It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

North Korea says "Sanctions = war"

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by zman

Originally posted by kojac



It seems to me direct talks between the U.S and N.K is the only way out..



Why is it that its the USA that has to do something about it. One has to answer what does little Kim want from us. Hey , if he attacks anyone of our allies then he will be rendured non-functionable , this is a fact. So , my question is why does he want one and one talks with us. , anyone got an answer to that?.


He wants money. It is called EXTORTION. He wants his US promised reactor finished which will now NEVER happen since he is nuke tech for wartime purposes.

He wants MONEY, TECHNOLOGY and NUKE POWER... none of which he can be trusted with which is why talking to him is a moot point.




posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by zman


Why is it that its the USA that has to do something about it. One has to answer what does little Kim want from us. ..., anyone got an answer to that?.


Little Kim (not the rapper, the dictator) wants to talk to us because we are the perceived "super power" in the world and he wants to make us twist in the wind. He knows that this is a lose-lose situation for us. If we bomb him forward to the stone age, the rest of the world will think we are trigger happy war mongers (those who don't think that already.) If we sit and talk one to one, he got us to capitulate. Our best plan is to wait him out and let him have his tantrum. His long range missles stink, his new-q-lar bomb test was a bomb, and with sanctions in place he won't be able to feed his army, which is the reason many of them join-guaranteed food. His time is coming to an end and if we can show some patience, this could be somewhat bloodless-for us anyway.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Thanks Slap Nuts, now I understand.

If the US is provoked that will make it both acceptable to nuke a population and easy to deal with the aftermath.

I do not doubt that the US has the technology to flatten NK but which particular form of mass destruction is deployed against them is really hardly the point is it? The technology existed to flatten N. Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, (not to mention NK the first time around), the fact that it's more advanced now is irrelevant.

What good is your technology doing you in the Gulf and how much comfort is your 60 year technology lead going to be when a crude dirty bomb goes off in downtown Chicago or a fertilizer bomb in a truck explodes outside a school in LA?

Trust me, it doesn't take much sophistication to make an effective bomb and let it off outside a shopping mall and at that point all the technology in the world isn't going to make you feel any better.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Edn
Direct talks between the US and NK years ago would have avoided where we are today.


Sorry we had direct talks with NK back when Clinton was in office. It yielded an agreement that NK would suspend all nuclear research in exchange for fuel oil and two light water reactors. The problem was it was a sham! They took our oil and our light-water reactor technology and continued right along with research to build a nuclear weapon.

This time around, Bush knows that the only way to end this is for China to end it - hence the 6-way talks. Since SK, Japan, China, Russia and others are most directly affected (I mean, it is their backyard) they need to send a clear message to NK that this behavior will not be tolerated!



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by timeless test
Thanks Slap Nuts, now I understand.


Glad to be of help.



Originally posted by timeless test
If the US is provoked that will make it both acceptable to nuke a population and easy to deal with the aftermath.


LOW YEILD, 4-th Generation aimed ant MILITARY targets. Do a little research on 4th gen nuclear fusion devices.


Originally posted by timeless test
I do not doubt that the US has the technology to flatten NK but which particular form of mass destruction is deployed against them is really hardly the point is it?


Only mass destruction of military targets.


Originally posted by timeless testThe technology existed to flatten N. Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, (not to mention NK the first time around), the fact that it's more advanced now is irrelevant.


Yes, but it was dirty, large and would have caused massive civilian casualties... this is not the same as modern fusion devices.


Originally posted by timeless test
What good is your technology doing you in the Gulf and how much comfort is your 60 year technology lead going to be when a crude dirty bomb goes off in downtown Chicago or a fertilizer bomb in a truck explodes outside a school in LA?


We want to OWN Iraq... not just stop it militarily. We want to occupy at least a portion PERMANENTLY (re: 1 Trillion Dollar Embassy), this is not the same goal with NK. We are not using our top of the line weapons there because there are no military targets to hit. It is like football, you do not open the playbook during your out of conference games. You save , in reserve your "special, bread and butter, trick plays" for your harder or special needs opponents.


Originally posted by timeless test
Trust me, it doesn't take much sophistication to make an effective bomb and let it off outside a shopping mall and at that point all the technology in the world isn't going to make you feel any better.


What does this have to do with the NK situation?



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 09:52 AM
link   
timeless test, a nuclear attack will provoke a nuclear response. Short of that, I don't think SlapNuts is advocating a nation-obliterating nuclear first strike, though he hardly needs me to speak for him.

If Bush were to say something along the same lines to another national leader, we would all go berserk, and rightfully so.

I believe Bush should have tried bilateral talks...long ago. Now that NK has tested their nuke, and is now using threats of a nuke unless we talk, it's a different story. Perhaps a history lesson is in order...Kim's father hated us after MacArthur drove NK back out of SK. We embarassed him because he'd already declared victory...then we landed in full force.

Kim jr. is no different, except maybe he's crazy. This is a man that has people killed for leaving the country, taking pictures, using cellphones...the list really goes on. Crazy or just self-centered, we'll probably never know.

