North Korea War Fever

Why hasn't mr.porker ordered his army to attack? Does war now mean something different?

Apparently being in a state of war no longer means anyone actually shooting or fighting. At least on the NK side. I would think Kim would be embarrassed to make so many threats he never carries out. I don't see how this makes him look like a big leader to his people.
The North and South have been at war since 1950. They've just had a 60 truce truce and now NK is ready for some actions.
 
Last edited:
CNN today 4/2:

Kerry: We won't accept nuclear North Korea

Secretary of State John Kerry's comments follow reports that North Korea plans to restart a nuclear reactor that it shut down more than five years ago.


I don't know quite what to make of this. Apparently we are pretending that North Korea does not yet have a nuclear bomb? I thought they already did and the question was simply whether they could build one small enough to put on an ICBM to hit Los Angeles?

The other implication is that it LOOKS like Kerry is saying we'll stop them becoming a nuclear state. Does that mean he is hinting we'll bomb that nuclear reactor they want to start up to make plutonium? Kerry's statement was connected to that NK announcement.

China has for days been said to be moving troops and jets to their border with NK. Is that for military aid, or to keep North Koreans from streaming into China if war breaks out?

It is true that Obama also said the U.S. would not allow NK or Iran to become a nuclear state. (I simply didn't believe that.) Now Kerry is saying the same, quite flatly, no wiggle room. That implies that we would do something to stop them, because we sure haven't been able to stop either power nuking up with negotiations and "sanctions."
You are reading into the statement something that's not there. He's saying we, being the US will not accept a nuclear armed North Korea. We have been negotiating, threatening, and arm twisting the NK to stop them for building nuclear weapons. That statement seems complete in order with what we have doing.
 
You are reading into the statement something that's not there. He's saying we, being the US will not accept a nuclear armed North Korea. We have been negotiating, threatening, and arm twisting the NK to stop them for building nuclear weapons. That statement seems complete in order with what we have doing.


Can't agree, with respect --- this same statement has been made in those words referring to two states: Iran and North Korea, by the president and the secretary of state.

What does "won't accept" MEAN if Iran and North Korea just pay no attention and go on nuking up despite all the negotiating, sanctions, etc.? Because that is what they are doing.

Either it's an empty verbalization, or it's a threat of war we'll carry out, one or the other. If you are saying it's an empty verbalization, well, that's possible and was what I thought when Obama said it about Iran, but now I'm beginning to wonder. If we make empty threats like North Korea, no one will believe us, either.
 
So the news this morning, 4/3, is that North Korea has closed their joint industry area to South Koreans. There are 800 still in there, managing labor by 50,000 North Koreans averaging an income of $130 per month, which apparently the North Korean government is highly dependent on for hard currency, so the news says. They are all still working, and NK says the South Koreans already there can go home if they want, they just can't go back in.

Okay, this is an escalation. How many more steps of escalation ARE there? One more would be actually expelling the South Koreans, and maybe shutting those factories. I'm trying to think what other escalations are possible short of war. Shelling islands, ships, planes, etc., except South Korea knows that's next on the menu so they have warned NK that will be taken as an act of war this time. So that's dicey.

Our own government keeps pointing out, repeatedly, that North Korea has not yet mobilized troops. I don't view that as an "escalation," since my studies of World War I lead me to think mobilizing troops (Russia and Germany) is simply getting ready to strike as soon as possible.

Same when George W mustered a large force in Kuwait in 2003: apparently Saddam really thought that he could negotiate out of an invasion, but I knew that once troops are mustered, pretty much anywhere, they WILL be used. So I'm watching for whether North Korea musters troops at the border. If they do, I would expect war to start after that. I could be wrong.
 
This is my solution.:eusa_whistle:

25263d1365318681-north-korea-war-fever-bhmmzvjcqaipwud.jpg
 

Attachments

  • $BHMMZVJCQAIpWUD.jpg
    $BHMMZVJCQAIpWUD.jpg
    26.4 KB · Views: 94
Last edited:
If you are looking for a date it will likely be April 15. Kim has told other countries to remove personnell by the tenth. The fifteenth is the anniversary of Grandpa Sung's creation of the North Korean state.
 
I'm betting the tenth for a "test" missile launch. That's Wednesday.
 
I'm betting the tenth for a "test" missile launch. That's Wednesday.

I find it funny that among all the threats NK has made, they think they are going to be able to "test" a missile. I wouldn't be surprised if that missile "test" is what sets off an international confrontation. And the funny thing is, China seems to be more on our side than NK.
 
I'm betting the tenth for a "test" missile launch. That's Wednesday.

I find it funny that among all the threats NK has made, they think they are going to be able to "test" a missile. I wouldn't be surprised if that missile "test" is what sets off an international confrontation. And the funny thing is, China seems to be more on our side than NK.

