North Korea: A theory (a possible trap involving China and Russia).

reply to post by penninja

Would not a World War be the perfect crisis to reset the system financially and politically and accomplish TPTB's goal of drastic population reduction and control? Nations and their leaders then could be pawns in a greater game.

Originally posted by penninja
Gee wis.... You know the only actual worry the USA has is that it's populace has become completely clueless in it's world view.

You guys are mostly 20 years outdated... or more, in regards to the global agendas of these nations.

Russia and China are not out to destroy America lol

The goal is the regional blocking of the planet under the five permanent members of the UN security council, the only people being set up and "tricked" are small nations with the capacity to endanger the "NWO" for lack of a better term... the THREAT of the cold war became a global mission of stability over time... that is WHY we wax socialist while they wax Capitalist in tandem... we are all falling in the direction of ONE system... NK is screwed.

I can't believe i am the only one to star this post... It's the most accurate of the entire thread.
Russian Minister lagarov was quoted as saying today that "Russia was on the same page with the United States over the North Korean Issue"

Sorry mate , this thread is bs. We are not living in cold war anymore , the World now is globalised , China and Russia and US and 99 % of countries care only about Money . Weak USA --- > bad for economy of Russia and China , and reverse.

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by nake13

 

You are assuming that a well placed and large enough EMP blast along with a coordinated cyber attack would not be effective. Let's hope that you are right!

I would suggest that were such a device fired at the continental US,the US anti missile defences would take care of it,however,if detonation were achieved the US ICBM stock,along with most other military equipment, would be largely unaffected as they would be hardened against any possible EMP attack.

A cyber attack would be more worrying,unless the US have dramatically improved their cyber security systems.

reply to post by CosmicCitizen


Only a crazy person would want to nuke NK, or anyone else for that matter. It would be stupid to do that because all of that radiation would end up back here on the west coast just like with Fukushima. Also, because I have inside knowledge of the subject due to the nature of my profession, I assure you that one sub shooting nukes at NK isn't even close to "shooting our wad". We have plenty of wads, and China and Russia both know that. I think all of this NK talk is probably just a big distraction, and I really hope nothing comes of it. Anyway, your theory is pretty interesting to say the least.

A great theory, but the EMP blast has been speculated for years that is nothing new and I am sure military planners have this covered, one thing though, you have to play chess and get lots of practice to become an expert, the U.S. is the only active warbringer/wager the last 20 or 30 years actively battle hardening personnel, firing shots and killing on mass scale, the others have to be more or less wargamers and theorists on how their equipment would hold out.

Most of the heavy equipment and technology they would need and probably possess has more than likely not been tested and used or deployed in real war in recent memory so there is a huge question mark, they also have to figure out how well their supply lines will work outside of it's region, the same is true for their personnel, the U.S. has world presence and no matter what anyone thinks the U.S. runs NATO and Russia and China will be fighting the world at that point.

I do feel that Russia and China will think more than twice before even thinking of attacking the U.S. because the outcome will probably be mutual destruction and mass casualties on all sides, no winners, a well planned chess match doesn't end up like that.

reply to post by nake13

What if said "device" was already in orbit? Would it not be harder to shoot down before de-orbiting into the upper atmosphere over the continental US as opposed to shooting down the missile shortly after it was launched? FWIW there is a NK satellite already in orbit (since Dec 2012) and its orbital path takes it over the middle of the country.

reply to post by phinubian

Yea its not like a chess match where a Bobby Fischer pulls out a gun and shoots a Garry Kasparov after losing a pawn.

reply to post by CosmicCitizen


No, they did it before, and they can do it again. The USS Lake Eerie shot down an NRO satellite that was in orbit several years ago, using the Aegis BMD system and an SM-3 missile. There's no reason that they can't repeat the feat again now, and it would probably be easier now, since they've upgraded the system quite a bit since then.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Didn't the idiot in chief obozo tell the troops stationed in the middle east to "stand down" while our ambassador was sodomized and murdered in Benghazi? Isn't that the one thing we do know about Benghazi? And that he fired or retired 5 top military leaders after this?

Who's to say the military would be ordered to "stand down" again, if the US population was threatened?

He's probably got his lackies up to generals now.

reply to post by Happy1


There's no proof that anyone was ordered to stand down in Benghazi. There are stories, but that's all they are, without any proof they won't be anything but stories.

As for "standing down" now, theater commanders have plenty of leeway when it comes to self defense. The White House can tell the JCS to order them to stand down, and the theater commanders will tell them exactly what to do with that order, in explicit detail. If their base is in danger, no commander will follow an order to stand down and let it be over run. And with the E-6B out in the area, they have a battle staff that can prosecute the fight if necessary, so good luck getting any commander to stand down.

