North Korea

[xxalxx]

How often do they update the Doomsday clock, as I think Trump must have nudged it another 30 secs closer to midnight

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/doomsday-clock-stays-the-same-time-despite-north-korea-provocations/

 

[Firestar_3x]

Any action by the USA will be via conventional means (cruise missiles followed by heavy bombers), they will not be doing a "first strike" using nuclear weapons, the international community won't stand for it since the response is totally disproportionate and sets a very very dangerous precedent.

 

[Freakbro]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/doomsday-clock-stays-the-same-time-despite-north-korea-provocations/

"We don't make changes to the Doomsday Clock in response to individual events," Krauss said. Instead, any notable events are reviewed together as a whole and are evaluated collectively before changes are made.

Cheers, that's interesting to know

 

[XeNoN89]

Any action by the USA will be via conventional means (cruise missiles followed by heavy bombers), they will not be doing a "first strike" using nuclear weapons, the international community won't stand for it since the response is totally disproportionate and sets a very very dangerous precedent.

This. US will never launch a nuclear first strike, only conventional.

 

[LeMson]

if it wasn't for the potential for the suffering and death of millions of innocent people I'd find it almost perversely amusing

People are already suffering there, reunification with the South would be the best outcome, like East/West Germany.

 

[Orionaut]

People are already suffering there, reunification with the South would be the best outcome, like East/West Germany.

Which is of course what the North has always wanted, and what the US/UN has always opposed

 

[ubersonic]

If that is true, then the world has left it too late to fix North Korea.

That would have been October 9, 2006.

 

[Rilot]

This. US will never launch a nuclear first strike, only conventional.

It doesn't matter what they use. NK have thousands of normal artillery pieces pointed at Seoul which will start firing as soon as any attack happens.

 

[Scania]

This. US will never launch a nuclear first strike, only conventional.

Yet ironically are the only nation to have ever used nuclear weapons in anger....

 

[ubersonic]

Any action by the USA will be via conventional means (cruise missiles followed by heavy bombers), they will not be doing a "first strike" using nuclear weapons, the international community won't stand for it since the response is totally disproportionate and sets a very very dangerous precedent.

Now, you say that, but the thing is that the result of a full scale conventional attack on NK would almost certainly be a nuclear retaliation. Because of that it's logical that if force against NK does become the last option that a nuclear strike would be the best way to go about it in order to try to reduce their nuclear capability.

As far as the international community goes there would probably be some condemnation and a lot of irate Facebook posts, but there would also be support. I.E given the choice South Koreans would rather see mushroom clouds over the boarder than in the middle of Seoul.

 

[Roar87]

I don't know why people are blaming Trump for this, if any state was threatening to attack the UK and testing nuclear weapons we would be saying the exact same thing and have our Navy and Airforce prepared to act. He's not being irrational. If Iran threatened to attack one of our territories with a missile attack we'd tell them to expect a full retaliatory response. I think the US has been very lenient considering NK is threatening to attack the continental US with nuclear weapons, it's only the fact that China is next door to NK that has stopped KJU currently existing as a pile of dust.

 

[Firestar_3x]

Now, you say that, but the thing is that the result of a full scale conventional attack on NK would almost certainly be a nuclear retaliation. Because of that it's logical that if force against NK does become the last option that a nuclear strike would be the best way to go about it in order to try to reduce their nuclear capability.

As far as the international community goes there would probably be some condemnation and a lot of irate Facebook posts, but there would also be support. I.E given the choice South Koreans would rather see mushroom clouds over the boarder than in the middle of Seoul.

The above really depends on the state of US intelligence and the readiness of the NK army to respond.

It takes time to setup a launch, to date all launches from NK have all been out in the open, do they have any hidden missile silos sitting ready to go?

By the looks of things the immediate nuclear response from NK would involve damage to its own country too.

I think the most likely response would be a conventional missile strike at South Korea and a pouring of military across the boarder.

 

[Roar87]

Now, you say that, but the thing is that the result of a full scale conventional attack on NK would almost certainly be a nuclear retaliation. Because of that it's logical that if force against NK does become the last option that a nuclear strike would be the best way to go about it in order to try to reduce their nuclear capability.

As far as the international community goes there would probably be some condemnation and a lot of irate Facebook posts, but there would also be support. I.E given the choice South Koreans would rather see mushroom clouds over the boarder than in the middle of Seoul.

I think you're underestimating the US's conventional capabilities. There's no chance of a nuclear attack by the US unless one is used by them first. B1's and B2s in combination with Cruise missiles can be some absolutely massive damage and most likely knock out 90% of North Korea's missile facilities, they will only have a few warheads at most, so you're likely to stop any ability to retaliate with just conventional means.

 

[LeMson]

Which is of course what the North has always wanted, and what the US/UN has always opposed

Following the destruction of NK leadership and military it might be a go'er

 

[ubersonic]

I think the most likely response would be a conventional missile strike at South Korea and a pouring of military across the boarder.

You don't need guided missiles to nuke a target in artillery range, this is why SK were raging so much after NKs first nuclear tests even though they were years away from having missiles.

 

[Avenged7Fold]

But why would NK nuke SK?

The artillery pointed at SK is there to prevent and fight invasion by ground. Nuking SK would not only go against their eventual aim of reunification, it would also force the US to step in and it would also **** off China and its own people since the winds generally blow north or north/east most time of the year. SK are probably the last place NK want to nuke.

 

[ubersonic]

But why would NK nuke SK?

NK are technically still at ware with what is now SK, just under a ceasefire. The trump card NK has used in recent times to avoid being Freedomized™ is that it would rekt SK if it was attacked, since it got the ability to utilize atomic shells that danger from such an event was magnified.

 

[VincentHanna]

I don't know why people are blaming Trump for this, if any state was threatening to attack the UK and testing nuclear weapons we would be saying the exact same thing and have our Navy and Airforce prepared to act. He's not being irrational. If Iran threatened to attack one of our territories with a missile attack we'd tell them to expect a full retaliatory response. I think the US has been very lenient considering NK is threatening to attack the continental US with nuclear weapons, it's only the fact that China is next door to NK that has stopped KJU currently existing as a pile of dust.

Because North Korea are always making empty threats and it's wise not to rise to them?

 

[Efour]

I wish those 2 idiots would just wrestle it out rather than put the ordinary lives of millions in jeopardy

 

[Washout]

I don't get what the dear leader is hoping to achieve threatening to attack and nuke all and sundry. Little wonder they go through top brass purges in the military so often.
It'd be so much easier to establish relations with generals, off the dictator and then try your level best to reign in the military leaders from reacting and attacking the South. Would be instability but as long as none of them harbour ambitions of being the next dear leader and with the military on side the Koreans could very quickly set about a plan for re-unification.