Now that is some wishful thinking! China has been silent. They haven't said anything to us. The idiot in charge, John Kerry is going to China so they can not tell him anything in person. To Americans who want to believe, such silence means they are on our side. China is on China's side. Not our side. They will let obama bluster around doing nothing pertinent until North Korea has been agitated into making some sort of attack.
 
I'm betting the tenth for a "test" missile launch. That's Wednesday.

I find it funny that among all the threats NK has made, they think they are going to be able to "test" a missile. I wouldn't be surprised if that missile "test" is what sets off an international confrontation. And the funny thing is, China seems to be more on our side than NK.

Now that is some wishful thinking! China has been silent. They haven't said anything to us. The idiot in charge, John Kerry is going to China so they can not tell him anything in person. To Americans who want to believe, such silence means they are on our side. China is on China's side. Not our side. They will let obama bluster around doing nothing pertinent until North Korea has been agitated into making some sort of attack.

This was the article I read that led me to make the statement I did, especially this line in the article: "Pyongyang has taken similar actions in the past, prompting Washington to step up military readiness in the region to soothe allies South Korea and Japan. But in an unusual rebuke this week, Beijing called North Korea’s moves 'regrettable' — amounting to a slap from Pyongyang’s strongest economic and diplomatic supporter."

Here is a link to the article I read:
North Korea crisis could bring U.S. China closer - The Morning Sun

Another thing to point out is that China has amassed a lot more troops than usual along the NK/China border. U.S. officials believe that this is not to support the NK regime militarily, but to stop the millions of refugees they expect to flood their borders if a war starts again.
 
You are reading into the statement something that's not there. He's saying we, being the US will not accept a nuclear armed North Korea. We have been negotiating, threatening, and arm twisting the NK to stop them for building nuclear weapons. That statement seems complete in order with what we have doing.


Can't agree, with respect --- this same statement has been made in those words referring to two states: Iran and North Korea, by the president and the secretary of state.

What does "won't accept" MEAN if Iran and North Korea just pay no attention and go on nuking up despite all the negotiating, sanctions, etc.? Because that is what they are doing.

Either it's an empty verbalization, or it's a threat of war we'll carry out, one or the other. If you are saying it's an empty verbalization, well, that's possible and was what I thought when Obama said it about Iran, but now I'm beginning to wonder. If we make empty threats like North Korea, no one will believe us, either.

The term "won't accept" is ambiguous and is meant to be so. It leaves open the door for negotiations but can also be taken as a threat of tighter sanctions or attack. Veiled threats and messages within messages are the language of international negotiations. Choice of words, the person who delivers the message, or the way it is delivered can signal a hardening, softening, or no change of position.

Such remarks are often empty threats as are the North Koreans. We and our adversaries issue such threats as warnings for various political purposes. We have done so with Iraq, the USSR, China, and North Korea many times. The US has threatened to attack the USSR, stop aid to to Pakistan, to abandon the Saudis, to stop military aid to Egypt, etc,......all empty threats.
 
I find it funny that among all the threats NK has made, they think they are going to be able to "test" a missile. I wouldn't be surprised if that missile "test" is what sets off an international confrontation. And the funny thing is, China seems to be more on our side than NK.

Now that is some wishful thinking! China has been silent. They haven't said anything to us. The idiot in charge, John Kerry is going to China so they can not tell him anything in person. To Americans who want to believe, such silence means they are on our side. China is on China's side. Not our side. They will let obama bluster around doing nothing pertinent until North Korea has been agitated into making some sort of attack.

This was the article I read that led me to make the statement I did, especially this line in the article: "Pyongyang has taken similar actions in the past, prompting Washington to step up military readiness in the region to soothe allies South Korea and Japan. But in an unusual rebuke this week, Beijing called North Korea’s moves 'regrettable' — amounting to a slap from Pyongyang’s strongest economic and diplomatic supporter."

Here is a link to the article I read:
North Korea crisis could bring U.S. China closer - The Morning Sun

Another thing to point out is that China has amassed a lot more troops than usual along the NK/China border. U.S. officials believe that this is not to support the NK regime militarily, but to stop the millions of refugees they expect to flood their borders if a war starts again.
Besides Korea, China and the US have the most to loose by military action. South Korea is a major trading partner with China, far more important than North Korea. For China to abandon North Korea is too break long standing agreements. Yet, supporting North Korea in military actions would create huge problems in the region for China and could bring them into a direct confrontation with the US. I think China's most likely position is to continue to advise North Korea to avoid war and if war comes, only give tacit support. China has a lot to lose in such a war and little to gain.
 
Last edited:
"I recognize that this would be tantamount to political hara-kiri considering the crisis, but we may want to start thinking about letting North Korea into the ‘nuclear club. Just some sort of nominal membership: a couple bombs and regular invitations to club functions.

"They’re about to have a functioning bomb anyhow, so why not make the most of it?

"The down side to this of course is that Iran would want in the club, and then Saudi Arabia, and – I don’t – Venezuela.

"It’s something that would have to be worked out with the North Koreans.

