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.

 

Should the US Preempt North Korea's Nuclear Weapons

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 04:17 AM
link   
Given the all of the relative sabre rattling and dangerous brinksmanship that Kim Jong seems to enjoy playing at what point should we consider a preemtive strike to eliminate Kim's ability to produce nuclear weapons. A strike would have to be coordinated and multiple targets would have to be struck at the same time. The case for going after Kim is multi faceted. First he cannot be allowed to spread enriched uranium or WMD to the highest bidder. He also represents a threat to regional stability and threatens several of our allies. Esp Japan and the South.

The current known nuclear facilites in North Korea:




If we went after thier ability to launch the nuclear weapons and struck at thier missile production facilities we would have even more targets to hit:




Of course there are several drawbacks to going after Kims WMD.

1) He could use the ones we missed and attack Japan or if he has a longer ranged missile, Guam, Hawaii, or the West Coast.

2) Any strike could precipitate an invasion of the South by the North's Armies.

3) The conflict could move off the Korean Penninsula if China becomes involved.




posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 04:18 AM
link   
The only way to beat them would be to nuke them.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 04:28 AM
link   
I don't know if China does not enter into the fight and we can get all the nuclear facilites we may be able to pull it off without going nuclear.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 04:29 AM
link   
there is no good solution to this. unless you can get rid of kim jong il and anyone that might replace him i doubt there is little one can do aside from actual military intervention that is going to put an end to this north korean problem.

it isnt the people and i dont even think its the government as much as i hate communism, i think its that short chunky lil movie obsessed dictator. i think everyone else is just kinda going along with whatever the little kook says. i dont think he's in his right mind, even for a dictator and i believe even those who follow him are afraid to question anythign he says or does. i think he has serious mental problems. i guess being raised to believe you're god like tends to create a egomaniacal attitude over time. i think all this "power" really put the zap on crazy kim's head.

its a shame korea in general has to suffer because of him and what his father did prior to him taking power.

i dont know what the US may or will do but i think even with bush, regardless of the cynical remarks, nuclear war is a dead last resort. to even consider it would be foolish not just for north korea or america but for the entire world. talking doesnt work, they just make more claims about BS nonsensical paranoia that would even make some of us on ATS doubt. they dont want to talk. they want to develop whatever military weapons they want and continue to get all the aid and food countries and orginzations have sent them in the past. kim wants to have his cake and eat it too. i guess we'll go another 50 years and wait for the nut case to die and see if the next person can have some reason talked into them.

to us what they spew is propaganda, to them, its EVERYTHING. its their own world and universe. its amazing what they teach their kids as history there. thanks to kim and his father generations of kids have grown up thinking north korea is THE pinnacle of culture and knowledge and the rest of the world is so backwards and uncivilized. not just the US! no no no! they have made it seem as though north korea is something that its really not.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 04:38 AM
link   
Your right PrankMonkey. Kim has to go, but that may be difficult. The population rever him like a god and will fight any attempt to oust him. Invasion is not a realistic option either. Its not another Iraq.

I find it intersting that when he travels its by train and not by air. However, if we could take Kim out, the whole cult of personality may collapse with him and we would stand a better chance of long term peace.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 04:39 AM
link   


Of course there are several drawbacks to going after Kims WMD.

1) He could use the ones we missed and attack Japan or if he has a longer ranged missile, Guam, Hawaii, or the West Coast.

2) Any strike could precipitate an invasion of the South by the North's Armies.

3) The conflict could move off the Korean Penninsula if China becomes involved.


the biggest drawback is the most immediate problem posed by north korea. they have over 100,000 conventional artillery pieces aimed at Seoul. with less than 20 minutes notice, they could conceivably kill over a million people and ruin one of the biggest economic centres of the region. the problem is there is no way we can take out all the artillery pieces because they are so spread out, unlike nuclear or missile installations. imo, this simple fact is the one reason we treat north korea with kid gloves, not their nuclear capability.

EDIT: i guess this kind of falls under #2, above, but no invasion would even be nessecary. it's like a dead-man switch.

-koji K.

