North Korea Mega Thread

[Senator-elect Spark]

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

[Senator-elect Spark]

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

[Senator-elect Spark]

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.

We cannot risk their safety and our safety, North Korea must be taken seriously and eradicated before they are able to launch that nuclear weapon. Would you rather a pre-emptive nuclear strike to happen unexpectedly on Seoul or a major US city? I highly doubt it, we cannot jeopardize security. Swift action needs to be taken and implemented. Eventually, war cannot be avoided. South Korea & Japan should have nothing to fear because the US is behind them.

[Senator-elect Spark]

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.

Imagine the trouble West Germany had integrating the east, times about a 1000

The cultures are radically different and as a result of the separation for a long length of time that have changed drastically. I have spoken with someone from South Korea and they say that they don't talk to the North and just disregard them.

[Senator-elect Spark]

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.

We cannot risk their safety and our safety, North Korea must be taken seriously and eradicated before they are able to launch that nuclear weapon. Would you rather a pre-emptive nuclear strike to happen unexpectedly on Seoul or a major US city? I highly doubt it, we cannot jeopardize security. Swift action needs to be taken and implemented. Eventually, war cannot be avoided. South Korea & Japan should have nothing to fear because the US is behind them.

Why would a pariah nation that exists solely to maintain a single family in power piss away all their deterrence in a pre-emptive strike

Because they are radical and a dire threat to international stability.

[Senator-elect Spark]

The Security Council has approved the US-proposed sanctions by unanimous vote.

FFs.

[Senator-elect Spark]

[Senator-elect Spark]

So what happens if North Korea attacks Guam with ballistic missiles? And the ideology of communism will not flourish much longer on the face of the planet. Trump is doing exactly what he needs to do IMO by issuing a warning and it means he's serious about it.

[Senator-elect Spark]

So what happens if North Korea attacks Guam with ballistic missiles? And the ideology of communism will not flourish much longer on the face of the planet. Trump is doing exactly what he needs to do IMO by issuing a warning and it means he's serious about it.

enjoy getting drafted little boy

Let's hope he's the first one to go given he's so enthusiastic about it.

I have been saying it and I would be proud to serve my country to defend it at all costs.

[Senator-elect Spark]

This President faces an existential crisis not seen since Cuba when JFK was in office.

[Senator-elect Spark]

So what happens if North Korea attacks Guam with ballistic missiles? And the ideology of communism will not flourish much longer on the face of the planet. Trump is doing exactly what he needs to do IMO by issuing a warning and it means he's serious about it.

enjoy getting drafted little boy

Let's hope he's the first one to go given he's so enthusiastic about it.

I have been saying it and I would be proud to serve my country to defend it at all costs.

Then go ahead and sign up...what are you waiting for cuck?

Not everyone at Atlas loves America enough to put politics aside.

I'm not a big flag-waver, but I'm an American and I pray that our President (whether you like the fact or not) will succeed in his objectives for America in this matter.

This is exactly right. It's a fight to retain our freedoms and democracy. I'll be sure to wait for you to defend us while you cower in fear. And I'd also ask if everyone on this forum could exercise a degree of political tolerance for others' political beliefs. This isn't about our leanings, it's about the safety and security of our nation among others. If you won't protect it, you are inherently un-American.

[Senator-elect Spark]

So what happens if North Korea attacks Guam with ballistic missiles? And the ideology of communism will not flourish much longer on the face of the planet. Trump is doing exactly what he needs to do IMO by issuing a warning and it means he's serious about it.

enjoy getting drafted little boy

Let's hope he's the first one to go given he's so enthusiastic about it.

I have been saying it and I would be proud to serve my country to defend it at all costs.

Then go ahead and sign up...what are you waiting for cuck?

Not everyone at Atlas loves America enough to put politics aside.

I'm not a big flag-waver, but I'm an American and I pray that our President (whether you like the fact or not) will succeed in his objectives for America in this matter.

