N Korea threatens US with first strike

guardian ^ | 2/5/03

[Snowy]

Wow. You make too much sense. Now I'll really have trouble sleeping tonight!

[Steel Wolf]

I think they are making a play on the preemptive strike philosophy that we are displaying with Iraq. "If they can do it, so can we" argument.

They want to be taken seriously, and they think that by talking like a grown up will lead us to view them as one. They have yet to grasp that, viewed with any perspective, they're coming across as belligerant, unhinged and unconvincing. They are very afraid of being next, and want to portray themselves as big time players, unlike Saddam, who we clearly don't fear to go after.

[Taffini]

and always when you are on the phone

[Billthedrill]

This crisis is entirely fabricated. There is no brink for the brinksmanship unless they're going to try to shell Seoul or make a MiG run on the Kitty Hawk with a couple of bombs.

I don't think they have a nuclear weapon. I don't think their current missile technology is up to lobbing anything but a little high explosive toward Honshu. I don't think they have the material or the logistics for an extended campaign in the south. I do think they're trying for the worldwide sympathy (and aid) that they saw going Vietnam's way when we were in that country and that they see ramping up toward Iraq. Funny thing is, the only thing I've heard out of the left is the taunt "why don't you invade North Korea?" which is not, I suspect, quite what they were after.

[Zebra]

Today, nuclear weaponry-especially tactical nuclear weapons-is less contaminating, more discriminating, and more versatile in application and delivery compared to the first generation weapons. This fact, combined with the decline of standing armies and conventional forces and the localizing/regionalizing of international conflict, increases the likelihood of their use. In fact, there likely will be circumstances in which tactical nuclear weapons will be the best--and perhaps only--choice.

For example, there are those who believe that the "taboo" label will be removed in a situation where a moral imperative is present (such as a threat from an aggressor possessing and willing to use WMD and where countless lives could be saved) and where the weapon of choice is a low-yield (one tenth of a kiloton or less) nuclear submunition (a hundred or a thousand times "cleaner" that first generation atomic weapons) delivered with pinpoint accuracy (such as via a cruise missile) on a clearly non-civilian infrastructure identified with the threat (such as a bio-chemical or nuclear facility or massed army).

Another example would be a situation that offers no other option than nuclear weapons, such as when they are the sole weapons capable of attacking a specific type of target, such as underground/bunkered facilities. The American nuclear arsenal includes the B 61-11, which is designed as an earth penetrator. Tomahawks, tipped with low-yield nuclear submunitions (each with the power of a large conventional bomb), would be dramatically more effective that conventional Tomahawks, whose 1,000-lb. payload pales next to that of even a single attack plane. See http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/cc/conrad01.html

The situation in North Korea could escalate to this level: a supposed lunatic dictator, under the threat of domestic revolution in a starving and bankrupt state, possessing of WMD and a fanatical militaristic society, issues an ultimatum involving a pre-emptive military strike against the ROK. We wargame this situation many times daily. It is likely that a number of modern response scenarios are non-conventional.

In fact, this is the kind of situation I have always believed would result in the first use of these weapons since 1945 (even more so that a suitcase nuke delivered by a terrorist).

[TheRedSoxWinThePennant]

yea captain when your done over baghdad we need you to pull a big u turn and head due east and await further instruction

[HP8753]

Ahhhhh!!! The Clinton/Carter Legacy

[Recon by Fire]

The seem to forget that America is the one holding the A,K,Q,J,10,9,8, and 7 of spades ....

Don't forget that we also have both Jokers.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

What aircraft do these people have? What type of missiles and what is their range? What about tanks etc.? I have not paiid attention to NK for years-ever since 1953!

[TheRedSoxWinThePennant]

there's only two or three worthwhile targets there so popping off 24 missiles is a waste of resources.

you are right as far as military sites but just think of all the commies you have to kill I vote for the whole 24

[daviddennis]

Dog Gone: The timing is interesting, but I don't think there's enough trust between them for a solid alliance. One would knife the other in the back for even the tiniest advantage.

Steel Wolf: Kim Jong Il actually has enough technology to fill several garages - a healthy supply of imports, such as Mercedes-Benz S600 sedans and the like. But in terms of anything that affects the people of North Korea, you are correct.

D

[Steel Wolf]

What are the odds that NK and Iraq have been in contact regarding a joint strategy when the US moves into Iraq? I would have to think that they have. They both have the incentive.

Certainly they could have, but opportunists make poor allies. More likely, North Korea is taking advantage of the situation, and couldn't care less what happens to Saddam. Their missile export business is about to attend a class called 'US Navy Blockade Techniques 101', so the loss of a good client is a non-issue.

They realize that we're slowly turning up the heat on the pot their cooking in, and would be foolish not to act, posture, or bluff while they still have a credible means to.

[RippleFire]

BUMP

[Robert_Paulson2]

ON THIS ISSUE... I would agree

---

when it's time to relax, one thing is clear, beer after beer, if you have the time, we got the beer...

now, who's buyin' tonight?

[Taffini]

I was really disappointed to hear kim liked Daffy Duck, one of my favorites

[Restin Payce]

How many of you have kids on a carrier or another ship ? I think a nuke in the middle of a carrier task force would be "reaching the U.S.". I have some kin deployed and if it were me at the wheel there would be some very plain talk about what happens if a NK nuke goes off. I don't think that NK realizes that "W" is not the same kind of President as his predecessor.

[Republic of Texas]

I would interpret this to mean they will attack SK. Which, according to South Korean students, would be a good thing.

[Taffini]

yeah, thanks clinton. remember when old rodger clinton went over to north korea with his loser band? what was that all about?

[ezo4]

Well this sucks.

And where might this first strike land. Any body now. what are there capabilities?

Those bastards.