North Korea Mega Thread

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Trump said during the campaign he would be willing to negotiate with Un. Un said back in February or so he was willing to send diplomats to work with the United States. Why is this happening?

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Trump said during the campaign he would be willing to negotiate with Un. Un said back in February or so he was willing to send diplomats to work with the United States. Why is this happening?

He was lying, as usual. Trump has no skill as a negotiator. He's just an ignorant, immature bully with a big ego and a talent for BS when he gets caught.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

So apparently our best hope is a missile defense system that apparently isn't as strong as it should be. I'm not sure I really trust his trumpness to effectively make our defense better, so this is starting to get a bit concerning.

Indeed. We should have spend the last several years working with the country with the best missile defense system in the world on developing our own. Sadly, that country was forced to focus more on defending itself from our former President.

[Beet]

There was a UN security council resolution condemning North Korea that had the support of the other 14 members, including China, but it was Russia who vetoed. Scapegoating Russia for everything has consequences.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/19/asia/russia-un-veto-north-korea/index.html

At least Russia is urging serious negotiation with North Korea along with sanctions, that is more reasonable than the current "no talks until North Korea agrees to denuclearize first" administration policy, to be frank.

How so?  That's the only thing we really want and we know we're not going to get it.  This is all show on all parts at this point.  Pursuing North Korean talks is about as productive as pursuing a Middle East peace deal at this point.

There are other things that could be useful, simply opening contact would be useful. Ronald Reagan once said of the Soviet Union, we do not mistrust each other because we are armed, we are armed because we mistrust each other. Gaining information on their political goals, and maybe eventually moving towards arms control talks, is not out of the question.

[Beet]

"There is a military option to destroy North Korea's (missile) program and North Korea itself," Graham said on NBC's "Today" show. "If there's going to be a war to stop them, it will be over there. If thousands die, they're going to die over there, they're not going to die here and (President Donald Trump) told me that to my face."
He continued: "I'm saying (military options are) inevitable if North Korea continues."
But, he added, "You can stop North Korea militarily or diplomatically. I prefer the diplomatic approach."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/01/politics/lindsey-graham-north-korea-donald-trump-white-house/index.html

Goodness gracious. There has been no serious effort at getting North Korea to stop. Bilateral talks have never been offered, let alone suspension-for-suspension, let alone serious sanctions on Russia and China to get them to reverse course, or dismantling North Korea's overseas networks. If they're going to start a potentially nuclear war, and claim that they want to exhaust other options, there are plenty of options that haven't even been tried.

The choice isn't between thousands dying over there and thousands dying over here. The choice is between starting a war in which thousands die, which potentially spirals into World War III, and not doing so.

[Beet]

"There is a military option to destroy North Korea's (missile) program and North Korea itself," Graham said on NBC's "Today" show. "If there's going to be a war to stop them, it will be over there. If thousands die, they're going to die over there, they're not going to die here and (President Donald Trump) told me that to my face."
He continued: "I'm saying (military options are) inevitable if North Korea continues."
But, he added, "You can stop North Korea militarily or diplomatically. I prefer the diplomatic approach."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/01/politics/lindsey-graham-north-korea-donald-trump-white-house/index.html

Goodness gracious. There has been no serious effort at getting North Korea to stop. Bilateral talks have never been offered, let alone suspension-for-suspension, let alone serious sanctions on Russia and China to get them to reverse course, or dismantling North Korea's overseas networks. If they're going to start a potentially nuclear war, and claim that they want to exhaust other options, there are plenty of options that haven't even been tried.

The choice isn't between thousands dying over there and thousands dying over here. The choice is between starting a war in which thousands die, which potentially spirals into World War III, and not doing so.

They are refusing talks with the South. http://www.atimes.com/article/north-korea-rejecting-talks-south-korea/ So in all likelihood, they would refuse to talk with the US.

