North Korea - What Would You Do?

I'm seeing a lot of comments from people who think it's time to 'take the gloves' off with North Korea, in favour of Trumps Fire And Brimstone, or Sturm Und Drang approach.

But I'm curious as to what that actually means? What do people think should actually be done?


The problem with military action is there doesn't seem much that can be done with the South Korean towns and cities that are in range of the heavily dug in NK artillery positions. Any bomb or missile strikes against NK would almost certainly be met with massive retaliatory fire at civilian targets causing heavy casualties. Possibly even with Sarin gas warheads.


(There also isn't a carrier air group in range at the moment, so air strikes would have to be via sea launched cruise missiles and high altitude bombers.)


So, I'm curious. What do folks who think something should be done, think should be done?

Ground invasion? Prepared for tens of thousands of military casualties?

A nuclear first strike? Even though you know you'd be sacrificing hundreds of thousands of civilians on both sides?

An attempt to take out the NK leadership with targeted strikes? Again, knowing it would result in Sarin gas warheads reigning down on Seoul?



I mean I agree that something needs to be done, just I have no idea what that 'something' is...

Well first, what is the basis for this whole 'thing'? NK decided it wanted to develop a nuclear capability so it would be seen as a big boy on the world stage. Kim clearly has narcissistic personality disorder --- there's a lot of that going around these days. So he wants to be seen as an important ruler --- make his dead daddy proud. There's a lot of that going around today, too.

But the U.S. has decided that WE say who does and who doesn't get to have nukes. Who made us boss of the world? Why do we get that right? Why Pakistan and not NK? Not saying I agree but where is the basis for our authority on this? So Kim gets pissed at the U.S. saying who the F do you think you are? And so it starts.

There is no upside to this. There is no clean 'surgical' solution. 100,000's of people are going to die and be maimed if we attack NK. But there are people in positions of power that don't care. As long as those people aren't 'our' people. IMHO, the only responsible option is to have Kim taken out internally --- by his own people. And that won't be easy or quick. But I don't think Kim is actually planning to attack anyone unless he legitimately feels he's about to get attacked. He's just trying to appear the big man by waving a gun around at school.

a reply to: Painterz

Little Kim has around 4 nuclear warheads so nothing the current anti missile defence technologies cannot cope with really.

End of the day there is no point in trading meaningless words and Sabre rattles with North Korea which amounts to nothing more than hyperbole.

If NK are stupid enough to launch an attack against Guam or anywhere else for that matter there failure and destruction is pretty much guaranteed there and then, or very soon after.

Pretty much a given really that if they are do launch such an attack that there capital of Pyongyang will be destroyed soon after along with there mobile ICBM launchers and air defence network.

But lets hope cooler heads prevail because nobody really wishes to contend with another Nagasaki or Hiroshima.

If you want to know what I want to happen watch The Interview

I think we should be asking bill clinton this question. He dropped the ball 20 years ago.
Then bush and Obama kicked the can down the road through their presidencies.

Now trump has to deal with lil nutter.

I say he needs to pressure China heavily to take care of their neighbor. They supported north Korea, let them deal with the consequences.

Our middle East foreign policy will turn out this way too. Iraq, Iran, Egypt, all will bite us in the butt for a long time so get used to it.

North Korea has centralised its army in Pyongyang, Kim may as well have painted crosshairs in the town square.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Painterz

Little Kim has around 4 nuclear warheads so nothing the current anti missile defence technologies cannot cope with really.

End of the day there is no point in trading meaningless words and Sabre rattles with North Korea which amounts to nothing more than hyperbole.

If NK are stupid enough to launch an attack against Guam or anywhere else for that matter there failure and destruction is pretty much guaranteed there and then, or very soon after.

Pretty much a given really that if they are do launch such an attack that there capital of Pyongyang will be destroyed soon after along with there mobile ICBM launchers and air defence network.

But lets hope cooler heads prevail because nobody really wishes to contend with another Nagasaki or Hiroshima.

Do they?

How do you know?

Cos MSM or your countries leader said so?

Provide nuclear armed long range cruise missiles to both Japan and South Korea along with Thaad. Make it clear to China they will be there for as long as NK has nukes but no longer. See what happens.

Lift some sanctions. Lift more when they return to talks. Scale down military drills if they say agree to limit testing. Then see what they actually want.

Then approach the talks with demands that aren't completely unreasonable like what happened under Bush. Truth be told I think they wanted them to walk out since it'd give them excuse to double down on the current, and failed, policy.

This is largely similar to what Bill Clinton and Roh Moo-hyun were doing but thanks to Bush and Lee Myung Bak a decade of diplomacy was totally destroyed in favour of sabre rattling and regime change. Obama just continued Bush's ridiculous policy and there had been no change in South Korea either until fairly recently.

a reply to: Painterz

If you ignore a narcissist they will eventually go away.

I would just take a low-key approach here.

Stop the excessive rhetoric on our side, make no sudden moves at all. The assessments here in this thread -- that NK wants respect, wants to preserve the regime -- appears right to me. If that is true and we are not understanding that, we are just making things worse. We don't have any respect for NK (how could we?) but we don't need to rub that in anyone's face -- we are better than that.