This is exactly right. It's a fight to retain our freedoms and democracy. I'll be sure to wait for you to defend us while you cower in fear. And I'd also ask if everyone on this forum could exercise a degree of political tolerance for others' political beliefs. This isn't about our leanings, it's about the safety and security of our nation among others. If you won't protect it, you are inherently un-American.

"If you don't agree with my perception of this situation, you aren't a real American"

Sounds about right

No, I'm saying that it's not based on our opinions of politics. It's about preventing the deaths of our own citizens and our allies.

[Senator-elect Spark]

So what happens if North Korea attacks Guam with ballistic missiles? And the ideology of communism will not flourish much longer on the face of the planet. Trump is doing exactly what he needs to do IMO by issuing a warning and it means he's serious about it.

enjoy getting drafted little boy

Let's hope he's the first one to go given he's so enthusiastic about it.

I have been saying it and I would be proud to serve my country to defend it at all costs.

Then go ahead and sign up...what are you waiting for cuck?

Not everyone at Atlas loves America enough to put politics aside.

I'm not a big flag-waver, but I'm an American and I pray that our President (whether you like the fact or not) will succeed in his objectives for America in this matter.

This is exactly right. It's a fight to retain our freedoms and democracy. I'll be sure to wait for you to defend us while you cower in fear. And I'd also ask if everyone on this forum could exercise a degree of political tolerance for others' political beliefs. This isn't about our leanings, it's about the safety and security of our nation among others. If you won't protect it, you are inherently un-American.

Dude you couldn't even ask a girl out without making her feel like a potential rape victim.  How are we supposed to trust you to protect our freedumbs and demokkkracy?

That is irrelevant and if you think that bothers me you're mistaken. Because many of you won't.

[Senator-elect Spark]

So not wanting nuclear war means you hate America?

No, it means that you must try to prevent it from happening and save lives.

[Senator-elect Spark]

The world finds itself in this precarious situation thanks to eight years of inactivity and wimping out by Obama.  

Among others.

[Senator-elect Spark]

I'm pretty sure no one actually wants the United States to get nuked. That's the whole point of criticizing Trump's approach to the situation so far. He's made the odds of nuclear war higher than they would be with a more level headed person at the helm. Not going into denial and acting like everything's being handled just fine doesn't mean you want a war to break out.

I've highlighted the crux of the immediate issue. 

You say the problem is Trump's approach.  Is that really true?  Trump has conveyed to the North Koreans that there will be real consequences that will occur if they keep making nuclear threats toward the US.  Is there a consequence to not responding, kicking the can down the road some more, that is preferable?

Or, perhaps, we could do the truly revolutionary, and try talking to them? North Korea isn't run by the sanest group in the world, but they are rational enough to recognize their self-interest lies in avoiding a nuclear confrontation with the United States while also safeguarding itself from the fate of other non-nuclear enemies of America, e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya. They have very legitimate reasons to hate us, considering what we did to them during the Korean War, into which we asserted ourselves without any threat to our nation. That war resulted in the death of 600,000 North Korean civilians, 406,000 North Korean soldiers, while the US dropped 635,000 tons of bombs, 32,557 tons of napalm, and virtually annihilated their infrastructure with every substantial building in the country destroyed, the majority of cities and villages mere rubble, and was so severe it forced factories, schools, hospitals, and so on underground, and compelled them to dig mud huts and tunnels underground for housing.

The Communist regime that followed the war helped to solidify its power over the demolished nation by scapegoating the United States and fear-mongering about our desire to recreate the destruction wrought upon them during the Korean War. Since the North Koreans were already traumatized, isolated from the West, and forced to rebuild a broken country, they were susceptible to such propaganda, which aided in empowering the regime to continue despite its intolerable cruelty, extreme poverty, and total isolation. Without the American bogeyman, which we helped and continue to help them create, they may have collapsed already. Instead, with every threat or rumor of threat by the United States, the North Korean propaganda machine can gin up fervent nationalism among its populace, which serves the regime's interests. The best thing we could've done, aside from staying out of the Korean War, was ignore them and let the regime implode. But now, we're giving them exactly what they want.

