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.

 

N. Korea slams U.S. nuclear umbrella as declaration of war+

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   
NK is always saying the something is a declaration of war.

NK is the developmentally disabled child of all the countries of the world.

What do you do with NK. Ignore them and they through tantrums. Try to appease them and they want more concessions.

Perhaps China will finally get tired of the tantrums and slap NK down.




posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Voxel
 

In some respects I think you hit the nail on the head. He definitely has some sort of messiah complex ala Jim Jones and those are the people who kill everyone when they go out.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Karlhungis
 

Yep! The good thing is we still have the freedom to BS on conspiracy sites!



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 

Yeah, all they need is Chris Elliott to play Kin Jong Ding Dong's political adviser and Will Ferrell to be Army chief. Throw in Billy Bob Thornton as secretary of state too, so what if they aren't Korean.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


I am not altogether unconvinced that this is China using North Korea to test the US current leader's stick-to-it-ness. All the while claiming that they stand behind the US. After all, what better way is there to test one's enemy by proxy without getting hostility built up towards you?

[edit on 10-6-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by tristar
 


I am not altogether unconvinced that this is China using North Korea to test the US current leader's stick-to-it-ness. All the while claiming that they stand behind the US. After all, what better way is there to test one's enemy by proxy without getting hostility built up towards you?

[edit on 10-6-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]


I doubt China is directing N.Korea, but given such an opportunity i do not think they are allowing this to slide through without them and Russia dipping their fingers into the party cake.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   
If perhaps anyone is wondering, why on earth is there so much media hype around North Korea and its missile test since it obviously cannot pose any threat to any nation, let alone those under the U.N. * Just a side note, the U.N. has many times turned a blind eye at regional disputes under the explicit directions from the U.S. *

But here is the recent article, ill point out what seems to have ignited this small but escalating tension.

2 Koreas hold rare talks amid nuclear tension





Bilateral relations worsened after a pro-U.S., conservative government took office in Seoul last year, advocating a tougher policy on the North. In retaliation, the reclusive regime cut off ties, halted all major joint projects except the Kaesong complex and significantly restricted border traffic. The North's second nuclear test blast on May 25 further damaged ties.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


I think they are, after all North Korea is a buffer state between a country that has large ties with the US and China would have to be stupid to let them go their own way. This is just my humble opinion of course but I think we are currently locked in a preconflict chess game with China *think Germany and the UK pre-WW 1 only quieter*. We *US and China* are putting a nice front up in order to give the appearance that anything but is happening until hostilities flare.

[edit on 10-6-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by tristar
 


I think they are, after all North Korea is a buffer state between a country that has large ties with the US and China would have to be stupid to let them go their own way. This is just my humble opinion of course but I think we are currently locked in a preconflict chess game with China *think Germany and the UK pre-WW 1 only quieter*. We *US and China* are putting a nice front up in order to give the appearance that anything but is happening until hostilities flare.

[edit on 10-6-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]


Indeed, very similar to what you have described did happen just before the outbreak of ww1. North Korea alone could not maintain a war of any sort since it prime resources are limited, so that would require its long standing allies for support.

As many can see here, everyone is crying "wolf", but who is actually the "wolf" is hard to distinguish as there all dressed as sheep.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


I think it's pretty logical for Beijing to be pulling Pyongyang's strings *geographical closeness, political ideological simularities, etc*. After all, as I said earlier there is a great deal of benefit for China to have North Korea as a sort of test dummy * especially while claiming estrangement without really much of a reason after so long a relationship*, if there is a conflict on the horizon, which again in my humble opinion, is not a question of if but when.

But, basically, if I was leader of China and saw conflict with the US as unavoidable, it's exactly what I would do. Use NK to test my opponent for just such a time I could strike or push things to my advantage so when the fight did come I would be ideally situated to win. And I would make it seem like I didn't have much to do with my test dummy so as to avoid any possible backdraft.

[edit on 10-6-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


Indeed, given the amount of strategic placements of the U.S. fleet for optimal defense and offence they have more or less given away what has been perhaps seen as future strategic importance if and when the need arises. Not too mention what is going on under the water. No one has mentioned how many subs are in the international waters just idling by without moving, also it is a prime time for one to decode what incoming and outgoing signals are being used let alone the radar encryption being used by the various surface,land and underwater vessels.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


I would imagine there is ALOT of covert submarine maneuvering happening in the Pacific for a while now. No body would talk about though, of course. And that brings me to another thought, you don't hear much about Chinese submarines do you?



