North Korea dreams of USA's destruction

[Stephan90]

I wonder how China would react if South Korea and the USA invaded North Korea. In my opinion they would not intervene personally. Maybe they would support them with weapons and food to sustain a guerillia-war.

 

Hopefully Korea wil be united soon, so that North Koreans can enjoy some prosperity too.

[sivispacem]

I wonder how China would react if South Korea and the USA invaded North Korea. In my opinion they would not intervene personally.

I think, strategically speaking, they'd have far more to lose by doing something than just by doing nothing. They're already becoming something of a pariah for their support of the DPRK.

[Typhus]

Is it true that North Korea's entire nuclear arsenal consists of a tin can and an old bus ticket?

[Stephan90]

 

I wonder how China would react if South Korea and the USA invaded North Korea. In my opinion they would not intervene personally.

I think, strategically speaking, they'd have far more to lose by doing something than just by doing nothing. They're already becoming something of a pariah for their support of the DPRK.

The world is still dependent on China, they produce like 95% of rare earths and are with US state bonds worth over 1 trillion $ the largest creditor of the USA. They are a strong factor for the world conjuncture.

 

 

Is it true that North Korea's entire nuclear arsenal consists of a tin can and an old bus ticket?

 

Do you live under a rock?

 

North Korea is already a nuclear power and has done a successful nuclear bomb test in 2009. The nuke had an explosive power of 20 kilo tons.

 

Seoul is not far from the border. North Korea could kill hundred thousands if not millions with one successful nuclear strike.

[ThunderSt0rm]

Silly North Korea, US is way more powerful than them. If they would strike, they would get mass bombed.

[sivispacem]

 

The world is still dependent on China, they produce like 95% of rare earths and are with US state bonds worth over 1 trillion $ the largest creditor of the USA. They are a strong factor for the world conjuncture.

In terms of rare earth metal (a mild aside), those of us who've spent the last five years shouting "I told you so" in relation to China's dominance being short-lived have been vindicated. Thanks to decreases in their exploitable assets, increases in costs and improvements in mining techniques, there have been a whole raft of additional production operations set up in recent months and years. China are effectively in the process of being sidelined as the primary producer of REM (which aren't really rare in reality) and the prices for them (which were artificially inflated by the Chinese state-owned enterprises) have crashed through the floor. There's an interesting article here about how Molycorp and Lynas have collaboratively and systematically destroyed China's rare earth monopoly. As for the question of debts and funding, China hasn't been able to execute any economic leverage over the US in the past, and there's no reason it will in the future. Especially at a time when it's arguably decreasing in strategic importance as the more favourable and open BRIC nations (so Brazil and India, then) outstrip their growth and provide a much more savory point of contact for Western powers. What's more, China's very existence is dependent on maintaining a working trading relation with the Western world. The West can probably live without China- there are plenty of other nations chomping at the bit to take their place- but could China live without the West? Not in their current form, IMO. I don't think that the Chinese authorities would do anything rash that would run the risk of offending the Western world or inflaming already sensitive tensions, hence why much of their muscle-flexing has been towards other Eastern powers over largely insignificant islands in the South Pacific, rather than resisting US attempts to systematically dismantle every connection the DPRK has with the outside world. It's bad enough that China have build their entire economic empire on the back of intellectual property theft and commercial espionage- they're treading a thin line as it is.

 

 

North Korea is already a nuclear power and has done a successful nuclear bomb test in 2009. The nuke had an explosive power of 20 kilo tons.

Closer fifteen, and there's absolutely no evidence they can actually deploy nuclear weapons operationally. The very act of minaturising a nuclear weapon to a level deliverable over even that short distance is likely beyond them, much less trying to do so in the face of of one of the most modern, well-equipped and heavily militarised areas of the world. They can't deliver by missile as far as we know (not unless they've managed to drop their fission gun-type design down to below 1000kg or sorted their abysmal launch reliability, anyway- the last thing they want is a rocket explosion scattering weapons-grade uranium across their country) so conventional air delivery would be the most feasible. And I can't see their ancient, decrepit air force managing to deliver anything to the South given that there are probably more surface-to-air missiles located along the DMZ than there are in most of Western Europe. The DPRK may be the best example of a rogue state, but I don't think even they would risk suicide-by-nuke to inflict serious, though hardly irreparable damage on their adversary.