A reignition of conflict on the Korean Peninsula would almost certainly result in civilian casualties at levels unseen since the Vietnam War. It could also result in the first use of an atomic weapon on civilians since WWII. Seoul, a city of 9,914,381 people and metro of 25,600,000, could come under immediate, sustained, and extraordinary assault. Countless artillery and warheads will be launched into major civilian centers throughout the Korean Peninsula and, possibly, into Japan as well. Considering North Korea has threatened Guam, that may even be a target. American military bases in the region house tens of thousands of American troops, placing them in immediate danger. A tactical nuclear strike in the region, if successful, could not only result in instant death for tens of thousands via incineration, but severe physical injury, psychological trauma, and long-term consequences resulting from cancer causing pollutants, which could be spread throughout the fallout zone. When North Korea falls, which it would from the war, then who knows what they may do with their nuclear material or into whose hands it may fall. Add to that a massive wave of refugees will break the Chinese border, attempting to escape the unrelenting aerial, sea, and eventual land bombardment, triggering a humanitarian crisis that would rival, if not dwarf, that of Syria and Iraq.

There are alternatives to such a nightmarish war scenario. We should not only entertain, but pursue those aggressively, so that we may avert such a crisis. Only if North Korea attacks us first or we discover a legitimate active plan to attack American territory, bases, or allies, should we engage in a military confrontation. Anyone who says otherwise is completely devaluing the lives of millions of Koreans and tens of thousands of American soldiers, and for what?

I agree with everything but the last sentence. Are you willing to risk allowing major U.S. cities to becoming susceptible to a nuclear attack? Be sitting ducks and wait for North Korea to act? Doubtful in my mind, and the President knows this.

[Senator-elect Spark]

Do conservatives actually trust Trump to lead America safely and effectively through a war with a country like North Korea? That's a serious question. We all have seen Trump behave, all the lies he tells, the erratic decision making, the knee-jerk reactions that had zero forethought. I get that I see Trump differently than a Republican does, but Trump's absurd, often-unhinged behavior should make everyone, including conservatives, nervous as hell in this situation.

And on a personal note, I'd like to state that it currently my dream that we go through at least one Republican administration that doesn't drag us into war with someone. I mean for the love of god, we are barely even done with Iraq and Afghanistan!

Iraq was entirely unnecessary. However, in this instance we actually do have an imminent and credible threat. It parallels to Kennedy's administration with the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. In the coming months, it will need to be addressed in some manner.

[Senator-elect Spark]

Depending on the result of the war with North Korea, we will need to negotiate with China regarding government to take the place of the former North Korean regime if they are wiped out. Due to their objection to a reunified Korea by the U.S., China will likely want to install a provisional government while the U.S. would seize the remaining weapons and protect South Korea's sovereignty.  

I know this is morbid to think about, but if we actually did launch enough nukes to "wipe out" NK, it would just be an unlivable wasteland, right? So there wouldn't really need to be a "government" there. It would probably clear up eventually (although nukes have never been uses in that kind of concentration before so you can't say that would happen) and something would have to happen with that land. I'd be fine with letting China have it if they were insistent on it.

If you just mean overthrowing the government, letting the Chinese keep NK as a separate state and having them set up their own government would be a good way to avoid the endgame so to speak. SK wouldn't be happy about that at all, though.  

Probably wouldn't use nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula unless the situation spiraled out of control.

[Senator-elect Spark]

Do conservatives actually trust Trump to lead America safely and effectively through a war with a country like North Korea? That's a serious question. We all have seen Trump behave, all the lies he tells, the erratic decision making, the knee-jerk reactions that had zero forethought. I get that I see Trump differently than a Republican does, but Trump's absurd, often-unhinged behavior should make everyone, including conservatives, nervous as hell in this situation.

And on a personal note, I'd like to state that it currently my dream that we go through at least one Republican administration that doesn't drag us into war with someone. I mean for the love of god, we are barely even done with Iraq and Afghanistan!