It's conventional wisdom that they refuse talks with the South to delegitimize the government in the South, and have always sought direct talks with the U.S. instead. It's well possible they could refuse, but it's absurd to say you tried diplomacy when you didn't even offer talks before getting what you wanted beforehand.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why would NK budge, though? Trump hasn't changed a thing of Obama's policy, other than issue more threats, that's the thing. What exactly, has he done, in the past 8 months, to change North Korea's calculus? He's gotten China to stop coal imports from North Korea for several months, even though overall trade is up 10%. Other than that, he's only continued the policy of "strategic patience" despite claiming otherwise. Nothing he's done on the diplomatic front could have expected to have a serious chance at success. He's just waiting for more tests before saying that war is justified rather than making a real effort to stop their program otherwise. Not that I think a war would be a good idea in any case.

I have to think if Iraq had 16+ nuclear-tipped ICBMs and was within miles of metropolitan areas of tens of millions of people, even the insane zealouts under Rumsfeld wouldn't have cavalierly gone in.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

"There is a military option to destroy North Korea's (missile) program and North Korea itself," Graham said on NBC's "Today" show. "If there's going to be a war to stop them, it will be over there. If thousands die, they're going to die over there, they're not going to die here and (President Donald Trump) told me that to my face."
He continued: "I'm saying (military options are) inevitable if North Korea continues."
But, he added, "You can stop North Korea militarily or diplomatically. I prefer the diplomatic approach."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/01/politics/lindsey-graham-north-korea-donald-trump-white-house/index.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Beet, what more would you want Trump to do, capitulate? The offer to suspend the nuclear testing program in exchange for suspending exercises with North Korea is worthless. It doesn't accomplish any U.S. goal and the North would be able to end it at will, whenver they're ready to do more tests.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Mods: Petition for this to become a "Updates on North Korea" sticky thread. It would be easier than having 100 threads on the same thing, just different launches, etc.

x VM

Seconded.

[Beet]

Beet, what more would you want Trump to do, capitulate? The offer to suspend the nuclear testing program in exchange for suspending exercises with North Korea is worthless. It doesn't accomplish any U.S. goal and the North would be able to end it at will, whenver they're ready to do more tests.

What exactly is "capitulation", Ernest? Capitulation would be allowing the North to overrun the South and unify Korea under its rule. Suspending exercises costs nothing, not even a single cent, nor does offering to talk. Is merely talking with them so horrific that getting major cities nuked is preferable to it? I don't understand that reasoning.

As for what "more" do I want Trump to do, I've already listed four things he could easily do. What he's done so far is worse than nothing, by the way.

[Inmate Trump]

Good thing we have a leader with a wealth of diplomatic experience.  I'm sure everything will be fine in his tiny hands.

A situation like this could've never been handled by someone who sent out emails about wedding planning.

[KingSweden]

Follow on evaluation article on 38N http://www.38north.org/2017/08/jschilling080117/

Good stuff! Thanks

[Rookie Yinzer]

Good thing we have a leader with a wealth of diplomatic experience.  I'm sure everything will be fine in his tiny hands.

A situation like this could've never been handled by someone who sent out emails about wedding planning.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Here's something that'll lighten up the mood (it'll do the exact opposite):

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/31/politics/north-korea-ejection-test-submarine-activity/index.html

So now even their sub tech is getting better.

I have to admit, that article really is terrifying:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Given Trump's track record, the only question is how bad he'll fumble it.

It shows how low the bar has gotten when "not getting into nuclear war" would be one of this administration's top achievements.

Something that needs to be remembered if there is a North Korean strike on the US or our Allies:
the Trump maladministration has constantly assured the public that nothing bad can possibly happen with Trump on the job while simultaneously constantly flirting with war on the Korean Peninsula. A nuclear attack on the US would be the most damning demonstration of Trump's utter incompetence imaginable.

In the event of such a horrible act of war, there can be little doubt that Trump woould attempt to leverage it to his personal political advantage. That must not happen. If the United States is attacked by North Korea, in the face of Trump's assurances and provocations then under such circumstances he would need to be held as culpable as the Kim regime.

[bilaps]

North Korea will not attack US. Iran will not attack US or Israel for that matter. Russia doesn't want to attack US. These are all propaganda bs you hear on MSM which are forever in a neo-con/war industry/hawkish wing of the country.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Beet, what more would you want Trump to do, capitulate? The offer to suspend the nuclear testing program in exchange for suspending exercises with North Korea is worthless. It doesn't accomplish any U.S. goal and the North would be able to end it at will, whenver they're ready to do more tests.