Edited February 10, 2013 by sivispacem

[orbitalraindrops]

People are laughing at the fact that they have poor technology and so therefore don't pose a threat but I think that millions of brainwashed people and some AK-47's are a lot to worry about. Look at vietnam. The vietcong were literally using sharpened sitcks with poo on the end and they still managed to kill a considerable amount of the best equpt best trained soldiers in the world. These N.K people would gratefully die for the short fat chode that rules over them. There either going to continue posturing until they get nuclear weapons or in the event that a conflict does break out end up in some guerilla type situation with north korean children trying to overrun american checkpoints all because they hope to one day being suckling on Kim Jong Uns p3nor. Either situation is bad and I think N.K for the sake of it's people and the worlds stability needs to be liberated.

Edited February 10, 2013 by orbitalraindrops

[sivispacem]

People are laughing at the fact that they have poor technology and so therefore don't pose a threat but I think that millions of brainwashed people and some AK-47's are a lot to worry about. Look at vietnam. The vietcong were literally using sharpened sitcks with poo on the end and they still managed to kill a considerable amount of the best equpt best trained soldiers in the world.

There's a very large difference between being able to hold your own in an irregular insurgency/counterinsurgency conflict and a direct military confrontation. Their ability to conduct guerilla warfare is severely limited by the fact they're basically enclosed and completely isolated; the only feasible situation in which a guerilla war would take place would be a ground invasion and when their entire military capability could be annihilated in a single opening salvo by a moderately-armed European country (let alone a coalition of any kind) there isn't really the need for them.

[Dingdongs]

Which is why, in my opinion, due to the nature of the citizenry in North Korea, warfare with them would have to be a kill everyone strategy.

[Max]

 

I saw this a couple of days ago. Activision is working hard on blocking all the videos.

 

Using footage from American video game and American song as propaganda against America. Brilliant! Why did they make this anyway? Half the freakin' country doesn't even have electricity and I don't think anyone besides their glorious leader and his closest people have internet.

The thing about videos like this is that they're not designed to be viewed by a domestic audience. They get their US hating rehtoric in other ways.

 

This video is designed to propogate North Korea's image in other counttries and particularly, as a threat to South Korea. Its all just sabre-rattling and propaganda.

Edited February 10, 2013 by Max.

[EscoLehGo]

Which is why, in my opinion, due to the nature of the citizenry in North Korea, warfare with them would have to be a kill everyone strategy.

Yea but don't you think a lot of the populace could be bought over with a couple sammiches and clean drinking water? It's my understanding that the average North Korean isn't faring so well in the food department.

[Stephan90]

Which is why, in my opinion, due to the nature of the citizenry in North Korea, warfare with them would have to be a kill everyone strategy.

Yea but don't you think a lot of the populace could be bought over with a couple sammiches and clean drinking water? It's my understanding that the average North Korean isn't faring so well in the food department.

No, of course everyone must be killed, they are evil, evil communists.

[Guest]

I love the cheap special effects, they actually make North Korea look bloody pathetic.

[GunWrath]

 

Might as well do a mass wipeout of the entire population. Abit absurd sounding I know.. but all of them are literally brainwashed. They won't be of use to normal population once freed from their oppressors.

 

Some sort of virus or just do the whole Hiroshima thing.

Let me guess; you're an American, correct?

American as apple pie. Does that decide why I think they would be wiped out? Not at all.

[GTA_stu]

Their leader should get assassinated just for that god awful hairstyle.

 

 

Looks like an overgrown moustache sitting on his head.

[crispypistonx8]

Lol, even the lowest forms of life have dreams... few are rarely worth mention this is not one.

[GunWrath]

Their leader should get assassinated just for that god awful hairstyle.

 

 

Looks like an overgrown moustache sitting on his head.

Hahaha.. asian stalin.

[Doublepulse]

Their leader should get assassinated just for that god awful hairstyle.

 

 

Looks like an overgrown moustache sitting on his head.

Damn.. He looks so nice with that horrible haircut and friendly smile... It sucks he does not have horns or red eyes with pale skin like the evil characters on Fable series..

 

Seriously, I watched that documentary that ThePinkFloydSound posted in the thread about them nuking the US, man NK is one crazy f*cked up country.

