North Korea appears close to test-firing long-range missiles capable of reaching the United States and its allies, notably Japan. North Korea maintains that the U.S. is hell-bent on provocations for war, citing the major set of American military exercises conducted off the Pacific island of Guam beginning on Monday, June 19th. The five-day maneuvers, called "Valiant Shield," involved 30 ships (including three aircraft carriers), 22,000 troops and 280 aircraft.



1. What are your views on the nuclear proliferation? Should North Korea (or any other country) be allowed to possess WMDs?



2. How should the U.S. react to North Korea’s decision to test the Taepodong-2 nuclear missile?



3. Are the U.S.’s actions belligerent?

quote:

Originally posted by ampmaster:
how would you do it then doc?

I didn't say I had an answer, just pointing out some things you overlooked.

Although I did post a semi-joke answer a while ago, I forget if it was this thread or not.

how would you do it then doc?

quote:

Originally posted by ampmaster:
my way of doing things is to bomb the living hell out of the north while killing anything that approaches the 38th parallel. a few MOABS/FABs and some of those new FSWs should help even the odds and as soon as we get the prepostioned stocks in port and manned we'll have a shitload of gun barrels pointed north

And Seoul would be leveled about 5 minutes after you started the attack. They've got thousands of peices of conventional artillery aimed in on the capital. You'd never be able to stop them until it was way too late. You don't need a nuke to destroy a city.

my way of doing things is to bomb the living hell out of the north while killing anything that approaches the 38th parallel. a few MOABS/FABs and some of those new FSWs should help even the odds and as soon as we get the prepostioned stocks in port and manned we'll have a shitload of gun barrels pointed north

I never once said that they would ever destroy the world. I stated that it is pheasable for them to be able to ignite a world war. Personally, I believe we would kick their tale if a conflict arose but the costs of sending troops in there would be disastrous.

How ignorant... I find that last post to be quite amusing, do keep telling your tale of how Korea destroys the world.

1.)You are right N. Korea has very few if any allies. However even though they may only be able to reach one of our cities they could very well decide to attack one of our allies in the pacific region.(this is where world war jumps in)
2.)N.Korea hates us and if we don't pretty much concede to there every wish they will attack one of us (us being the US and our allies).

AND conceding to every wish is not in the US way of mind especially in the marine corp way of thought if I'm not mistaken, no?

One. North Korea has very few allies so no world to have a war with
Two. North Korea is not one of the most powerful nations on earth, sure they have big military but there is no infrastructure to back it up, their people are starving and so if the majorty of their army
Three: the NKs do not have a lot of nukes, if their Taepdong system worked (it doesn't so far) and factoring in a failure rate of 50% (very generous I think) chances are they will take out one US city at the max, the US on the other hand can wipe out the whole nation of North Korea in a nuclear firestorm

North Korea is one of the most powerful nations on the planet. However, we also are one of, if not the, most powerful nations on the planet. Considering these things we need to try to negotiate, not bribe, beg, or plead, negotiate with N. Korea. BECAUSE a nuclear war with them would more than likely result in world war as well drastic costs of finances as well as human life.

Yeah instead of buying Nukes they were busy buying Iranian and Russian ballistic missile systems... look, the Taepodong is just a collection of boosters and a missile, most of these parts they have had for years... as in since 1998 when they launched a missile over Japan, more than 5 years ago I would say... don't you think?

And if they wern't developing nuclear weapons back then why were they always pulling the Saddam Hussein trick? Not letting inspectors go every where? You realize that most of their facilities are buried right? Underground bunkers and the like?

We have always known that they use the aid we give them for their military, even if it is a simple as using it to feed the military it's being used improperly.

quote:

they have now started to develop weapons that can strike further than ever before and now have stronger ties to countries such as Iran.

That has happened in the last 5 years, since we stopped the negotiations!

quote:

Tell me, how exactly was it working before?

Was nK developing nuclear weapons? Nope. SOunds like it worked to me.

quote:

All of our bargaining before hand was nothing more than a ploy by nK to get money from us.