It's also highly likely that if NK can't properly weaponize their material, or is unable to build or obtain a suitable delivery system, they will most certainly sell their technology or material.



[edit on 11-10-2006 by Astygia]



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
One last thing to hel[p put your mind at ease... this is the EXACT sort of conflict that would allow us to "test" our fourth generation low yeild fuison nuclear weapons... Imagine standard cluster bombs except that the bomblets are all super-mini nukes. The fusion type weapons will not create the "dirty" fallout the Pu/Ur old school nukes do.

It will be TOTAL and COMPLETE annahilation from the air and sea.

The SKs and US troops in SK are also VERY well fed and armed, unlike the NK army.

Don't worry, he has had this coming since he stopped talking to us in the 90s. REMEMBER we did enter talks with him in th 90's, offered him a nuclear reactor, failed to finisih it and he withdrew from the talks... not us as far as I know.

Bye, Bye, Jong Il. You are picking the wrong fight at the wrong time.


Go in...Do job...Get out. Just like Iraq. Nobody wants this mess. China will not accept the refugees an amred conflict (no matter how one sided) will cause. So, we end up in another occupation. While our military is provisioned for war on two fronts, we simply cannot handle multiple occupations, especially on this scale. Removing the regime, and defeating the military would, as you ellude to, be a walk in the park. It's what comes after this that will really kick our ass. Another thing to consider, is KJI's will to go out with a bang. He's not the brightest, that's been established, but he'll see us coming, and take action. It's not hard to imagine him simply blowing up his remaining nuclear material, even in his own back yard, just to make life miserable (and a lot shorter) for everyone involved.

I think we need to refocus back on Iraq. If KJI does something stupid with his new toys, let him do so unprovoked by the US, then let the EU, China, Russia, and Japan handle it.

To be honest, I really don't think it matters much. One way or another, something wicked this way comes. Dangerous times we're living in, and I think it's time that we start hanging on, and riding it out, because we lost our steering long ago. Darwin's coming back, and he's not taking prisoners.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by timeless test

What good is your technology doing you in the Gulf and how much comfort is your 60 year technology lead going to be when a crude dirty bomb goes off in downtown Chicago or a fertilizer bomb in a truck explodes outside a school in LA?



May I interject? Technology in many cases is not a deterrent to a fanatic with a bomb strapped to his chest or in his car trunk. We can detect those weapons but it's not easy when there is a car speeding at you, and you are a young soldier who just got out of Muslim sensitivity training. In my opinion we should let our soldiers fight, I can't stand all those people who run around with their hair on fire because we put ladies underpants on some guys head and let a dog bark at him. Let our guys fight, it's down and dirty and not for the squeamish. If you don't like it then don't join up. Soldiering is a dirty, nasty job.

As far as dirty bombs in Chicago or fertilizer bombs out side of schools? Something like that is bound to happen regardless of our position or tactics. We will be attacked again at some point. This is not a reason to fight in NK, Iraq, or Afghanistan. Holding back every single time makes us look weak, and although many of the western nations don't think it makes us look weak, those are not the people we are fighting and the people we are fighting think holding back force makes us look weak. (how many times can I use the word weak?
)

I don't think the time is right to attack NK. Not because I am anti-war at all costs but because I think it can be done in a way that is easier and less costly to us.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unit541
Go in...Do job...Get out. Just like Iraq. Nobody wants this mess. China will not accept the refugees an amred conflict (no matter how one sided) will cause. So, we end up in another occupation.


Nope... 100% aerial vs. military targets only. The only ground fighting will be in the area we already occupy just south of the DMZ.

There will be no occupation, just a lightning fast oblitheration of ANYTHING military or nuclear.

The NK populace will take care of the rest and China, US, etc. will supply humanaitarian aid to the populace via. China.

IMHO.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
The NK populace will take care of the rest and China, US, etc. will supply humanaitarian aid to the populace via. China.

IMHO.

hehe, if you think the Iraqis are having a difficult time 'taking care of the rest', wait 'till you see the NK people try.

China has been pretty clear about it's unwillingess to clean up any mess.

What you propose is exactly what the plan was in Iraq. Have we learned nothing?



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unit541
hehe, if you think the Iraqis are having a difficult time 'taking care of the rest', wait 'till you see the NK people try.

China has been pretty clear about it's unwillingess to clean up any mess.

What you propose is exactly what the plan was in Iraq. Have we learned nothing?


No, the plan in Iraq was to put 300,000 pairs of boots on the ground...

How is this similar?



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
LOW YEILD, 4-th Generation aimed ant MILITARY targets. Do a little research on 4th gen nuclear fusion devices.


I'm not debating their efficiency or the capability of the US to deploy them.


Only mass destruction of military targets.


Great idea, because, of course, our intelligence is faultless isn't it?


Yes, but it was dirty, large and would have caused massive civilian casualties... this is not the same as modern fusion devices.