Iraq was entirely unnecessary. However, in this instance we actually do have an imminent and credible threat.

And the most clueless person we could possibly pick to handle it.

He isn't clueless if he's competent enough to become President of the United States. I'd rather call him clever.

[Senator-elect Spark]

I'm pretty sure no one actually wants the United States to get nuked. That's the whole point of criticizing Trump's approach to the situation so far. He's made the odds of nuclear war higher than they would be with a more level headed person at the helm. Not going into denial and acting like everything's being handled just fine doesn't mean you want a war to break out.

I've highlighted the crux of the immediate issue.  

You say the problem is Trump's approach.  Is that really true?  Trump has conveyed to the North Koreans that there will be real consequences that will occur if they keep making nuclear threats toward the US.  Is there a consequence to not responding, kicking the can down the road some more, that is preferable?

Or, perhaps, we could do the truly revolutionary, and try talking to them? North Korea isn't run by the sanest group in the world, but they are rational enough to recognize their self-interest lies in avoiding a nuclear confrontation with the United States while also safeguarding itself from the fate of other non-nuclear enemies of America, e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya. They have very legitimate reasons to hate us, considering what we did to them during the Korean War, into which we asserted ourselves without any threat to our nation. That war resulted in the death of 600,000 North Korean civilians, 406,000 North Korean soldiers, while the US dropped 635,000 tons of bombs, 32,557 tons of napalm, and virtually annihilated their infrastructure with every substantial building in the country destroyed, the majority of cities and villages mere rubble, and was so severe it forced factories, schools, hospitals, and so on underground, and compelled them to dig mud huts and tunnels underground for housing.

The Communist regime that followed the war helped to solidify its power over the demolished nation by scapegoating the United States and fear-mongering about our desire to recreate the destruction wrought upon them during the Korean War. Since the North Koreans were already traumatized, isolated from the West, and forced to rebuild a broken country, they were susceptible to such propaganda, which aided in empowering the regime to continue despite its intolerable cruelty, extreme poverty, and total isolation. Without the American bogeyman, which we helped and continue to help them create, they may have collapsed already. Instead, with every threat or rumor of threat by the United States, the North Korean propaganda machine can gin up fervent nationalism among its populace, which serves the regime's interests. The best thing we could've done, aside from staying out of the Korean War, was ignore them and let the regime implode. But now, we're giving them exactly what they want.

A reignition of conflict on the Korean Peninsula would almost certainly result in civilian casualties at levels unseen since the Vietnam War. It could also result in the first use of an atomic weapon on civilians since WWII. Seoul, a city of 9,914,381 people and metro of 25,600,000, could come under immediate, sustained, and extraordinary assault. Countless artillery and warheads will be launched into major civilian centers throughout the Korean Peninsula and, possibly, into Japan as well. Considering North Korea has threatened Guam, that may even be a target. American military bases in the region house tens of thousands of American troops, placing them in immediate danger. A tactical nuclear strike in the region, if successful, could not only result in instant death for tens of thousands via incineration, but severe physical injury, psychological trauma, and long-term consequences resulting from cancer causing pollutants, which could be spread throughout the fallout zone. When North Korea falls, which it would from the war, then who knows what they may do with their nuclear material or into whose hands it may fall. Add to that a massive wave of refugees will break the Chinese border, attempting to escape the unrelenting aerial, sea, and eventual land bombardment, triggering a humanitarian crisis that would rival, if not dwarf, that of Syria and Iraq.

There are alternatives to such a nightmarish war scenario. We should not only entertain, but pursue those aggressively, so that we may avert such a crisis. Only if North Korea attacks us first or we discover a legitimate active plan to attack American territory, bases, or allies, should we engage in a military confrontation. Anyone who says otherwise is completely devaluing the lives of millions of Koreans and tens of thousands of American soldiers, and for what?

I agree with everything but the last sentence. Are you willing to risk allowing major U.S. cities to becoming susceptible to a nuclear attack? Be sitting ducks and wait for North Korea to act? Doubtful in my mind, and the President knows this.