Even if it was a ploy to get money, they weren't using it for weapons back then or we would have found out about it. THis only happened because we stopped talking with them.

Tell me, how exactly was it working before? When we were handing them out aid that was not being used properly? When they denied the UN the ability to check to see where the donations were going? The people of nK are starving, and the leadership does not care, the people are brainwashed to think that the rest of the world is the cause of their suffering.

All of our bargaining before hand was nothing more than a ploy by nK to get money from us. South Korea to this day still feeds the norths army through shipments of rice. Look where it's gotten us, they have now started to develop weapons that can strike further than ever before and now have stronger ties to countries such as Iran.

quote:

North Korea is not some little nation that we are going to be able to effectively bargain with, the chips are stacked in their favor for the time being.

It's worked before, and I see no reason why it wouldn't work now. The administration should be doing everything to try and prevent N. Korea from getting nuclear technology and Bush is not doing everything that he can. It is only your opinion that it would not work. You do not know for sure. It has worked up until the recent past and discontinueing that method was a huge mistake.

Well here is the reality of the situation for you... North Korea is not some little nation that we are going to be able to effectively bargain with, the chips are stacked in their favor for the time being. All they want is money, they make a threat we appease they shut up for a few years, it's the way it's been for decades now.

The military X that you keep going on about, have you ever actually looked up numbers and such of what they usually include, do you not realize we hold Xs on a monthly basis IN Korea? You dont, I'm positive, so stick to topics you do know about, the media reports about Valiant Shield were all wrong anyway, they got the numbers of carriers, ships, and aircraft wrong. Their source didn't count on nK launching a missile.
By the way those numbers of ships and aircraft were sensative, as in not to be released, another media leak for political purposes i see.

And if you think for a second that the troop levels maintained in theater will repel a nK ground assult you are seriously mistaken my friend.

quote:

Now, what I am looking for is what do you suppose is an equal reaction to the missile tests, what do you propose we do? My point here is that there is not much we can feesably do about it, it sucks but thats the truth.

We need to go back to having talks with North Korea. Under Clinton there were anti-nuclear agreements and frequent talks and N. Korea stuck by those agreements. Then, along came Bush and he stopped those talks. Lo and behold, a few years later N. Korea is into nuclear weapons.

while it's true that both the DPRK and US have annual military training cycles, the key is the fact that the US markedly stepped up the size of the program this time. it involved far more troops than normal, and covered a few new scenarios, which gives the notion that the US is seriously preparing for an armed conflict. yes, obviously the whole point of training exercises is to prepare for armed conflict, but the point of making it a bigger exercise is to send a subliminal message. so no, it is not immaterial to the argument.

as for what to do with the DPRK: the brinkmanship policy with the USSR did not end in nuclear war, and in that case we were playing chicken with a confirmed, known nuclear power that was in possession of thousands of nukes. the DPRK is in no position to challenge the US, and this must be made clear. a military invasion is both undesirable and infeasible, thanks to a certain catastrophic adventure in the middle east. US air and naval power in the region, as well as the relatively few troops stationed in the ROK and japan, provide the backing necessary to challenge and shut down the DPRK's aggressive stance. think of north korea as the arrogant little kid that just needs a good smack in the face from his older brother. and no, that's not a metaphor for military attacks.

Ok so let me pick this thing apart for you:

It is highly probable that North Korea already has a weapons grade plutonium.

Now, what I am looking for is what do you suppose is an equal reaction to the missile tests, what do you propose we do? My point here is that there is not much we can feesably do about it, it sucks but thats the truth.

Now as far as the military training EX is concerned it happens every year, usually around the same time, it's kinda like RED FLAG. North Korea has an anual training cycle as well... this is all nothing new and therefore quite inmaterial to any argument.

So again, what do you propose we do, I'm willing to entertain quite a variety of ideas, but I'm sure most will be punctured quite quickly.

launching ICBMs would not be considered a sensible responsive action, so no, i am not suggesting that we launch ICBMs into the ocean.

Exactly thats why I didn't give you one.