NK is creating vast amounts of anti-USA propaganda, and using that to unite the NK people (against the USA, to keep control over the people.) It is not the first or last time we have seen that happen. Let's just accept that, quietly shun NK as much as possible, and get over that. We don't need to feed that cycle. We should detach ourselves.

Finally, the larger issue here is how to handle states that want to create nuclear weapons. I would suggest we just make our policy clear here, that we will destroy any country that uses nuclear weapons against us. That is undoubtedly a fact, and I think everyone understands that. Willfully using nuclear weapons against the USA, is sticking your head in a blender. It is utter suicide. If you use nuclear weapons against the USA or any ally of ours, there is no hope for you.

We can't possibly be broken or taken down by NK. But we can utterly destroy NK. Fact.

And one more note -- it is hard to understand this situation because we are constantly being lied to by the press. For example, may be that Kim Jong Un is a total rock-star, a brilliant and brave and friendly guy seeking peace -- we would love him if we got to know him -- (total speculation, I am just creating an example.) We really don't know anything, just what we are told. So my comments here are based upon what may (and probably are) be total falsehoods being propagated by news sources and our own government. We are manipulated, just like NK. That is the way the world works, unfortunately.

If the truth is close to what I think it is, the best approach here is to just take a step back, and stop getting so jittery.

originally posted by: Kalixi
If you want to know what I want to happen watch The Interview

I see no reason for military action. We don't need more wars against countries that are not a direct and imminent threat to the US.

I think try to talk to the little turd and see what it is that they want. See if we can't work out a compromise.

a reply to: Painterz

Personally I would like a joint venture of nations to send in a fairly impressive number of spec-ops to take out all high government and military figures and dismantle the entire government overnight if possible, perhaps on that night, strategic bombings to help out the success of the mission, and then discuss the future with whoever is like 400th in line to take over the government on a reunification with south korea with the south as leader...then we move our military bases the hell out of the peninsula upon said reunification and enjoy a new friendship.

But that is the optimistic version which is questionably plausable. The truth of the matter, I genuinely don't know...but NK is a American and USSR invention that is our mess we need to address. A old cold war relic

a reply to: SaturnFX

I think their government as it is would fail by doing that.
South Korea would be the only option imo that the citizens of the north would trust or accept.

They need to lead the way.

a reply to: Painterz


Ummm...I would pull the troops back from the DMZ...I would also cease the war games in the south...

While that was occurring...I would also scale back and eventually end sanctions...starting with economic and agricultural sanctions...

Concurrent with those approaches I would extend respect...restraint...and dignity to the entire nation...first in deeds...then in words...

After all...haven't the people of that nation suffered...bled and died enough from sanctions that only affect the people of the nation...and never the leadership...

If we in the west wear the mantle of humanitarianism...perhaps it's time to commit to the definition...Aren't we responsible for causing death and dearth if we starve a people in an effort to starve a regime...?

Perhaps it's time to change an approach that failed the test of time...perhaps...if we claim the high road...it's time to actually take the high road...and be a humanitarian example...


But what do I know...right...?






YouSir

I'd basically contain, then and make starve. No negotiations. No talks. No aid. Nothing. As far as the US is concerned, Fat Boy doesn't exist. I'd focus any sanctions and other restrictions on countries that continue any kind of relations with North Korea. Finally, I'd just pull back any military so the NKs know we aren't going to just preemptively do anything, but at the same time make sure it is known that if any of their military puts one big toe across the DMZ, NK becomes a future Wal-Mart parking lot.

You can't negotiate with nut jobs. They've continually lied and lied. Negotiations only possible when both sides are reasonably truthful and have the same moral code.

originally posted by: YouSir
If we in the west wear the mantle of humanitarianism...perhaps it's time to commit to the definition...Aren't we responsible for causing death and dearth if we starve a people in an effort to starve a regime...?

the US gives the north tons of food. what the government doesn't simply withhold is given to the people under various explanations of how the government got the food out of brilliant force and negotiations, etc. The people don't even know the food comes from the USA (even when its stamped on the food bags). Its all quite sad. We don't starve the people, the government prioritizes war and army building over feeding the people.


North Korea isn't a nation, its a gulag run by a few on top keeping the illusion of all powerful overlord. When a person see's their subjects as playthings to torture, you aren't going to smile them to death, and patting them on the back for such fearless leadership will only embolden them.

originally posted by: Edumakated
I'd basically contain, then and make starve.

The top will not starve, the people will.

What might work better is carpet bombing all areas with things like food (with messages of welcome from the US) ipads with proxys to get net, etc...give the people the power and let them see how the outside world really is. That would have a much greater impact than any food sanctions that will simply starve the people more and give more weight to dear leaders words on how he is fighting the world to protect them.

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: Edumakated
I'd basically contain, then and make starve.

The top will not starve, the people will.

What might work better is carpet bombing all areas with things like food (with messages of welcome from the US) ipads with proxys to get net, etc...give the people the power and let them see how the outside world really is. That would have a much greater impact than any food sanctions that will simply starve the people more and give more weight to dear leaders words on how he is fighting the world to protect them.

The people are already starving. We just got to get that starvation to the top or make the people mad enough they over throw Kim. I do like the idea of carpet bombing with outside world access though.