N. Korea Warns of 'Merciless' Nuclear Offensive

[boogaboo]

A target for... more empty threats?

A gun in the first act fires in the third.

You mean this country? Surely they would nevrer harm another living soul.

They will assimilate you into their collective

 

[Danielos]

You mean this country? Surely they would nevrer harm another living soul.

Link to video.

Must be great being a North Korean worker ant. What a pity that I was born into a selfish, capitalist country!

 

[Winner]

You mean this country? Surely they would nevrer harm another living soul.

There is a Czech-made tram! I didn't know we were exporting them to DPRK too, but it looks like an older model which are still in service in my town

If North Korea is threatening nuclear attacks, then I hope 10 US nuclear submarines are stationed next to North Korea right now. I suppose they've been there for decades though.

Nuclear submarines don't have to be next to DPRK, the range of most US SLBMs is pretty big - missiles from one US nuclear sub stationed in middle Pacific could probably wipe DPRK off the map in half an hour.

 

[Leonel]

As much as I despise and fear a North Korea and/or Iran with nuclear weapons, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty must be the most hypocritical international treaty ever invented. How can USA say that Iran and North Korea doesn´t have any right to nuclear weapons when themselves they have massive arsenals and have used them on real targets twice? Either, nobody is allowed to have them, or all should be allowed. We can´t have a middle ground where a few, selected major powers have a right to field these devastating nations.

I think ALL present nuclear weapons should be handed over to UN for disarnament.

Beeeecause non-proliferation means you don't share them with other countries. And considering the US and Russia already had them before the treaty and they aren't giving them to other countries like Cuba (well at least not anymore) I would think they're abiding to it on the surface. Unless I'm missing something.

 

[Patroklos]

I was under the impression that no one, US military intelligence services included, claims to know that much about how North Korea's military is arranged and equipped. Now some assumptions are pretty fair to make, I dont for a second suspect myself they are anywhere near European, Russia or Chinese standards myself, but what are you basing the above claim on? Do you know the exact inventory of their armed forces? Does the US govt even claim to know that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_North_Korea

The exaggeration was intended.

 

[Formaldehyde]

About the guilty party in all this mess (with N. Korea, Iran, Burma, some african nations...), there is a sentence I deeply believe in : "all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing".

The only problem with that premise is that there are no "good men". The US certainly doesn't qualify. Take the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq based on deliberate lies and deceit, for instance. Or if you prefer, the CIA overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iran. There are countless other examples, but I won't bore you with details. If you really want to crusade for "good", it would seem to me to be a good idea to fix your own "goodness problems" first.

In N.Korea's case : tens of millions live subdued to a total maniac.

Got any actual proof to support that allegation? I would think a real "maniac" would have attacked SK long ago, instead of simply posturing and saber-rattling whenever he and his country feel threatened by the same "good guys" who have been deliberately harassing them ever since GWB labelled them part of "the Axis of Evil" after 9/11.

There is not doubt that NK is a repressive totalitarian goverment. But there are dozens of right-wing ones in the world today that either go completely unnoticed or are actually our "allies". But the Cold war taught us that left-wing ones are always vile while right-wing ones are really not all that bad, since "good men" don't seem too preoccupied with those.

What does the world/UN do? says "it's their 'internal' problem". Well, now it's other people's problem aswell.

It certainly wasn't "other people's problem" until GWB started openly harassing them. NK/SK relations had steadily improved until he started posturing against them, thereby annoying the hell out of the leaders and people of SK who are actually threatened by such rhetoric.

The UN should have (ofcourse it didn't) destroyed the regime and leader long ago. I really love the Korean people. Look how the south succeeded. The UN is near redundant.

I guess you are forgetting all those years when SK was a barbaric totalitarian government no better than NK was. Yet they still received the undying admiration and support of the US government long before they finally decided to give their own people the right to vote.

This thread is yet another classic example of right-wing extremism at work. A NK newspaper writes a commentary that nuclear weapons may now be used offensively if they are provoked enough. Since all media is controlled in NK, everybody simply assumes this is now the official government position, which it may or may not be. And now, the far right is trying to use it as a justification to wipe them off the face of the earth, even though the US officially threatened nuclear war itself many times in the past.

I'd say NK has likely accomplished their goal. While doing nothing officially, the US will think twice before advocating harsh embargoes that will only cause the people of NK to further starve, just as the people in Iraq did after the first gulf war. And then they will point at all the starving people which they directly helped cause, and state "Look how evil NK is!" After all, it worked with Iraq, and as it continues to work with Cuba...

 

[Winner]

Beeeecause non-proliferation means you don't share them with other countries. And considering the US and Russia already had them before the treaty and they aren't giving them to other countries like Cuba (well at least not anymore) I would think they're abiding to it on the surface. Unless I'm missing something.

NPT divides countries into two categories - nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states. The countries listed in the first category had nuclear weapons when NPT was conceived and they're allowed to keep them as long as they don't give them to others or help others to develop them.

There is something in the treaty along the lines than NWS should eventually disarm too, but nobody pays any attention to that.

 

[Danielos]

Beeeecause non-proliferation means you don't share them with other countries. And considering the US and Russia already had them before the treaty and they aren't giving them to other countries like Cuba (well at least not anymore) I would think they're abiding to it on the surface. Unless I'm missing something.

What I meant was, how can they create a treaty that grant a few selected countries access to doomsday-weapons but make it prohibited for the rest of the world?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Spoiler :

You mean this country? Surely they would nevrer harm another living soul.

Link to video.