 

I normally try not and say those things about a country, but damn NK might have to be an exception. I don't wanna blame an entire population for something the leaders have caused, I am sure like every country, there are some nice people, but seriously that is one country someone could sh*t talk and not feel any guilt about.. But you could also feel bad for the people trapped in that hell.

[darthYENIK]

Apparently they successfully detonated a nuke in their underground test site.

[Clem Fandango]

I think people are overestimating just how "brainwashed" the population are. The youth at least are very heavily influenced by Japanese and South Korean culture (which means they are consuming independent foreign media) and are refusing to wear their state-issued grey garbs.

 

It's also ironic that I've heard "the North Koreans are so brainwashed we have to engage in genocide against them" in here, given that shows a heavy level of indoctrination by western governments- what makes it especially funny is that the westerners saying these things are so successfully brainwashed that they present it as their own opinion; say what you will about North Korean propaganda, I doubt they've successfully convinced anyone that the state line is their own personal opinion.

 

I think all the North Korea scape-goating is just a desperate attempt by the west to paint themselves as white hats when basically all their enemies on the international stage are either rag tag rebels who've had their lives destroyed by western foreign policy, or radicalised militants who think(?) they're responding to crimes against their ethnic group. I mean there's Russia (and to a lesser extent China) but that's a very complex affair and tends to be marginalised in public dialogue in favour of the more simplistic model of international relations being a big show down between the freedom loving west and the crazy dystopian hell holes that are North Korea and Iran.

 

Maybe rather than discussing how much you'd like to see the complete destruction of a hostile nation that is incredibly small and isolated, an international pariah, has almost no industrial, military or intelligence capabilities and is run by crazies with no attachment to reality, we could talk about something that's not a huge waste of time?

[The-King]

Whenever North Korea is mentioned I always think of the documentary Vice did.

 

I highly, highly recommend watching all three parts; they're the most unique insight I've ever seen into the nation.

 

 

[Dale Nixon]

Whenever North Korea is mentioned I always think of the documentary Vice did.

 

I highly, highly recommend watching all three parts; they're the most unique insight I've ever seen into the nation.

 

 

Nah, the Vice documentary is over sensationalized sh*t. You're better off watching personal homemade videos and pictures and reading reviews people have posted on going to North Korea. But even then, it's interesting, but not necessarily the truth.

 

Melchior's post is fairly spot on.

[Kevin...]

Saw that as well. Its nothing really new. NK detonated two others in 2006 and 2009. I think they used uranium this time around though.

 

While I can side with both the peace and war sides of the debate, I think a show of force may be in order because they just doing want to listen to the UN or follow sanctions.

 

Lets nuke them. Well, the land at least. Find a nice patch of land with little to no inhabitants and drop a big one there. Hell, use their own site. Sure, you will get some fallout but you can track weather and we could surface detonate rather than air detonation.

[Clem Fandango]

Saw that as well. Its nothing really new. NK detonated two others in 2006 and 2009. I think they used uranium this time around though.

 

While I can side with both the peace and war sides of the debate, I think a show of force may be in order because they just doing want to listen to the UN or follow sanctions.

 

Lets nuke them. Well, the land at least. Find a nice patch of land with little to no inhabitants and drop a big one there. Hell, use their own site. Sure, you will get some fallout but you can track weather and we could surface detonate rather than air detonation.

Why? What could possibly be averted by doing such a thing? Also, if we nuked every nation that ignored the UN's constant condemnation, we'd basically have to nuke the f*ck out of America, Britain, Australia and Israel.

 

Also, sanctions are imposed externally, they're not really something you abide by internally.

[The-King]

 

Whenever North Korea is mentioned I always think of the documentary Vice did.

 

I highly, highly recommend watching all three parts; they're the most unique insight I've ever seen into the nation.

 

24R8JObNNQ4

Nah, the Vice documentary is over sensationalized sh*t. You're better off watching personal homemade videos and pictures and reading reviews people have posted on going to North Korea. But even then, it's interesting, but not necessarily the truth.

 

Melchior's post is fairly spot on.

