View Poll Results: What is the best course of action in dealing with North Korea?

Voters
14. You may not vote on this poll
  • Full scale preemptive military strike

    4 28.57%
  • Limited preemptive military strike

    0 0%
  • Appeasement in the form of recognition and aid

    1 7.14%
  • Strategic Patience - Neither negotiation nor military action

    9 64.29%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789101112 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 174

Thread: The Korean Dilemma

  1. #61
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,568
    Quote Originally Posted by Amled View Post
    Seeing some of the statistics quoted here and elsewhere I hope sincerely that you are right!
    That said, seeing what has been posted here and elsewhere I’m afraid you’re not!
    Unfortunately, without the bounds of normal morality, what is objectively rational could be quite insane from our perspective, and dictators also have a well trodden record of miscalculation.

  2. #62
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    3,140
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    Yeah, you might have read the excellent study from the Nautilus Institute:

    https://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet...c-and-reality/

    Which projects 64,000 casualties in the first day and up to 80,000 in a week's time when the threat of the DMZ artillery has been largely eliminated. But you read the headline number without what the study actually tells you.

    The 64,000 figure is for a total surprise attack by NK, assuming 100% functional rate for the artillery, unlimited ammo, and a 1% attrition rate per hour from counterbattery fire.

    In reality such an attack has never been rehearsed in large scale military exercises by NK, we will be initiating military action if we chose to attack the nuclear weapons program, the artillery function rate will be no where near 100%, ammo will be limited, and attrition rates will be multiples or orders of magnitude higher than 1% because of the enormous improvements in kill chain response times in the last decade, the advent of continuous real time surveillance by drones and satellites, the limited geography, and the continuous monitoring of NK military sites on the DMZ by such systems.

    When yo take into account these realities you are looking at figures well below those estimates. Less if we initiate on the DMZ.
    So you are Ok that 64,000 South Koreans, or thereabouts, is a fair exchange without asking them?

    I'm curious as to how one initiates right under the eyes of the other side, monitoring us, and keeps it under wraps?

  3. #63
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,568
    Quote Originally Posted by tbm3fan View Post
    So you are Ok that 64,000 South Koreans, or thereabouts, is a fair exchange without asking them?

    I'm curious as to how one initiates right under the eyes of the other side, monitoring us, and keeps it under wraps?
    No. I'm not ok with 64,000 ROK. Heck I'm not OK with 64,000 NK.

    But war is not OK. War is the catastrophe that you have to undertake because you are even less OK with losing far more than the catastrophe that would be 60,000 dead in Seoul.

    If we under take action at a time of our choosing, we can keep losses to well below those projections.

    The choice we are facing today is not whether we undertake action at a time of our choosing or against a remote chance of some manageable catastrophe occurring in the future. The choice is whether action is taken at a time and place of OUR choosing, or action occurs of unpredictable circumstances driven by a regime with a record of violent attacks at a future time with uncontrolled and uncontainable parameters that could see nukes going off in south Korean or US cities.

    You don't have good choices. Your security is illusory.
    Last edited by citanon; 03 Sep 17, at 03:29.

  4. #64
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,127
    If he ever gets a proper nuke he'll sober up. Nukes going off in SK or US cities only if he faces a use it or lose it situation after he gets a working nuke.

  5. #65
    Regular
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    87
    Wow, it's been a long time, Gentlemen but let's step back a few steps here. FOAL EAGLE AND KEY RESOLVE and ULCHI FREEDOM GUARDIAN, Corps+ to Army- level exercises are held twice a year without corresponding North Korean exercises. In fact, the largest NK exercise was a battalion level dog and pony show for Fatty Kim.

    Fatty Kim no longer speak of Liberation of the South but rather the threat of America and their dogs in Seoul. His only threatening motion are the missile and nuclear tests.

    If you gentlemen compare to the Cold War Days, whenever NATO had an exercise, so did the Warsaw Pact, even if it was a surprise exercise, and vice versa. No better way to test your response than to actually test yourselves against the enemy's preparation.

    What does this mean? Seoul is on a warfooting. Kim is not. To actually threaten Seoul, Kim would need to move men and supplies to staging areas at the army level. Things they haven't done in 20 years. No doubt there are examples here and there of North Korean prowness but at the army level? They are wholely inadequate.