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


The Chinese have been doing what they know best, low profile until its time to move. They are a patient minded society as their culture has shown us, lets not forget their war tactics amongst other known tacticians are currently and will be studied in future generations for a purpose. So lets take a quick look into not too long incident were it involved a submarine which could be detected with todays equipment from hundred miles away. So here is that event which people did not understand, but those who were caught with their pants down were left with their jaw dropping to the floor.

Published: 1:31AM GMT 13 Nov 2006


Chinese sub secretly stalks US fleet
China's Song-class diesel-powered attack submarine shadowed the USS Kitty Hawk undetected and surfaced within five miles of the aircraft carrier on October 26, the newspaper reported, citing unnamed defence officials.
The submarine was discovered after it surfaced by one of the American fleet's aircraft on a routine surveillance flight, the newspaper reported.
The report emerged as Admiral Gary Roughead, commander of the American navy's Pacific fleet, made his first visit to China.
Admiral William J. Fallon, commander of the US forces in the Pacific, has been working with the Chinese on a military exchange programme in recent months.
The two countries have been working on a heightened military partnership in the wake of the North Korean nuclear test. China was widely praised for its role in brokering North Korea's return to the six-party talks.
The Chinese submarine was carrying Russian-made wake-homing torpedoes and anti-ship cruise missiles, according to the officials.
The Pentagon refused to comment on the alleged incident.

www.telegraph.co.uk...



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


Of course, after all Chinese culture gave us such minds as Sun Tzu.
Hm...... That makes us look bad. REAL bad. Not to mention clueless to boot. But reinforces my beliefs that NK's actions are being controled by China to China's benefit.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


Oh yes, the Chinese are definetly involved in all this, they have far too much to gain and really not too much to loose.

Hypothetical scenario.

1)-Small skirmish happens,

2)-Infrustructure is paralyzed or destroyed

3)-Chinese and Russian (Old Allies) aid to assist rebuilding the nation

4)-A new export market has been developed and essentially sealing the fate of that nation ever rejoining as a single nation again.

Lets not forget that both nations apart from Russia who are in a dispute about an island which once belonged to Japan have any sort of forward military base let alone a nation under its direct control with access close to its long standing adversary.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


I don't think it'll come to blows against NK. That is too close to China making it more than a little risky from their point of view. I am pretty sure NK will just back down unless they have in mind touching off armed conflict *possibly WW3* now.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


But that would go against China's posture at the moment. I should have added.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:54 PM
link   
lil kim is an asian leprechaun....lol

he act like a jalous guy with is girlfriend...since he is dying he's saying if i dont rule my country nobody will...and run off the cliff



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   
You both have excellent points, China stands to lose on both sides of the war. South Korea is economically valuable, North Korea's border opening adds millions more mouths to feed of a traditional enemy.

Not to mention that if North Korea crosses the border in an invasion it will probably do as Asian armies have done since Genghis Khan and forcibly conscript everyone they come across as front line soldiers, strategic psychologically and in terms of preserving its own troops.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


I must say that to ignite a ww3 is unlikely to happens since there is are no prime resources at stake here. If this nation was an oil or gas nation then i would have had second thoughts. But as it stands and i mean unless Russia and China do not step in to diffuse the issue then a small skirmish is most likely to happen. It may not happen today or tomorrow but it does seem to be a probability of it all.

As for the U.S. and U.N. protecting its allies, first thing is first, the U.S. will protect its own interests ( Vessels ) before risking any such forward intrusion into hostile waters. A similar mistake was performed by the British at the Falkland's war, were two ships were hit as a result of their over confident and not assessing the enemy's capabilities. Obviously Argentina did not have the naval capacity then so it used fighters with exocet missiles to cripple and sink. Simple strategy on behalf of the Argentina's tacticians. They managed to sink four ships and almost sink the carrier, if they had done so, then the British would have lost the war. That is the time when the then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had announced to the world that it would consider the use of nuclear weapons if the need arose. Keep in mind this was back in 1982.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join