Party politics aside: WTH?:

Tools    





The U.N. is preparing to draft and vote on a resolution in response to North Korea's blatant disregard to agreements that they were all tohappy to agree to because it meant money, but:



"The resolution demands North Korea eliminate all its nuclear weapons but expressly rules out military action against the country, a demand by the Russians and Chinese. Bolton warned Pyongyang, however, that if it continues pursuing nuclear weapons, the U.S. would seek further measures."


Isn,t this like saying "hey you cannot murder people because the law says you cannot, but if you do nothing will happen to you other than a lot of hemhawing?
__________________
“The gladdest moment in human life, methinks, is a departure into unknown lands.” – Sir Richard Burton



I am having a nervous breakdance
Well, technically they've "only" tested nuclear weapons so far, they haven't used it against another country. And to attack North Korea at this point wouldn't be very smart, imo. I think what the resolution shows is that although China and Russia condemn North Korea's nuclear bomb testing they do not want to appear as being in US leading-strings. I also think this is a first step. The resolution and Bolton's statement are telling us that if North Korea doesn't do the right things in a near future, the UN will produce more aggressive resolutions and/or USA will probably act on their own, even if I think it's pretty unlikely that close US allies like Japan and South Korea will approve of military campaigns in their area with a nieghbouring nuclear weapon dictatorship involved. I heard earlier today, I think it was, that North Korea wants to pick up the six-nation talk again. I mean, they (he) are (is) acting erratic and irrational most of the time but sometime even the most hardheaded dictator must realize that the number of friends is rapidly increasing.
__________________
The novelist does not long to see the lion eat grass. He realizes that one and the same God created the wolf and the lamb, then smiled, "seeing that his work was good".

--------

They had temporarily escaped the factories, the warehouses, the slaughterhouses, the car washes - they'd be back in captivity the next day but
now they were out - they were wild with freedom. They weren't thinking about the slavery of poverty. Or the slavery of welfare and food stamps. The rest of us would be all right until the poor learned how to make atom bombs in their basements.



The Chinese don't want order to break down in a desperately poor country on their own border. And I don't blame them.

They also have a veto on the Security Council, so....



Originally Posted by Officer 663
The Chinese don't want order to break down in a desperately poor country on their own border. And I don't blame them.

They also have a veto on the Security Council, so....
This is a big part of the reason China opposes military action. There has been a long history of Chinese xenophobia and mix that with overpopulation in urban areas and you have the potential for a refugee nightmare. Imagine the situation here at our border magnified to the power of 10. South Korea is in much the same position, but China being a dominant economic and military power in the region would make it the natural choice for giving assistance.

The Chinese and the Koreans have always had an uneasy peace, in many ways China cannot sustain itself, its ethnic diversity a source of internal conflicts since the time it was divided into somewhat self-governing regions, and its economy although vibrant is only sustained by government reluctance to trade currency on the open market. A devaluing that would certainly result from such an action would be devastating to chinese consumers, and international companies who do business in and do business with China.

Aside from those facts, any sort of military action is out of the question at this point. We have enough difficulty with resistance in Iraq to be taking on another much more organized and well trained military. If we were to strike it should have been years ago before the situation got so out of hand.
__________________
"You have to believe in God before you can say there are things that man was not meant to know. I don't think there's anything man wasn't meant to know. There are just some stupid things that people shouldn't do." -David Cronenberg



Attacking North Korea would be a major disaster. They already have about 40 nukes and so could kill easily a couple million people in South Korea and Japan. Such an attack would thrown the world economy into a deep depression and would be political suicide for Trump. Also, defeating North Korea without using nukes would be very difficult, in fact I don't think they could defeat it without using nukes if North Korea uses their nukes (nuking US and South Korean military positions would make short work of any allied force). The North Korean army is also very strong so it would be difficult to defeat it without major mobilization by the US (the US would need to re-institute mass conscription and increase the army size substantially before attempting an attack and would suffer very heavy casualties even if they win (several times the number of Vietnam or even higher the losses against Japan in WW2)).

Comparing invading North Korea with Iraq is also stupid. Iraq did not have a well organized army and their soldiers were so useless that the biggest problem the US army had in Iraq were first a single soldier with an artillery piece in Baghdad and second terrorists planting bombs after the army had surrendered. North Korea has a huge and well organized army. Although their equipment is outdated it is still effective.

If the US uses nukes on North Korea (and they would need to use about 100 nukes) this means the murder of millions of civilians which would completely destroy the US's international credibility and reputation.

Overall, there is no benefit from attacking North Korea and only a crazy or stupid leader would do such a thing. Considering Trump is both of these things that possibility remains.



Attacking North Korea would be a major disaster. They already have about 40 nukes and so could kill easily a couple million people in South Korea and Japan. Such an attack would thrown the world economy into a deep depression and would be political suicide for Trump. Also, defeating North Korea without using nukes would be very difficult, in fact I don't think they could defeat it without using nukes if North Korea uses their nukes (nuking US and South Korean military positions would make short work of any allied force). The North Korean army is also very strong so it would be difficult to defeat it without major mobilization by the US (the US would need to re-institute mass conscription and increase the army size substantially before attempting an attack and would suffer very heavy casualties even if they win (several times the number of Vietnam or even higher the losses against Japan in WW2)).

Comparing invading North Korea with Iraq is also stupid. Iraq did not have a well organized army and their soldiers were so useless that the biggest problem the US army had in Iraq were first a single soldier with an artillery piece in Baghdad and second terrorists planting bombs after the army had surrendered. North Korea has a huge and well organized army. Although their equipment is outdated it is still effective.

If the US uses nukes on North Korea (and they would need to use about 100 nukes) this means the murder of millions of civilians which would completely destroy the US's international credibility and reputation.

Overall, there is no benefit from attacking North Korea and only a crazy or stupid leader would do such a thing. Considering Trump is both of these things that possibility remains.
I agree that initiating an attack on North Korea would be a mistake. I do not think nukes would have to be used if it were to happen though and I also worry about NK attacking or launching something without provocation. Not talking verbal or even "training" exercises. They consider everything an act of war and certainly propagandize that crap to the highest level.

Right now I think staying tough and using sanctions is the best that can be done. If however NK initiates anything major I do not see many other options.



NK is not going to attack. Why would they? They are not irrational. They are just showing fangs to scare potential aggression against them. Their stock of nukes is an insurance policy.



NK is not going to attack. Why would they? They are not irrational. They are just showing fangs to scare potential aggression against them. Their stock of nukes is an insurance policy.
Then all is good I suppose.



Thing is that the rest of the world wants NK to not have nukes while NK wants to have nukes. Which is creating tension.

If NK could feel secure to not be invaded if they didn't have nukes they wouldn't feel this need.



The thing is, NK doesn't really need any nukes. They already have their insurance with their rockets pointing at Seoul. Of course I understand why they still want to go nuclear. It makes them even more threatening and difficult to attack. You can never weaponize enough.

Starving them economically seems to me to be the best strategy for now. I don't see any military option, except perhaps an incredibly risky (secret) coordinated speed attack on all their military facilities. The risks of such an undertaking are way too high, though. No smart man would ever bet on it, at least not in the current situation.
__________________
Cobpyth's Movie Log ~ 2019