What exactly is "capitulation", Ernest? Capitulation would be allowing the North to overrun the South and unify Korea under its rule. Suspending exercises costs nothing, not even a single cent, nor does offering to talk. Is merely talking with them so horrific that getting major cities nuked is preferable to it? I don't understand that reasoning.

I don't understand your reasoning that refusing to go along with Kim III's propaganda offensive must inevitably lead to a military offensive. Suspending exercises gains nothing and gives Kim the ability to boast he forced the United States to back down. The Trump Administration has far too few people at State to waste them in meaningless (to us, tho not Kim) talks that won't go anywhere.

[Mike Thick]

Copying this over from the other thread, relevant military asset articles, etc. at the bottom re ranges, arty, MLRS, etc.:

Here is a short primer on how it would play out https://qz.com/950488/nasty-brutish-and-short-what-the-next-korean-war-will-look-like/

Just the opening months, not counting an extended timeline if we have to put boots and face an insurgency.

The opening hours would see ~30,000 dead in Seoul. Most likely it would be more due to it being a city of 10 million people.

Their artillery doesn't have the range to saturate Seoul proper, so most of the casualties would occur in the northern suburbs, which is probably the reason their estimate is so low. How awful this would be probably depends on how much the US knows about the specific locations of the batteries, and how quickly they can take them out in a combat situation (as well as whether North Korea is acting willing to use WMD).

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/north-koreas-secret-strategy-war-america-go-underground-20525

http://www.rfa.org/english/news/korea/bunkers-11162009134509.html

One of these articles states that they have MLRS in addition to conventional artillery so they could definitely hit all of Seoul (the range is 70km or so. Def within range of all of Seoul).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_People%27s_Army_Ground_Force for a wiki on what the Ground Force has.

Here is a NK massed arty demo from early this year https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o3FTgL2L0g

Also this is good albeit a little old and it doesn't include the max ranges for the latest ICBMs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WyrYBrOC1o

Perhaps my wording wasn't clear -- they most certainly can hit Seoul. However, the further from the DMZ you get, the lower the volume of fire, since the vast majority of their pieces are conventional tube artillery. On top of this, they have to retract the guns into their bunkers after every shot to protect from counterattacks, which will slow them down significantly. So, they aren't capable of flattening Seoul within hours, as some have claimed.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/could-north-korea-annihilate-seoul-its-artillery-20345

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Beet, what more would you want Trump to do, capitulate? The offer to suspend the nuclear testing program in exchange for suspending exercises with North Korea is worthless. It doesn't accomplish any U.S. goal and the North would be able to end it at will, whenver they're ready to do more tests.

What exactly is "capitulation", Ernest? Capitulation would be allowing the North to overrun the South and unify Korea under its rule. Suspending exercises costs nothing, not even a single cent, nor does offering to talk. Is merely talking with them so horrific that getting major cities nuked is preferable to it? I don't understand that reasoning.

I don't understand your reasoning that refusing to go along with Kim III's propaganda offensive must inevitably lead to a military offensive. Suspending exercises gains nothing and gives Kim the ability to boast he forced the United States to back down. The Trump Administration has far too few people at State to waste them in meaningless (to us, tho not Kim) talks that won't go anywhere.

Suspending exercises means that the (paranoid, with some some justification) rulers of North Korea don't need to constantly be worrying about a surprise US/South Korea invasion, and don't need to decide between using their giant military machine to harvest crops or keep them prepared for a surprise attack. Ideally, this will make them less paranoid, which seems like a good change for a disconnected regime with a horrible record that has FOUR WMD programs.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Beet, what more would you want Trump to do, capitulate? The offer to suspend the nuclear testing program in exchange for suspending exercises with North Korea is worthless. It doesn't accomplish any U.S. goal and the North would be able to end it at will, whenver they're ready to do more tests.

What exactly is "capitulation", Ernest? Capitulation would be allowing the North to overrun the South and unify Korea under its rule. Suspending exercises costs nothing, not even a single cent, nor does offering to talk. Is merely talking with them so horrific that getting major cities nuked is preferable to it? I don't understand that reasoning.