And so I refer you back to the first sentence in my post. We should try talking to them. Not via China as our intermediary, but call the North Koreans and arrange a meeting between our leadership teams (including South Korea's). Sit down and hammer this out. North Korean leadership does not want to lose its grip on power, nor will it surrender its nuclear capabilities; the United States has ensured that due to our regime change in non-nuclear enemy states. But we both want to avoid a nuclear war, so the smartest plan is to treat North Korea with a modicum of respect; don't give them everything they want, but give them enough to ensure that they back away from the cliff. As in all relationships (whether interpersonal or geopolitical), dialogue must be maintained.

That is a credible argument, however, the time for dialogue has passed. North Korea does not have a stable leader who is willing to negotiate. President Moon Jae-in has explicitly expressed interest in talking with Kim Jong Un regarding this situation and even mentioned peaceful reunification, which I believe is the right move but it has proven unsuccessful.

The only other solution would be to accept them as a nuclear power, but even then how can we be sure that they won't attack us? I think it is a very risky proposition IMO.

I willingly accept to hear any opposing solutions and opinions.

[Senator-elect Spark]

By the way, the preemptive attack on North Korea would be justifiable to the UN by preventing a nuclear attack from occurring if we have sufficient intelligence to inform us that it is imminent.

According to the Article 2, Section 4 of the UN Charter an act is justified as self defense if two conditions are present.

1. There must a real threat and not perceived.

2. The self defense must be proportional to the harm in which the actor is threatened.

[Senator-elect Spark]

Do conservatives actually trust Trump to lead America safely and effectively through a war with a country like North Korea? That's a serious question. We all have seen Trump behave, all the lies he tells, the erratic decision making, the knee-jerk reactions that had zero forethought. I get that I see Trump differently than a Republican does, but Trump's absurd, often-unhinged behavior should make everyone, including conservatives, nervous as hell in this situation.

And on a personal note, I'd like to state that it currently my dream that we go through at least one Republican administration that doesn't drag us into war with someone. I mean for the love of god, we are barely even done with Iraq and Afghanistan!

Iraq was entirely unnecessary. However, in this instance we actually do have an imminent and credible threat. It parallels to Kennedy's administration with the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. In the coming months, it will need to be addressed in some manner.

There is a big difference between a country trying to obtain Nukes and one having them 90 miles of your coast.

Not really, it only would take an estimated 30 minutes to reach Los Angeles.

[Senator-elect Spark]

There is zero evidence that North Korea would ever do anything like launch a suicidal attack on the US. That's the bottom line. Outside of the heavy alarmism here, most of the world is not that worried--including the Russians, Chinese, and the Japanese and South Koreans who have lived under the North Korea threat for years and decades. North Korea continues to accept 100,000 tourists a year, including thousands of (non-US) Western tourists, the vast majority of whom go in and out with no incident; it continues to build hotels and try to develop its economy, and conducts $2-$3 billion in trade, and has relations with most world countries. To listen to some people here, you'd think none of this exists and the whole country consists only of their nonsensical propaganda and nuclear program. Every indication is that this is a government that wants to live and even grow in a semi-normal fashion. What would really help is to recognize that Jacobin American's post above illustrates that the cost of war is too high and ratchet down the threats while not giving them anything either.

I wouldn't ever rule that out so it's best to be prepared and also we have to be sure our military is ready to protect South Korea in the event that the lunatic makes a miscalculation and one of the missiles lands where it wasn't intended.

[Senator-elect Spark]

When he sees his land is laden with fire, fury, wrath of destruction and total annihilation by our tomahawk missile technology on his nuclear arsenal.

[Senator-elect Spark]

Kinda sad story but reports are out of S.Korea that the media is giving this little coverage. Apparently they are treating Trunp like they do with N. Korea and just tune out what is being said

Do you think South Korea is in denial while continuing to dismiss the threats. Or do they believe they aren't serious?