"I know this isn’t a pretty position to be in. But it’s better than a full-on war with a delusional and paranoid young man with a chip on his shoulder.

Robert B. Baer, a former Middle East CIA field officer, is TIME.com’s intelligence columnist and the author of See No Evil and The Devil We Know: Dealing with the New Iranian Superpower."

Viewpoint: North Korea?s Gaddafi Nightmare | TIME.com
 
North Korea has already detonated several successful nukes - they have demonstrated that they have the materials and technology. They have demonstrated thatthey have the means to deliver a bomb to anyplace in the world by launching and orbiting a satellite. All they need to do is to put the bomb on the rocket and launch it. With the "boy who would be king" controlled by the military it is anyone's guess what will happen. He has to go along with the military in order to stay in the palace so if the military wants to do more than rant and rave about its enemy, the USA, then he will go along with it no matter what the cost to his people. I am sure that he and the military leaders have a good bomb shelter to retire to in the event of war.
 
I have been prepared for most any emergency for the last 40 years.
Water, food, medicines, med-kit, first-aid kit, clothes and the rest. I am glad that I have never had to use it but I am prepared.
 
North Korea has already detonated several successful nukes - they have demonstrated that they have the materials and technology. They have demonstrated thatthey have the means to deliver a bomb to anyplace in the world by launching and orbiting a satellite. All they need to do is to put the bomb on the rocket and launch it. With the "boy who would be king" controlled by the military it is anyone's guess what will happen. He has to go along with the military in order to stay in the palace so if the military wants to do more than rant and rave about its enemy, the USA, then he will go along with it no matter what the cost to his people. I am sure that he and the military leaders have a good bomb shelter to retire to in the event of war.
The number 3,000,000 has the same significance for North Koreans as the number 6,000,000 has for Jews. During the Korean War the US killed some 3,000,000 North Koreans or about one of every three people living north of the 38 parallel. Our bombers turned cities and villages into rubble; they then returned to turn the rubble into pebbles, then came back again and again to turn pebbles into dust. Every generation of North Koreans has been indoctrinated with this account of the conflict, and it's possible they are so badly brainwashed they actually believe their military could win against the US today.
Some accounts I've read lately written by scholars and others who've studied Korea for the last half-century believe tensions haven't been this high on the peninsula since 1953.
 
"I recognize that this would be tantamount to political hara-kiri considering the crisis, but we may want to start thinking about letting North Korea into the ‘nuclear club. Just some sort of nominal membership: a couple bombs and regular invitations to club functions.

"They’re about to have a functioning bomb anyhow, so why not make the most of it?

"The down side to this of course is that Iran would want in the club, and then Saudi Arabia, and – I don’t – Venezuela.

"It’s something that would have to be worked out with the North Koreans.

"I know this isn’t a pretty position to be in. But it’s better than a full-on war with a delusional and paranoid young man with a chip on his shoulder.

Robert B. Baer, a former Middle East CIA field officer, is TIME.com’s intelligence columnist and the author of See No Evil and The Devil We Know: Dealing with the New Iranian Superpower."

Viewpoint: North Korea?s Gaddafi Nightmare | TIME.com
We can't do much to stop North Korea or any third world country from developing nuclear weapons without military action. The knowledge is there. It's no real secret anymore. You just have to have enough weapons grade nuclear material and trained scientists.

What the US and other nations can do is isolate any nation that tries to go nuclear, making it expensive by denial of trade treaties, favored nation status, and sanctions if needed. However nations like North Korea are already isolated so trade sanctions and other such measures may make it more difficult for them but it won't stop them from developing the weapons.

One of the unwritten pieces of US foreign policy is bringing less developed countries into the world trade community. Once they are dependent on world trade, it becomes very costly to thumb their nose at the rest of the world. This is when economic pressure really does work.
 
Last edited:
"I recognize that this would be tantamount to political hara-kiri considering the crisis, but we may want to start thinking about letting North Korea into the ‘nuclear club. Just some sort of nominal membership: a couple bombs and regular invitations to club functions.

"They’re about to have a functioning bomb anyhow, so why not make the most of it?

"The down side to this of course is that Iran would want in the club, and then Saudi Arabia, and – I don’t – Venezuela.

"It’s something that would have to be worked out with the North Koreans.

"I know this isn’t a pretty position to be in. But it’s better than a full-on war with a delusional and paranoid young man with a chip on his shoulder.

Robert B. Baer, a former Middle East CIA field officer, is TIME.com’s intelligence columnist and the author of See No Evil and The Devil We Know: Dealing with the New Iranian Superpower."

Viewpoint: North Korea?s Gaddafi Nightmare | TIME.com

Perhaps if they haven't been making the threats that they have recently, we could negotiate something with them. However, when a state such as NK threatens U.S. and our allies and bases overseas, we cannot allow them to acquire such weapons. We need not ponder whether he will use these detrimental weapons, as he has clearly stated he will. Why in the world would we allow him to get to that point?
 

Forum List

Back
Top