    I also ask you Gentlemen to look closely and FEKR and UFG. The North Koreans are right. They are offensive in nature. The amphibious training is telling. You don't need amphibious training to repulse a North Korean attack. You need it in order to be where the North Koreans are not, ie their rear.

    And while the regforce NK deployments do outnumber the SKs, the force density favours the SKs tremendously. A division per mile of frontage. The SKs have the immediate local superiority.

    So, what does this all mean? The SKs are prepared to take the DMZ in a matter of days, if not hours and there's nothing the NKs can do to stop them. The SKs are going to isolate the DMZ, ie trap 75-80% of the North Korean Army, and kill it.

    Then the nightmare scenario begins as North Korean society collapses with scenarios ranging from uncontrollable Civil War, refugee floods north and south. Even in the best case scenario, Seoul just inherited 25 million voters wanting to go on the welfare line.

  6. #66
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,127
    Look who just showed up : D

    Seoul is on a warfooting. Kim is not. To actually threaten Seoul, Kim would need to move men and supplies to staging areas at the army level. Things they haven't done in 20 years. No doubt there are examples here and there of North Korean prowness but at the army level? They are wholely inadequate.
    They're not even mobilising i heard

  7. #67
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,568
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Wow, it's been a long time, Gentlemen but let's step back a few steps here. FOAL EAGLE AND KEY RESOLVE and ULCHI FREEDOM GUARDIAN, Corps+ to Army- level exercises are held twice a year without corresponding North Korean exercises. In fact, the largest NK exercise was a battalion level dog and pony show for Fatty Kim.

    Fatty Kim no longer speak of Liberation of the South but rather the threat of America and their dogs in Seoul. His only threatening motion are the missile and nuclear tests.

    If you gentlemen compare to the Cold War Days, whenever NATO had an exercise, so did the Warsaw Pact, even if it was a surprise exercise, and vice versa. No better way to test your response than to actually test yourselves against the enemy's preparation.

    What does this mean? Seoul is on a warfooting. Kim is not. To actually threaten Seoul, Kim would need to move men and supplies to staging areas at the army level. Things they haven't done in 20 years. No doubt there are examples here and there of North Korean prowness but at the army level? They are wholely inadequate.

    I also ask you Gentlemen to look closely and FEKR and UFG. The North Koreans are right. They are offensive in nature. The amphibious training is telling. You don't need amphibious training to repulse a North Korean attack. You need it in order to be where the North Koreans are not, ie their rear.

    And while the regforce NK deployments do outnumber the SKs, the force density favours the SKs tremendously. A division per mile of frontage. The SKs have the immediate local superiority.

    So, what does this all mean? The SKs are prepared to take the DMZ in a matter of days, if not hours and there's nothing the NKs can do to stop them. The SKs are going to isolate the DMZ, ie trap 75-80% of the North Korean Army, and kill it.

    Then the nightmare scenario begins as North Korean society collapses with scenarios ranging from uncontrollable Civil War, refugee floods north and south. Even in the best case scenario, Seoul just inherited 25 million voters wanting to go on the welfare line.
    Welcome back Col. Good to get your viewpoint as always!

  8. #68
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,205
    Quote Originally Posted by Amled View Post
    Seeing some of the statistics quoted here and elsewhere I hope sincerely that you are right!
    That said, seeing what has been posted here and elsewhere I’m afraid you’re not!
    Sleep in peace. Watch and see; all of them will wimp down if threatened. They are essentially bullies and nothing else.

  9. #69
    Regular
    Join Date
    07 Jan 08
    Posts
    35
    How do we know this is even the real OOE? That is a new account.

  10. #70
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    5,099
    Bc it has logic in the post.And is easy to forget passwords.


    Colonel,hope your health is fine.

    I suspect the NK will collapse to a combination of psyops and naked force.Just bomb them with canned food and they'll change sides.

    On the other hand,I've seen a Nork martial artist that cried his tears out when Fatty's daddy passed out.He was safe from any watching eye,having escaped somehow to the beloved Motherland.But the reflex was so ingrained in him he still did the ritual.

    The good guys need to really bomb the crap out of comms and that includes cutting wires between frontline troops and their Rgt,before showing them the goodies of capitalist life.I doubt is possible to find potential defectors before the shooting starts,so it will be exploiting the gaps with agility.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  11. #71
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,444
    Hey, look!
    The adult is back!