No it's not the same but if you think the US or anyone else can bomb NK into submission without huge civilian destruction you are being desperately naieve


It is like football, you do not open the playbook during your out of conference games. You save , in reserve your "special, bread and butter, trick plays" for your harder or special needs opponents.


You appear grimly determined to ignore the realities of war for some reason.


What does this have to do with the NK situation?


Can you not conceive of the possibility that if the US takes such action against NK, (or anywhere else for that matter), then there will be reprisals? Yes they will be crude and they may feel like little more than a gnat's bite in the great scheme of things but look at the situation of Chechen reprisals in Russia - it may take time but you would have to accept the inevitability of ongoing violence in your backyard as well as abroad for the forseeable future.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unit541
[

What you propose is exactly what the plan was in Iraq. Have we learned nothing?


NK won't be like Iraq it will be more like East/West Germany after the wall came down. Not that it's perfect but once reunited as a single country, the strong SK economy will help NK along, of course, not without bad feelings on the part of the SKs and some resentment. But it won't be the cluster f... that Iraq has been. In some cases Iraqis are their own worst enemies, they steal the wire that conducts electricity-sometimes dying from the shock, and they shoot at the transformers when the lights go out. This is not all a US debacle.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astygia
timeless test, a nuclear attack will provoke a nuclear response.


Probably so unfortunately. My concern is the simplistic and naieve approach to such a confrontation that appears evident in some of the posts on this thread as if a technology lead will solve all problems. Technological prowess is of no use whatever if your opponent is beating you over the head with a Mk1 stick with a nail through the end of it.

I suppose I can only be grateful that no one has yet said "bring it on".



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by timeless test
Can you not conceive of the possibility that if the US takes such action against NK, (or anywhere else for that matter), then there will be reprisals? Yes they will be crude and they may feel like little more than a gnat's bite in the great scheme of things but look at the situation of Chechen reprisals in Russia - it may take time but you would have to accept the inevitability of ongoing violence in your backyard as well as abroad for the forseeable future.


Yes, I can, but to use football as an analogy again, you ALWAYS lose players to injury if you want to win the battle. Nothing is free. There will always be losses... ON THE CONTRARY, if he perfects his DONGGERS and warheads, BYE, BYE LA. So we lose the whole team instead of an offensive lineman. You make the call.

The WORLD stands behind us on this one, except maybe Chavz and the Iranian Mullahs.

There will be a REAL coalition of the willing this time and NK is gonna get stung. BADLY.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by timeless test
Probably so unfortunately. My concern is the simplistic and naieve approach to such a confrontation that appears evident in some of the posts on this thread as if a technology lead will solve all problems. Technological prowess is of no use whatever if your opponent is beating you over the head with a Mk1 stick with a nail through the end of it.

I suppose I can only be grateful that no one has yet said "bring it on".


Well, none of us on this board are national decision-makers, so don't let it bother you.

And I'm not sure why we're arguing about technology..? It's there, been there, if we gotta use it, we'll use it. What's the alternative, grab the stick and poke two nails in it?

Bring it on.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astygia
What's the alternative, grab the stick and poke two nails in it?


Well it does have the benefit of fewer global repercussions and I don't need to build a nuclear shelter in my garden.

[edit on 11-10-2006 by timeless test]



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 10:37 AM
link   
I was goint to stay out of the what-ifs and assumptions here, but I figure I'll interject this one little tidbit...

Iraq is a mess because of a borderline civil war...not because we removed its gov't and bombed its cities. The mess we unleased has more to do with sectarian violence than it does with overall lawlessness. Korea will not have this problem. I'd be willing to bet that most South Koreans would love to unite with NK eventually. It'll be an ugly transformation, no doubt, but IMO a necessary one. There is no place for isolationist countries and lines like the DMZ on this planet. It's gotta come down eventually. Don't let our mess in Vietraq sway you away from it.

Priority # 1 is ensuring that the world community is with us on this one. Much of America's strength lies in its ever dwindling allies. We need to make sure that Korea makes the first bad move unprovoked by the worlds "bully."



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 10:40 AM
link   
Maybe USA should start testing their anti-missile systems? And surely they could spare a few to lend to Japan and SK if push comes to shove.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Edn
Direct talks between the US and NK years ago would have avoided where we are today. I just posted about this elsewhere. The problem (and i think its the same problem with Iran) it the US believe they can ignore something until it goes away or they have to blow it up. The US government really are just as insane as the N Korean government. Talks could have easily avoided the test they did, talks could put the two countries on grounds that are at least are a little more stable. But talks are something the US will never do, and to think, there always going on about diplomacy.


There were direct talks years ago. Pres. Clinton sent Former Pres. Carter and Sec. Albright to N. Korea on separate occaisions.

Result: We gave them materials and assistance to build reactors "for peaceful energy uses".

Result: They enriched uranium and produced plutonium.

Result: They have detonated a nuclear device (maybe).

They did not just start enriching uranium in 2001. They have been at it since at least the mid 1990's.

Moral of the story: Don't trust communist dictators who spend all their money on the military while the people starve in the dark/cold.

[edit on 10/11/2006 by darkbluesky]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join