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen

Here is the scenario; let's say that North Korea does have an EMP bomb and it could already be in orbit and that it set off a blast the knocked out the US infrastructure possibly even disabling our missile defense and offensive capability (altho I would guess that they are hardened for EMP blasts) and then they also attacked South Korea (goal of unification) and we launched a devastating nuclear attack from our Polaris submarines to devastate North Korea. The net result would be that we basically will have shot our wad on retaliating against the North Koreans and at that point (esp with our defenses down) would be most vulnerable to an attack that was planned from the beginning.
[...]
Any thoughts on this theory?

I was one day "off" from ATS and this is the first thread I am reading, and the amount of ...uhmm....let's call it "unfounded nonsense" hits like a truck...

First, the likelihood that NK has a functioning nuclear weapon that could deliver an EMP over the US is almost non existent. WHAT they have is a few, old short range missiles, but we know that already.

NK has nothing "in orbit" except ONE satellite they launched last year which is said to be defunct and basically tumbling around in orbit broken without function. Do you think that NK, which is, in many aspects, a country like 1000 years back in the middle-ages, has a functioning EMP weapon ala "Star Wars" in orbit?

How many advanced EMP weapons does the US have "in orbit"? And then add 1+1 together how many NK might have.

EVEN IF we make up a scenario that NK would have some science fiction EMP nuclear warhead "in orbit", it is nothing but speculation to say that one attack would "disable the US infrastructure", our defense capabiltiy and missile defense. Cheezus this is just entirely nonsense.

SECONDLY, and this is the most important thing, we would not launch a "devastating nuclear attack" on NK, and read my lips, even if NK would be so stupid and would actually fire one of theirs first *we* would only use nukes on NK as a last resort if such a use would be justified. (Which, in all likelihood, it will not). A "devastation" of NK is not our goal, our goal is to take down their regime and protect us and our allies....not exploding a ton of nuclear warheads all around Asia just because NK might have fired one of theirs (even if that would, of course, be a catastrophe eg. if they would've targeted Seoul).

The US has about 9000 nuclear warheads, do you think we would (as you say so nicely) "blow our wad", and how many nuclear missiles (even if we assume a nuclear strike on our side) do you think it would need to give a serious blow to NK? You think the US would use up all their resources on NK?

And then, last but not least, are we at war with China or Russia or why would you assume that any of them would basically just be waiting for a good opportunity to "attack the US"? Over effing NK? If SOMEONE would jump on such an "opportunity" it could be Iran or another rogue state, but I do not think that China/Russia are so stupid to risk anything: All it would take would be ONE nuke over Moscow (millions dead) and another nuke of Beijing (millions dead again)...and I thin that as opposed to NK China and Russia are sane and know the consequences...ASIDE from the negative impact on their own economy it would have to attack us.

reply to post by Happy1

It reminds me of Cheney giving the orders to stand down as the hijacked aircraft was approaching the Pentagon on 9/11.

reply to post by Plan2exist18


It would have to be one hell of a blast to effect the whole country , I would guess .

reply to post by flexy123

There may be a good reason (MAD) why they have not acted on their long term goals but the ultimate goal of Communism is world domination. Maybe Krushchev was just bloviating when he said that "we will bury you!" during the Cold War. Maybe China will forgive our debt someday and since there is no calculated conspiracy to start WW3 to take down the West (and we are the chief cornerstone of same) then no fear of another communist country giving them a nuclear weapon - one that they are incapable of bringing up to contemporary standards. OK. Still I wonder why Kim who seems otherwise sane sans his recent bellicose behavior is acting so confident if not cocky.

reply to post by CosmicCitizen

How does an inferior fighter (especially in size) take out a larger and more skilled opponent - especially where rules dont apply (like a bar fight)? Simple; he strikes first (a "sucker punch" is especially effective) and may also have an unfair advantage via a force multiplier weapon or a competent backup.

reply to post by flexy123


What, if any, are your thoughts about the BRIC nations seeking to circumvent the US dollar, and use the yuan as the reserve dollar? What would happen to the US if the IMF and world bank were rendered futile?

Is economic war anymore destructive than nuclear war?

Is the obozo administration working with said communist allies, Russia and China, to destroy the US dollar, and the country?

You folks are not even close to giving NK their due credit. They are a proud nation, and not only do I think there is no chance they could be duped into drawing U.S. into conflict by China and Russia, I think there is an even lower chance (i.e. nil), of them knowingly sacrificing their nation to further the agenda of Russia and China.

Their new leader is young, sure. But his military staff is old and crafty. They are not morons. All their current moves are very carefully thought out, and I doubt very much driven by Russia or China.

So basically what your saying is......

reply to post by fleabit


That's the problem though. A young leader that can make a mistake in his pride, trying to show he's as strong or stronger than his father. With the forces in the area that's all it would take is one mistake, to kick off at least a limited war.

And with reports that he may be having trouble with his generals, that just makes things dicier.