    You were missed, Col.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  12. #72
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,444

    Russia's power play in North Korea aimed at both China and US

    By Jamie Tarabay, CNN September 3, 2017

    When Russia sent its bombers flying over the Korean Peninsula last week, it was as much a signal to its allies in Beijing as it was a telegraph to Washington that Moscow too, was pivoting to Asia.


    The Kremlin may not become Pyongyang's most steadfast and critical defender in this newest conflagration, but its cameo in the region is another attempt by Russian President Vladimir Putin to insert himself into a geo-political stalemate involving the US.

    Experts say it may also help deflect attention from upcoming military exercises in Belarus and western Russia next month, which have upset NATO members concerned about what amounts to a mass buildup of Russian troops on the edges of eastern Europe.

    China, which sent bombers into the air itself shortly after, declined to comment about the show of force from Moscow. In its regular press briefing on Wednesday, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said it would not "quantify how close China and Russia are cooperating on the North Korean nuclear issue," said Hua Chunying, a ministry spokeswoman.

    "Just like China, Russia plays a pivotal role in maintaining global peace and stability as well as promoting peaceful solutions to hotspot issues in the region," Hua said. "China is willing to strengthen its cooperation and coordination with Russia to jointly preserve peace and stability in the region and around the world."

    The real trouble maker

    If China is perturbed by its once-dominant Communist partner seeking to commandeer more influence in the region, it's not outwardly displaying those concerns.

    "I think China is confident that its economic development, its military development, takes place at a faster pace than Russia, so in the long run Russia is in no position to seriously challenge Chinese core interests," said Tong Zhao, a fellow at the Carnegie-Tsinghua Center for Global Policy in Beijing. "There are certain elements of competition between the two countries, but their shared concerns about the US very much outweigh that right now."

    Both Moscow and Beijing "share the basic perception of who is the real trouble maker and who is the biggest common threat in the Korean Peninsula," Tong told CNN.

    That trouble maker, he said, is the United States, and more specifically, the occupant in the White House.

    "Secretary (Rex) Tillerson says he wants to do diplomacy before considering other options but the rhetoric from other people in the White House -- (US President Donald) Trump tweeting that talking is not the answer, I think from the Chinese perspective the US is still considering a military option so that doesn't reassure leaders in North Korea or China," Tong said.

    Every action Pyongyang takes, said Tong, could be construed by Beijing and Moscow as a reaction to Trump's escalated posture.

    Putin appeared to reiterate this on Thursday when he called attempts to get the regime of Kim Jong Un to cease its nuclear program "a dead-end road."

    "Russia believes that the policy of putting pressure on Pyongyang to stop its nuclear missile program is misguided and futile," Putin said in an article released by the Kremlin. "Provocations, pressure and militarist and insulting rhetoric are a dead-end road."

    Russia has recently been making inroads to counter China's perceived clout with North Korea. Overtures include Russia's forgiveness of Soviet-era debt, of which $10 billion due from Pyongyang was written off by the Kremlin. Moscow is one of the largest donors of food aid to North Korea, and alongside Beijing, was recently hit with US Treasury sanctions for selling oil to the North Korean regime.

    This is all intentional, says Samuel Ramani, a Russian foreign policy specialist.

    "As Russia takes an increasingly assertive approach to world affairs, it reminds its citizens of the Soviet Union's status as a superpower that could influence conflicts worldwide," Ramani wrote in the Washington Post in late July. "In this respect, Russia's increased attention to North Korea is much like its military intervention in Syria and its expanded diplomatic presence in Libya and Afghanistan. Moscow is trying once again to project itself as a global power."

    Old rivalry reignites

    The jostling between the two powers over North Korea has decades-long historical roots.

    "To an extent it began when China and Russia became competitors for influence in the Communist world, they fought border battles in the late 1960s," said Carl Schuster, retired Navy captain and now adjunct professor at Hawaii Pacific University.

    Kim Il Sung, North Korea's founder, was a guerilla leader who became a major in the Soviet Red Army and served in it until the end of World War II. Upon his return to Korea after 26 years in exile, the Soviets installed him as head of the Korean Communist Party. With their help he built up an army and air force, then declared the founding of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea in 1948.

    Over the last 25 years Russia had virtually no ability to sway Pyongyang; it wasn't able to provide technological support or invest significantly in North Korean industry. Now, Schuster says, "Putin sees an opportunity to increase his influence, probably not by much, but it would be better than what he has, and it distracts America."