I don't understand your reasoning that refusing to go along with Kim III's propaganda offensive must inevitably lead to a military offensive. Suspending exercises gains nothing and gives Kim the ability to boast he forced the United States to back down. The Trump Administration has far too few people at State to waste them in meaningless (to us, tho not Kim) talks that won't go anywhere.

Suspending exercises means that the (paranoid, with some some justification) rulers of North Korea don't need to constantly be worrying about a surprise US/South Korea invasion, and don't need to decide between using their giant military machine to harvest crops or keep them prepared for a surprise attack. Ideally, this will make them less paranoid, which seems like a good change for a disconnected regime with a horrible record that has FOUR WMD programs.

I think Kim has a firmer grip on reality than that. He's knows that any effort to topple him will come in the form of a coup or assassination, not a surprise attack. Why do think North Korea freaked out over The Interview?

Keeping the North Korean populace at the brink of starvation helps Kim by keeping the people from having the energy needed to topple him.

[Beet]

Beet, what more would you want Trump to do, capitulate? The offer to suspend the nuclear testing program in exchange for suspending exercises with North Korea is worthless. It doesn't accomplish any U.S. goal and the North would be able to end it at will, whenver they're ready to do more tests.

What exactly is "capitulation", Ernest? Capitulation would be allowing the North to overrun the South and unify Korea under its rule. Suspending exercises costs nothing, not even a single cent, nor does offering to talk. Is merely talking with them so horrific that getting major cities nuked is preferable to it? I don't understand that reasoning.

I don't understand your reasoning that refusing to go along with Kim III's propaganda offensive must inevitably lead to a military offensive. Suspending exercises gains nothing and gives Kim the ability to boast he forced the United States to back down. The Trump Administration has far too few people at State to waste them in meaningless (to us, tho not Kim) talks that won't go anywhere.

I'm just going along with what the administration is telegraphing. Of course stalemate doesn't have to lead to a military offensive- we could settle into a long term doctrine of deterrence. But it if a military offensive is down the line, then direct talks are preferable.

Once a war starts, it's not going to stop escalating until it becomes a regime change war. A regime change war won't stop until the North's forces along the Yalu river must be destroyed. At that point China will have a strategic imperative to intervene. It'll either drag us directly into a war with China, or create a militaristic mentality that leads to war with China in a couple years. A war with China won't be quick either- deep strikes into Chinese territory will have to continue until they abandon their no-first-use policy. At that point there will either be a nuclear exchange or they will do enough damage to us that internment will be the least of some of our problems. If New York City is destroyed I'll be sent to the gas chamber.

At some point people will have to stand up and say no to Trump and the militarists. If sanity can't prevail on a matter of nuclear war there is no limit.

[Shadows]

If there’s going to be a war to stop [Kim Jong Un], it will be over there. If thousands die, they’re going to die over there. They’re not going to die here. And He has told me that to my face," Graham said. "And that may be provocative, but not really. When you're president of the United States, where does your allegiance lie? To the people of the United States," the senator said.

Military experts have said there are no good options for peacefully stopping North Korea, although the National Security Council has previously presented Trump with possibilities that could include putting American nukes in South Korea or killing Kim Jong Un. Graham said military experts are "wrong" that no good options exist. "There is a military option to destroy North Korea's program and North Korea itself," he added.

"I'm saying it's inevitable unless North Korea changes because you're making our president pick between regional stability and homeland security," he added. "He's having to make a choice that no president wants to make. They kicked the can down the road for 20 years, there's no place else to kick it."

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/north-korea/sen-lindsey-graham-trump-says-war-north-korea-option-n788396

[Spark]

What happens when North Korea has the capability of launching a nuclear ICBM at the US? How would Trump respond?

[Spark]

It's inevitable and I truly hope he is the one to take action, he's proven that. We have to strike first.

[Confused Democrat]

It's inevitable and I truly hope he is the one to take action, he's proven that. We have to strike first.

Strike first and risk the lives of hundreds of thousands of South Koreans?

It's easy to say that when you're sitting behind your computer in the US. I bet you'd be singing a different tune if you were living in Seoul.

[TheSaint250]

There's a good possibility that even if regime change happens the North Korean citizens won't go quietly. Many hate the regime but many are also brainwashed into loving it. Worst I can see is Vietcong-level resistance to a democratic North Korea or unified Korea.