[edit on 25-8-2004 by koji_K]



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 04:45 AM
link   
im gonna disagree with y6our comment that taking him out would change things or make things easier. if anything it will only make things worse.

its true they revere him, because they have to. they're not given a choice in the matter. they're all brainwashed into believing that whatever it is we do is an affront to them and their culture and has made us out to be the bad guy. even if we simply removed him and "took down" these nucealr facilities you'd see angry north koreans by the mob. they dont seem to realize we dont have a problem with them as a people only their leader the whacko. they are taught we are their enemy. they are taught all we want to do is invade and drink and rape their women and kill thir men and completely destroy the country and eridicate the world of all koreans. they paint a picture that is pretty much untrue in every way shape or form.


i'd love to see a unified FREE korea again. its nice to see the koreans enter the olympics together as one country even though they're arent. the people want to be unified but north koeans leadership has an all or nothing attitude...its not that they want to join up with south korea and be free and elect whoever they want, no kim want south korea to join him and live under his opressed rule.

the people cant help it, they're only taught these things and really dont know any better. even the soviet union is long gone, how much longer can this idealic utopia kim has created exist before holes are punched through it and people start to see him for the person he truly is. he only thinks of himself and how he can maintain power. if he even came close to caring about his people he'd be more concerned about food production than developing nuclear weapons to take on the heathen world his people are taught about.

[edit on 25-8-2004 by ThePrankMonkey]



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 04:54 AM
link   
Look at what a preemptive invasion of Iraq brought us. Do we really want a repeat?



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 04:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by heelstone
Look at what a preemptive invasion of Iraq brought us. Do we really want a repeat?


Im not suggesting an invasion. More like a few B-2's roaming across the countryside taking out production facilities. Invading the North would be akin to D-day in WWII



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 05:01 AM
link   
a couple bombers or a whole infantry division, they'll still call it an invasion. and when the stakes are this high it wouldnt pay to take half measures and use a couple bombers. if you're gonna do it, you better be prepared to go all out as thats what its gonna come down to. all or nothing.

thats why military action is the last option, otherwise the cease fire would have ended a long time ago and this situation would be over one way or another.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 05:35 AM
link   
When will someone "preempt" (if that verb exists) the US of A ?



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Corinthas
When will someone "preempt" (if that verb exists) the US of A ?


Not in our lifetime to be sure. Aside from the USA dig, do you offer anything constructive on how we should deal with Kim?



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 07:45 AM
link   
Why not try a Air & sea blockade nothing enters the country & nothing leaves. If a ship tries to enter or leave North Koren waters then sink it. destroy any aircraft that try to enter or leave North koren air space.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by xpert11
Why not try a Air & sea blockade nothing enters the country & nothing leaves. If a ship tries to enter or leave North Koren waters then sink it. destroy any aircraft that try to enter or leave North koren air space.


The problem is that the ChiComs would no doubt prop up the Kim governemtn with aid shipments. ALso a blockade may allow him to continue to build up his systems.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Fred T you seem like you want another war. North Korea are not a threat so there's no need to take them out and no we won't be attacking them anytime soon.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 11:09 AM
link   
North Korea just like the U.S. China, Russia and Israel has the right to be able to defend itself, defend being the operative word. Nuclear weapons are a deterrent to attack, Iraq obviously proves that. North Korea is not the only source of underground wmd, China is and does engage in the activity, as does Pakistan.

If you or Bush or any president is serious about attacking Korea, then it stands to reason that China should also be targetted, and we know full well that no one in their right mind has the gonads to bring about massive worldwide destruction.

Bush had the opportunity to engage Jong Il in dialogue, instead he puffed his chest and strutted like a peacock which angered the man, and he is an angry man, who is not likely to take any assault, no matter how devastating it may be, with a grain of salt when he can counter against the American backed South Korea. So no, he should not strike, instead he should get serious about addressing the issues in dialogue.

Had it been just a matter of nuking North Korea, Bush would have done so alrready. China and Russia were obviously brought into negotiations because of the severity of it the issue, and China's proximity to nuclear fallout and attack.

Jong Il may be a mad man, but I believe that Bush is likely the mad man who would first unleash nuclear bombs. The world is not going to sit back and watch the US methodically kill millions one country ata time and pollute their air and ground as they had to with Japan.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 11:15 AM
link   
I can't believe that you think America would simply just nuke a country without hesistation just because that country has nuclear weapons it doesn;t work like that.

As with Japan, that was under different circumstances and you can't compare.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 11:15 AM
link   
I think that you are right, the problems with North Korea could have been sorted out long ago when allbright was sent for negotiations. They agree a aid plan which the senate overuled.

All he wants is to be listened to and he thinks by threatening S. Korea and Japan with Nukes he will get what he wants.

I'm more worried about bush pushing the button than anyone else!



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flyboy211
I can't believe that you think America would simply just nuke a country without hesistation just because that country has nuclear weapons it doesn;t work like that.

As with Japan, that was under different circumstances and you can't compare.


I am not sure if you are addressing me, if you are, let me reiterate; I specifically pegged Bush, not America, and not any thinking person. Nor am I comparing the attack on Japan to anything, I simply infer that the circumstances today are different.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 05:03 PM
link   
ok sorry my mistake



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join