    Whatever little sway he may obtain, that, coupled with China's own shaky standing with North Korea, highlights the possibility that neither power enjoys particularly friendly relations with the isolated regime.

    "There is a profound sense of mistrust at the basis of the relationship North Korea has with China and even with Russia," said James Person, an expert on Korea at the Wilson Center. "There's a perception particularly with China that Beijing has been overly interventionist over the years and not respectful of Korean sovereignty."

    China and Russia both share a border with North Korea, a demarcation that has shifted over time as territorial disputes were resolved, and one that each of them jealously guards.

    Person said that China's determination to establish regional hegemony, or a "zone of deference" which takes in North Korea has created confusion among Western observers about China's capacity to rein Pyongyang in. "People in Washington, including President Trump, believe China can just pick up the phone and solve the problem but because of this tortured history of relations they don't have the ability to exercise at will political influence over North Korea."

    Moreover, there is risk in China's chastising North Korea any further, something that has been compounded by statements as far back as May in which the North Korean state-run news agency publicly rebuked China for banning coal imports from North Korea after a February missile test.

    The North Korean statements warned China of "grave consequences," and said Beijing should "no longer try to test the limits of the DPRK's patience."

    "The DPRK will never beg for the maintenance of friendship with China, risking its nuclear program which is as precious as its own life, no matter how valuable the friendship is," the commentary declared.

    Yet China chooses to endure this apparent belligerence. Beijing will always prefer the current leadership in Pyongyang to any that might follow should the Kim dynasty fall, says Person.

    "I think they would rather deal with the current North Korean regime with nuclear weapons than they would with a basically reunified Korea that places a US treaty ally at the Chinese doorstep," he said.

    Moscow's own relationship with Washington becomes more fraught each day. On Thursday, Trump's administration announced it would shut down Russian diplomatic missions in US cities, seemingly in response to an order from the Russian Foreign Ministry in July for Washington to cut its diplomatic staff in Russia by nearly half.

    Both Moscow and Beijing seek to keep the US at bay to protect their own interests in the area, something Person says the US could use to its advantage if it can quell North Korea's panic and pursue diplomacy again. Even now, he said, there are "talks about talks" that could lead to a de-escalation. But that choice belongs with President Trump.

    "The important thing is, the US has to recognize that only it has the ability to give Pyongyang what it wants," Person said. "Yes, China is important in the region, but let's not outsource to China anymore, especially given the fact that China is trying to reassert this hegemony in the region. By outsourcing our North Korea policy to China, we're only abetting them in doing this."

    The US must also contend with the notion that Moscow too will embrace a larger role.

    "Russia wants to be, and be seen as, a great power. It wants to lead the nations that resist Western power and influence. In defying the United Nations and supporting North Korea, Russia bolsters that status at home and abroad," Ramani says. "And so Moscow's alignment with North Korea will likely get stronger in the near future."


    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/01/as...sis/index.html
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  13. #73
    Senior Contributor Toby's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 16
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    1,244
    Great timing on the H bomb test Kim. The media driven west will scoop that right up. Just think how many mouths he could have fed instead! He's mot mad he's an Arsehole!

  14. #74
    Senior Contributor Toby's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 16
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    1,244
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    By Jamie Tarabay, CNN September 3, 2017
    [I]
    When Russia sent its bombers flying over the Korean Peninsula last week, it was as much a signal to its allies in Beijing as it wa.......
    Good read . Thanks

  15. #75
    Regular
    Join Date
    27 Jan 17
    Posts
    30
    So is there any worry that the security of nuclear arms will be used by North Korea to carry out terror attacks similar to the ones of decades past when they had the cover of the USSR? Possibly using the threat of those to shore up support from the militarists and possibly use the cessation of those activities temporarily in return for food and oil.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Drone Dilemma
    By Merlin in forum Operation Enduring Freedom and Af-Pak
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 15 Dec 09,, 00:02
  2. S. Korean perception of N. Korean nuclear program
    By Ironduke in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 13 Jan 09,, 01:36
  3. the dreadful dilemma....
    By dave angel in forum The Field Mess
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05 Sep 07,, 15:44
  4. The Second Korean War and China's dilemma...
    By YellowFever in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 24 Oct 06,, 06:41
  5. Dilemma of Confronting Fundamentalism
    By Ray in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30 Sep 05,, 22:34

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •