North Korea Mega Thread

[JA]

Nothing is going to happen, but part of me wishes something would, just so this saber rattling stops.

Rip it off like a bandaid.

Here here. Just bomb the hell out of them already and get it over with. NK is a dangerous, hostile power and each day we delay, is a step toward them one day lobbing one at a city here.

Always easy to say when you're safe behind your keyboard, confident that a war won't be coming to your doorstep. That your home won't be razed, your family and friends and neighbors slaughtered, living under constant terror that a bomb could be dropped any minute ending your life or crippling you. Keyboard warriors like you are the worst of the worst. War is hell on earth. Almost nobody escapes it without some form of PTSD - if they survive it. The people of North Korea (and South Korea) will be the ones to pay with enormous loss of life and potentially nuclear fallout. Millions of innocent people could easily perish in absolute agony. And, unsurprisingly, it'd be the second time within 70 years that the US slaughters countless North Koreans and levels their country. The only reason the lunatics running North Korea can get away with this is because they constantly invoke the memory of what America did to them in a war 60 some years ago that didn't even involve the US - yet we intervened, killed millions, and leveled their native land.

[JA]

U.S. PREPARED TO LAUNCH ‘PREVENTIVE WAR’ AGAINST NORTH KOREA, SAYS H.R. MCMASTER

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[JA]

North Korea now making missile-ready nuclear weapons, U.S. analysts say

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[JA]

Its far too late to be planning a preventive war. As much as we hate it, the status quo seems like the best option. Let North Korea wall themselves off with nukes if it saves Seoul IMO.

North Korea won't conduct a nuclear strike unless attacked first because their leadership knows they'll lose in the end. Their first priority, the motivation behind their development of nuclear weapons, is to ensure that the US doesn't conduct another war in Korea in an attempt to topple their regime. The US and those in East Asia may not like the new arrangement in the region, but launching a war because you're no longer free to overthrow a government at your whim isn't a good reason to endanger millions of lives.

[JA]

Oh Christ I'm going to be sick

Don't panic.  At present this is just talk.

Yeah, North Korea loves to talk a lot of trash. It's nothing new. I mean, that could always change, but so far I'd be more worried about American leadership getting an itchy trigger finger first.

[JA]

This board is literally insane right now. North Korean is threatening Americans and you shameless people are still complaining about trump

Yes, North Korea is threatening us and they have been for how many years now? A competent President would disregard their crying wolf and approach the issue through a process of attempted conflict resolution or at least ignore them. Instead, Trump has escalated the situation by engaging them in their absurd and childish antics. Now they've escalated their threats to threats of pre-emptive strikes on American territory. That's what people on this board are complaining about in regards to Trump.

[JA]

This board is literally insane right now. North Korean is threatening Americans and you shameless people are still complaining about trump

They're threatening Americans because of Trump...

Holy crap I am out of here for the time being. Just shut up you partisan hack. For 2 years we have sat by and let NK develop dangerous weapons and when they start threatening us it's because of trump?

This hours simply can't function as a news source when it is populated by people who are party hacks

I'd rather we'd get rid of their nuclear weapons now before they actually launch them. It's just a matter of time at this point. Trump just sped it up, probably, I agree with his statement but it wasn't anything new. People are just overreacting as always. We can't let them launch a strike no matter what, and if they do I don't really care what happens to everybody in the country. We should've gotten rid of the reds in the 1950's but we didn't and we are living with the consequences. Pray to God, that the scourge of communism will disperse from this planet soon.

[JA]

"And the Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrha brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven. [25] And he destroyed these cities, and all the country about, all the inhabitants of the cities, and all things that spring from the earth."

Is Trump the Lord in this modern context? Makes sense, since you deify him as such. Plus he's prone to bouts of hysteria, pettiness, jealousy, anger, and inclinations towards war crimes, torture, and sexism. Lots of overlap here...

[JA]

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?

[JA]

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. And for heaven's sake, stop goading them.

[JA]

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.

Dialogue is never too late. The North Korean leadership has reiterated countless times their desire to speak with the United States. Hell, even on the campaign trail Trump said he'd be willing to meet with Kim Jong Un to discuss these issues. Now, suddenly, that's unimaginable? North Korea will not strike first unless they have credible reason to believe a strike upon them is imminent. That's not even debatable; it simply requires looking at North Korea's track record. They're not ISIS; their ultimate desire is to perpetuate their government. That won't happen if American bombs are raining down upon them, and they know it. So, bring them to the negotiating table; that's what they want. That's what all their rhetoric is about. They want to speak with us and we've constantly refused them.

[JA]

I'm not a Trumpist, but I love the fiery rhetoric, I only wish we would actually act on it and unleash dragon fire on North Korea.

If you want to burn people alive, you are a complete failure as a human being.

[JA]

North Korea says it’ll complete plan to attack waters near Guam by mid-August

This certainly escalates the situation but there's still a chance they won't.

Praying for everyone's safety.

North Korea's like the woman next door in an abusive relationship that you hear at 1am screaming at her boyfriend if he comes home drunk from the strip club that late again, she's packing her sh*t and leaving him for good. He just screams back "go for it b*tch." Then you hear same thing one week later.

[JA]

South Koreans ‘more worried about Trump than North Korea’, says Gareth Evans

You must be logged in to read this quote.

70% of South Koreans polled by Pew Research said that US power and influence is a major threat to their country

[JA]

South Koreans ‘more worried about Trump than North Korea’, says Gareth Evans

You must be logged in to read this quote.

70% of South Koreans polled by Pew Research said that US power and influence is a major threat to their country

I know you're a Socialist, but try to support our side. Thanks

Unless you have something relevant to add to the discussion, then piss off.

[JA]

South Koreans ‘more worried about Trump than North Korea’, says Gareth Evans

You must be logged in to read this quote.

70% of South Koreans polled by Pew Research said that US power and influence is a major threat to their country

I know you're a Socialist, but try to support our side. Thanks

Unless you have something relevant to add to the discussion, then piss off.

Him speaking the truth is relevant to the discussion. Piss off yourself.

And the truth is what, exactly? Support Trump's Twitter tantrums that could initiate an unnecessary potential nuclear conflict? Support the US meddling in affairs, once again, where we don't belong and thereby endangering the lives of tens of millions of people? North Korea's hatred of us is our fault because we intervened in a conflict that didn't involve us and consequently destroyed their country and killed over a million of their people. And ever since that time, we've antagonized them and launched a series of regime changes in other countries that have caused them to seek nuclear weapons as a self-defense mechanism.

I don't have loyalty to any country; feel about that however you want. My only concern is innocent lives being endangered by two madmen, but only one of which would initiate a war. That particular madman is Trump, whose actions are being defended and supported by people who feel no threat to their lives or those of their family should war start.

So, again, piss off.

[JA]

He totally didn't.. except for his demonizing of America and defense of North Korea, who I may add, has nuclear weapons pointing right at us.

Where was my information incorrect? Did the United States not involve itself in the Korean War without being directly threatened? Did the United States' involvement not lead to the death of 1+ million North Koreans and the physical destruction of their country? Did the United States not engage in regime change against unfavorable states, such as Libya and Iraq? Has the United States not maintained an antagonistic foreign policy with North Korea since the cessation of military conflict? Do 70% of South Koreans not view US power and influence as a major threat to their country?

If none of that is incorrect, then my framing of the issue up to that point is uncontroversial. Then the controversy must arise from my argument that Trump, not Kim Jong Un, is the less stable player in this ongoing crisis. Yet, I am far from the only person to take issue with Trump's approach.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But, I forgot, you know more than the experts...

[JA]

...

I think that a strike on North Korea today would be a mistake of horrific scale, but I think it's also important to remember that the Korean War started because of an unprovoked North Korean attack on South Korea, and that if the US didn't intervene, it was more likely than not that the North would've won war. Looking at how the Kims have treated their people over the last 70 years, and how the South is today, I think it's really hard to argue that the best result of the war would've been a unification of the country. Even today, it's understandable that why the North Korean regime wants a nuclear weapon, and it's going to serve as an excellent deterrent for them, but it's also going to prolong the existence of the regime, which is bad for both the North Korean people and the region as a whole.

The problem was not solely that America intervened, which I would've opposed anyway, it is what we did during said intervention. As was noted in the quoted section in my previous post that pertained to our actions during the Korean War, our bombing was indiscriminate of civilian casualties and we completely leveled the country, killed over 1 million North Koreans, and bombed every form of infrastructure, including hospitals. That is what has not only provoked an intense hatred and fear among North Koreans towards us but has allowed the ruling family to feed on that paranoia and resentment for its own gain. Nothing protects a regime from its countless faults quite like militarized nationalism. And, daily, we provide them with more fuel to feed that fire which they use to protect themselves.

North Korea obtained a nuclear weapon following the elimination of a treaty signed by President Clinton. When they felt no progress was being made to ease the sanctions and isolation imposed on their country, they pursued the nuclear route. The sole hope of convincing them to denuclearize is to re-enter negotiations and sign a peace treaty with them. Since the US is determined not to do that, then their nuclear program will continue to advance, as will their provocative displays of power. Sanctions, embargos, and isolation have not worked for years now. It didn't work with Cuba or anyone else, either. Only by negotiations and defusing tensions have improvements, not only in our international relationships, but conditions in those countries occurred. The path to reforming or overthrowing the North Korean regime, without a war with millions of deaths, is through peace and cooperation.

[JA]

US Intelligence: North Korea's ICBM Reentry Vehicles Are Likely Good Enough to Hit the Continental US

Kind of like how US Intelligence concluded Iraq was developing WMDs and Iran would possess a nuclear weapon by 2007?

[JA]

North Korea accuses Trump of declaring war

You must be logged in to read this quote.