Sensationalized is the wrong word, cherry-picked is far more appropriate, which is how good documentaries work. Taking the most tantamount interesting/informative (keep in mind, combining both are key) footage they have and utilizing it. People wouldn't watch documentaries if they weren't interesting and regardless to what you watch it's going to have a biased point of view. Just because one thing you see doesn't share your point of view doesn't mean it's either wrong or right.

 

Truth is subjective so long as emotion permeates itself upon our society's conscience, so chill out. No matter how objective one point of view claims to be illogical conceptions will always come with them.

Edited February 12, 2013 by The-King

[Kevin...]

That was more of a personal feeling than a call to arms. But seriously, you want to argue the "nuke all countries who ignore UN" card, you would win. Thing is, that is not even close to what we were getting at while in the North Korea topic or on the subject of North Korea detonating a f*cking nuke while preaching war towards the USA as well as other countries.

 

And yeah, I don't mind a show of force. A demonstration. You may be against the idea of an active nuclear deterrent but I am not. Same goes for my personal life...if you come at me in an attempt to kill/harm myself or my family, i will fire a warning shot because, while I will kill you, I would rather not have to. Just look at Japan at the end of WWII. We didn't just bomb Japan to stop the war, we did it as a show for the USSR. It wasn't pretty, the cold war kicked off, but time have changed. If we can not defend and/deter those hostile against us, do we just wait until we are hit first. Personally, I would rather have a mindblowingly superior show of force, avoiding as much loss of life as possible (big bomb, within sight and on territory, little to no civilian impact) instead of waiting however long it takes for them to get their sh*t together (while we sit with our thumbs up our collective asses saying "Don't do it Kim. Stop playing with nukes or we may talk to you sternly on a multinational level which none of your population will ever see because you deprive them of the knowledge of their outside world and leave them living in squalor.) and bomb us...because that is their intent and main goal. Then and only then can we be forceful.

 

This is not Iraq and the imaginary WMDs. This is real, it could be dangerous down the road (yeah it may be a few decades but do you seriously want to let them gather forces and improve their technology to a level where they can somehow reach the US or some other country? i sure as f*ck don't.

[Typhus]

Here's what I don't understand, Kim Jong Un was foreign educated was he not? If memory serves me correctly, he attended a European private school and even played on their basketball team.

 

So, he was around real people. And, most likely, he ingested a great deal of leftist thinking, as seems to be the norm in a University setting. So why now, when he gains control of North Korea, does he retain the tyranny of his father? He is not out of touch, he has seen the outside world, he likely had conversations with people on the very subject of dictatorship and how unacceptable it was. But here he is, presiding over this sad, downtrodden nation of slaves and seemingly not giving them even the slightest bit of dignity or self respect.

 

I just don't understand how someone could see other parts of the world, be exposed to the arguments supporting civil rights and actively choose to be a tyrant.

Is he afraid that the army will kill him if he makes too many changes?

[Moth]

 

Is he afraid that the army will kill him if he makes too many changes?

Or you know, he likes having the power? Yeah he might have went to schools outside of North Korea, but that still doesn't change the fact that he was raised to be this way. Hell for all you know, he could have hated going to a European school and hated what he saw there.

[ccrogers15]

So did osama and his crew but look at them now.

[Clem Fandango]

Just look at Japan at the end of WWII. We didn't just bomb Japan to stop the war, we did it as a show for the USSR.

I think this is pretty wrong. It was to end the war with Japan- Japan was a military powerhouse and the bombings served to a) show force and b) send the Japanese government into chaos (the original target was Tokyo itself). The western powers use a similar strategy today, bombing a nation back to the stone age, destroying its ability to function internally without "aid" and things like World Bank loans, forcing them to set up favourable conditions for western financial institutions... but I'm off on a tangent.

 

 

And yeah, I don't mind a show of force. A demonstration. You may be against the idea of an active nuclear deterrent but I am not.

I think you're misunderstanding the discussion we're having. I am by no means claiming that I'm inherently opposed to nuclear deterrents and shows of force, I'm claiming that North Korea is not the threat you're making it out to be. They don't have the capacity to launch a nuke, and they don't have the ability to raise revenue- so that won't be changing any time soon. It's not a matter of us sitting around twiddling our thumbs and waiting for them to attack, it's a matter of them not having an ability to attack at all. Just because they make threats doesn't mean they should be taken seriously.