' - latest news

You fell for the Iraq lies not once, but twice. Stop being dupes.

 

[PirateMk1]

Ok.

I got annoyed and spoke without thinking; yeah you're right there, of course you're under threat.


So, what do you suggest? Do we just sit on our thumbs and accept that Kim could pop an H-bomb on or over the US, Japan, Australia, Guam, etc anytime something upsets him sufficiently?

You say he's sane and knows it would be suicide, or at least some are saying that.... I'm not so sure but ok.... what about the next guy?

What about your kid's kids? Is it ok if they end up paying tribute to NK to avoid nuclear blackmail?


Do you want the US to just withdraw from the region and let you and Japan figure out how to handle it?


What's the plan?

Make sure NK KNOWS WITH NO DOUBT that even an EMP attack results in annihilation of the ENTIRE country and that we will deliberately STERILIZE the entire country. Nothing not even the roaches make it out alive, bunkers or not. We detonate one of or big ones in a airburst test like we did in the 50's. To emphasize that point. Second and most important we begin immediately restarting the Reagan era SDI program that was envisioned to engage at it's inception over 50,000 simultaneous missiles and decoys of all types. It has now become a necessity the ABM system we have is NOT going to cut the mustard it was always a last ditch system in the SDI system of defense in depth. Speaking of which we should consider mounting our excess nuclear warheads on some of our longest range interceptors to help with knock down efficiency. Thirdly I have been saying for awhile now that every time NK shoots off missile we should have our deployed ABM system practice intercepting them. This is a problem that cant be solved satisfactorily with an invasion, it can be solved with guile and ingenuity.

 

[EnigmaO01]

But if I recall what THINK about EMP technology, it isn't about human casualties. Perhaps we should show him how it's done... ?

I have doubts NK had the infrastructure that would be susceptible to an EMP bomb. From reports I've seen most of the country is still at the level of the 1950's.

 

[joG]

False analogies are dangerous when it comes to arguments about war, particularly nuclear war. Chamberlain caved into a territorial demand. North Korea has only flexed its nuclear muscle. We used to flex ours. Your Saddam reference is more to the point. Iraq did nothing to us but we attacked anyway much to our grief and the grief of the people of Iraq.

Yes. An analogy can be misleading and it is dangerous to make decisions on incorrect premises. What is important is the game structure of the situation and which aspects are important. Caving in is the thing that is important. In the German case the territorial thing was much less grave than the caving in earlier on the rearmament of the Heer. When the French and English caved in on that point, Hitler had them by the small hairs. Knowing that, he just upped the ante more and more. This is the structure we face right here.

As to Saddam, you totally divert so you must not face the fact that your position is harmful to the country. Had Saddam been convinced that he would be eliminated, if he did not admit the weapons were destroyed and shown the UN where they were, he would not have held out against the Security Council. By suggesting that they would prevent war, the Putin, Schröder and Chirac led him to believe he was safe. That is the important lesson for negotiations. If the other guy believes you are bluffing, he will act accordingly.