North Korea. Your Ideas?

"Shall. We. Play. A. Game...?"

The only way to win...Is to never play the game.

a reply to: 3daysgone

I say we leave them alone until they violate another nation's sovereignty. In fact, I think we should use this as rule going forward in the future in all circumstances.

a reply to: dawnstar

From what I've read most of the important people live in Pyongyang (almost like the Capitol in Hunger Games).

Cruise missile the capitol and saturate 20 miles off the DMZ with Daisy Cutters and a few MOAB's.

We're never going to plan a casualty free war. They don't exist. However, war should be fought with three priorities in mind:

1 - eliminate the enemies means to resist (target CoC /ground forces/ Artillery in NK)
2 - maximize safe operating environment for American/allied forces (maintain air superiority / remove CBRN threat)
3 - reduce / minimize casualties to non-combatants (avoid collateral damage when/where possible)

The issue is how interwoven is NK's military infrastructure with the civilian population in the outlying districts. Are the artillery emplacements surrounded by hamlets (human shields)? How many civilian deaths are we going to cause in order to meet our objectives? POINT = Are we willing to make #3 replace #2 or even #1?

I've seen the priorities get skewed and I've seen it cause American lives as well as see it cause mission failure.

If (gods forbid) we ever attack NK, we have to do so with the intention of winning the war. Not hearts and minds and not an election. A war.

originally posted by: buckwhizzle
We just can't do a first strike.Guam will have to take the hit.According to the state-run paper,China has basically given the U.S. a "green light" if NK strikes first.That is the only move we have.IMO,of course.

No. If NK launches missiles near Guam we will have to intercept, then strike to decapitate command and control, rocket and nuke assets and artillery facing South Korea. The world is better off with no Lil Kim in it. China would do well to take him down before that comes to pass, which it will.

Send both the u.s and nk to sit at the kids table till both grow up and act like adults .

originally posted by: fiverx313

originally posted by: 3daysgone
Would you be willing to talk to Kim, or would you strike first?

it's not like we haven't had ongoing tensions with NK over this before. talking has always been the solution in the past... but our current guy doesn't words too good. things have been said that shouldn't have been, and it's a real worry to me whether anyone can talk the baby-in-chief down from his toddler tantrum.

Talking has never been the solution in the past...They've lied to us every time...That's how they got to where they are...

So is that what you would do??? Talk to lil Kim and ask him to stop making nuclear weapons and quit pointing them at us???

First thing I would do is try and get some American commerce into North Korea, just the basics with food and clothing for now.

Next thing is to get Kim more focused on the Korea reunification rather than war games. As a national power i would just stay out of it and let the North and South sort their own mess out. As a foreign power would just stay on the side lines to assist with support and some international issues.

With a reunified Korea there will be another 20 Million reasons not to use nuclear weapons. Getting into the nuke club is not easy, but like it or not North Korea is there. In time the tough authoritarian culture of North Korea will evolve as the much larger and more open democratic process of South Korea merge. A bit like what happened in Germany when its wall fell.

For now a welcome to the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) club is more than enough. Now get on with more important things.

I would let China know if NK launches anything that will fly into/over Japanese airspace it will be knocked down..I would no do anything before that.

North Korea has a LOOOONG track record of barking up nuclear threats towards us, and the West in general. Their entire government and culture is centered around anti-American rhetoric and propaganda. Rest-assured, if little Kim Jr. wants to "suddenly" back those EMPTY THREATS up with action, then by all means, he will have an utter HELLSTORM of U.S. military might reign down upon him -- something that's NOT going to end well for him. Saddam? Check. Bin Laden? Check. Kim Jong-il? CHECK.

a reply to: 3daysgone

Lets see, build an island in the china sea and put nukes on it. Make sure South Korea has nukes. Japan needs to have nukes. I say we give nukes away like candy at Halloween.

originally posted by: dianajune
a reply to: 3daysgone

I think it's a good source, esp. since it agrees with a Twitter page I subscribe to:

DefCon Warning System on Twitter

If China doesn't want the US to act in self-defense, it ought to do more than remain "neutral."

We are currently at DEFCON 5. The board is Green.

do nothing, north korea have been making threats for decades.
if they finally make a nuclear bomb they should be welcomed to the nuclear club.
if not america better start bombing countries like russia, uk, france, israel, india, pakistan etc, etc.
republicans love war so could be a goer.

originally posted by: Nickn3

originally posted by: dianajune
a reply to: 3daysgone

I think it's a good source, esp. since it agrees with a Twitter page I subscribe to:

DefCon Warning System on Twitter

If China doesn't want the US to act in self-defense, it ought to do more than remain "neutral."

We are currently at DEFCON 5. The board is Green.

Imho they need to change it to at least Defcon 3

Suppose the world was controlled by a relatively small group of people with very bad intentions.

Suppose that group needed a way to break into a global war to issue in their next phase.

Suppose there was some rebellious, clueless and easily controlled despot dictator/country ready to go nuts at any time that would easily pave that way.

Wouldn't it be wise to keep that dictator primed for action? To wait for years if need be, keeping that country anxious to explode in great fury until just the right moment, knowing precisely what will spring that trigger when the time comes?

I think it would be.

a reply to: growler

Brilliant example of a liberal mindset:

Sensible - "That guy waving that gun over there is dangerous"
Liberal "No, ALL guns are dangerous"

Can you point out Pakistan, India, Russia, France, UK, or Israel threating to launch nuclear warheads at America (or its protectorates) in the past 70 years?

What's the comparison then?

Honestly; I wish I'd wake up one morning and see the citizens overthrow the deity. Why don't we propose filling the countryside with leaflets? Perhaps some other 'harmless' posturing the NK seem to be so good at.