At 1:15 there is a grandma who looks exactly like Kim

Back to topic: In another thread it was agreed that through massive bombing North Korea could be taken out despite any large arsenals of weapons even if they are operational.
Though this may be a convenient solution for us and would be a way to take down NK it sure as hell is not convenient for the people of NK.
And don't forget China which appreciates NK as a buffer zone. Russia would not be very fond of an attack as well.

Doing things for the sake of doing things is not going to help.

 

[Danielos]

Spoiler :

At 1:15 there is a grandma who looks exactly like Kim

Back to topic: In another thread it was agreed that through massive bombing North Korea could be taken out despite any large arsenals of weapons even if they are operational.
Though this may be a convenient solution for us and would be a way to take down NK it sure as hell is not convenient for the people of NK.
And don't forget China which appreciates NK as a buffer zone. Russia would not be very fond of an attack as well.

Doing things for the sake of doing things is not going to help.

According to Wikipedia, North Korea has a massive air defence system. But I guess that was what they said about Iraq as well...

 

[Patroklos]

Nuclear submarines don't have to be next to DPRK, the range of most US SLBMs is pretty big - missiles from one US nuclear sub stationed in middle Pacific could probably wipe DPRK off the map in half an hour.

More importantly SLBMs are expensive, and even more importantly SSBNs are expensive. Its never been done, but it is speculated that a full missile firing will break the keel of an SSBN. It won't necessarily sink the sub, but it will be useless as a missile platform afterward.

Not that the price of an SSBN is important when nuclear wars are going on, but there really is no need to use them.

 

[Patroklos]

The only problem with that premise is that there are no "good men". The US certainly doesn't qualify. Take the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq based on deliberate lies and deceit, for instance.

And here comes captain irrelevancy!

 

[Danielos]

And here comes captain irrelevancy!

I agree with Captain Irrelevancy. I despise USA almost as much as North Korea.

 

[Formaldehyde]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_North_Korea

The exaggeration was intended.

I don't see where that article supports your allegation whatsoever. It even appears to directly contradict it:

Beginning in the late 1970s, after South Korea received new technologies and equipment from the United States,[10][11] the DPRK began a major reorganization and modernization of its ground forces. The DPRK began to produce a modified version of the 115 mm gunned T-62 tank, which was the Soviet army's main battle tank in the 1960s. Based on general trends and photography of armed forces parades, it is clear that the DPRK has made considerable modifications to the basic Soviet and Chinese designs in its own production.

In the 1980s, in order to make the army more mobile and mechanized, there was a steady influx of new tanks, self propelled artillery, armored personnel carriers (APCs), and trucks. The ground forces seldom retire old models of weapons and tend to maintain a large equipment stock, keeping old models along with upgraded ones in the active force or in reserve. The army remains largely an infantry force, although a decade-long modernization program has significantly improved the mobility and firepower of its active forces.

Between 1980 and 1992, the DPRK reorganized, reequipped, and forward deployed the majority of its ground forces. The army places great emphasis on special operations and has the 2nd largest special operations forces in the world — tailored to meet the distinct requirements of mountainous Korean terrain. Between 1984 and 1992, the army added about 1,000 tanks, over 2,500 APC/infantry fighting vehicles (IFV), and about 6,000 artillery tubes or rocket launchers. In 1992 North Korea had about twice the advantage in numbers of tanks and artillery, and a 1.5-to-1 advantage in personnel over its potential adversaries[citation needed], the United States-Republic of Korea defenses to the south (though it must be pointed out that most of this equipment is obsolete compared to that of the South Korean military)[citation needed]. Over 60 percent of the army was located within 100 kilometers of the DMZ in mid-1993.

Perhaps you can quote the sections where you actually think the article supports your claims...

And here comes captain irrelevancy!

Is that what you call refuting his contention by providing facts? Irrelevancy?

No, here come the ad hominems from the extremist right, as usual. Try addressing the issues for a change.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

According to Wikipedia, North Korea has a massive air defence system. But I guess that was what they said about Iraq as well...

Actually North Korea has the densest and largest in the world. But the Iraq-argument was also already punshed in my face by Winner when I argued in favour of North-Korean military power and I had to surrender

 

[Patroklos]

I don't see where that article supports your allegation whatsoever. It even appears to directly contradict it

You were kind enough to quote it already:

The ground forces seldom retire old models of weapons and tend to maintain a large equipment stock, keeping old models along with upgraded ones in the active force or in reserve.

Is that what you call refuting his contention by providing facts? Irrelevancy?

You seem to be under the impression that because something is a fact it is relevant. You should not be under this impression.

Case in point, California is a top producer of avecados. While factual, it is not relevant. This lesson was provided to you free of charge

 

[Terxpahseyton]

And that proves that?:

Your average WWII second rate power infantry company was better armed/fed/trained that 90% of the NK military today. You have a very inaccurate conception of what NK's military is.

Hardly

 

[Patroklos]

And that proves that?:

Shall I quote myself?

The exaggeration was intended.

I was mocking Danielos for pretending NK was maintaining a world class modern military when they are in fact backwards in everyway relative to their likely opponents.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8157123&postcount=37

 

[illram]

Don't know if this has been mentioned, but don't we have the capability to shoot down NK missiles launched at the USA?

 

[Patroklos]

Don't know if this has been mentioned, but don't we have the capability to shoot down NK missiles launched at the USA?

In the numbers they are likely to launch them probably, most reliably in the boost. Given their near 100% failure rate for their longer range missiles the odds are significantly better.