Options

[Comrade]

My link anyhow:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/dprk/army.htm


So is it too risky to provoke a revolution from within now or is the future risk worth aggressive action in Bush's second term (oh yeah!). Who is for serious action in the next term or who is willing to wait?

 

[Annie]

My link anyhow:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/dprk/army.htm


So is it too risky to provoke a revolution from within now or is the future risk worth aggressive action in Bush's second term (oh yeah!). Who is for serious action in the next term or who is willing to wait?

That was interesting, to say the least. I'm assuming written late '90's? Even then, an excercise 'surprised' the West with their unanticipated training. We know how surprised we were regarding the nuclear potential, very recently.

Time does not seem to be our friend here. But, there is always one, we too have a problem with 'stretched troops.' There is also the wee problem of China, not to mention the French led UN.

My job here is to look for the 'holes', admitted up front that 'planning' was not my specialty. Right now, I'm waiting to see what you strategy guys come up with, then I can offer more 'constructive criticism'.

 

[Comrade]

State Department facts on NK military:

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2792.htm

S.K. spending on it's military is fraction of N.K. as a % of overall GNP.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2034.html

Korea, North 22.9% (2003)
Korea, South 2.7% (FY03)

And yet it invests in a force almost three times more valuable in real dollars:

Korea, North $5,217.4 million (FY02)
Korea, South $14.522 billion (FY03)

Including the U.S. and even perhaps elements from Japan and Taiwan alongside UK and Australian support there is no doubt North Korea will fall, but not without some kind of pyrrhic victory.

And China could really escalate the situation if it get's involved.

But back to the two-way radio sets. Could this establish an intelligence network? What do you think of my delivery systems?

 

[Annie]

S.K. spending on it's military is fraction of N.K. as a % of overall GNP.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2034.html

Korea, North 22.9% (2003)
Korea, South 2.7% (FY03)

And yet it invests in a force almost three times more valuable in real dollars:

Korea, North $5,217.4 million (FY02)
Korea, South $14.522 billion (FY03)

Including the U.S. and even perhaps elements from Japan and Taiwan alongside UK and Australian support there is no doubt North Korea will fall, but not without some kind of pyrrhic victory.

And China could really escalate the situation if it get's involved.

But back to the two-way radio sets. Could this establish an intelligence network? What do you think of my delivery systems?

Illustrating once again the success of captialism, SK has a much better economy! (understatement). As far as radios, hey I'm clueless, now if we could get DK or -=d=- to step in....

I do see your point however, regarding being able to afford a war better. That would be assuming however no nukes, or SK would not be in good shape.

 

[Comrade]

Illustrating once again the success of captialism, SK has a much better economy! (understatement). As far as radios, hey I'm clueless, now if we could get DK or -=d=- to step in....

I do see your point however, regarding being able to afford a war better. That would be assuming however no nukes, or SK would not be in good shape.

ABM tech is the critical component of victory against North Korea. If we perfect this technology and manage to mass produce the platforms we could intercept all nuclear threats and perhaps most of the conventional threats from mid-ranged artillery.

Some 20,000 gun tubes on the DMZ would do some serious damage on the cities and inflict losses on those forces in the region, but also be taken out quickly and intercepted with selective prioritization. I can't say how much, or how fast they'd be taken out of operations. But such a prospect has to happen in the next two years, or we're left with ICBM's and nuclear Mirvs and zero options.


I think Bush in 2004-2008 will subdue N.K. by some means, but what it's worth and what's the risk of letting them continue on their program?

 

[Comrade]

Before any of this becomes an option, we need to contact the dissident elements of those who have escaped from the countryside. They surely do exist in the thousands.

The first step would be to contact an expatriate willing to be "captured" by Chinese immigration and sent back to N.K., one of several thousands every year who are indeed sent back.


We can arrange this quite easily and with considerable screening.

 

[Annie]

ABM tech is the critical component of victory against North Korea. If we perfect this technology and manage to mass produce the platforms we could intercept all nuclear threats and perhaps most of the conventional threats from mid-ranged artillery.

This is what is behind "Star Wars" program?

Some 20,000 gun tubes on the DMZ would do some serious damage on the cities and inflict losses on those forces in the region, but also be taken out quickly and intercepted with selective prioritization. I can't say how much, or how fast they'd be taken out of operations. But such a prospect has to happen in the next two years, or we're left with ICBM's and nuclear Mirvs and zero options.


I think Bush in 2004-2008 will subdue N.K. by some means, but what it's worth and what's the risk of letting them continue on their program?

I guess my unworthy question would have to be, would it be worth it? I'm going to fess up, at this point I think something will have to be done shortly. Time is running out.

 

[Comrade]

This is what is behind "Star Wars" program?

Much better than star wars, 30 years ahead.

We've conducted a few successfull and a few other failed tests on the tech and this doesn't guarantee results yet, but this is the process we should expect. It's based on missile interception, well equiped to deal with the threat of N.K. nuclear ballistic missiles, given decoy or MIRV deployment is very limited, although not for much longer.

In other words, a year or two and we'll take their launched nukes out of the sky.

I guess my unworthy question would have to be, would it be worth it? I'm going to fess up, at this point I think something will have to be done shortly. Time is running out.

Absolutely. The offensive capability in N.K. will exceed our capacity for defence as they attain modern deployment and greater range and numbers, even nuclear subs, while our defense tech is very difficult and slow going.

We have to hit them once our ABM defense is still good enough and their development remains primitive.

We can't wait.


Again, the first place to start is with repeat emigrees from the North Korean countryside. Let's talk about planting agents, the first step in this take down. We need agents.

 

[Annie]

Absolutely. The offensive capability in N.K. will exceed our capacity for defence as they attain modern deployment and greater range and numbers, even nuclear subs, while our defense tech is very difficult and slow going.

We have to hit them once our ABM defense is still good enough and their development remains primitive.

We can't wait.


Again, the first place to start is with repeat emigrees from the North Korean countryside. Let's talk about planting agents, the first step in this take down. We need agents.

Assuming all that, and that you check your email, which agents? CIA? SK? Chinese? Sp. Ops?

 

[Comrade]

Assuming all that, and that you check your email, which agents? CIA? SK? Chinese? Sp. Ops?

We need ony a score among the several thousand N.K. refugees who entered into South Korea from China to return to the border region, and be captured, processed (naturally also appearing to Chinese immigration as if they never left to S.K.), and then sent back to N.K. for sentence in their camps for a period from 3 months to several years.


The key aspect of this plan is that China and nor does N.K. have any record of S.K. immigration, and that punishment for emmgration remains light, especially among those first offendors or influential families among those who willingly escaped to S.K. and now volunteer for real action to free their own people from within.

This is the first class of recruits. It makes complete sense. We can prepare them for future drops or specific training and insert them back into the repatriation process without N.K. being aware of anything but the most extreme breaches of secrecy in our recruitment chain of command.

Again, I feel S.K. should only know of a plan at a high level and yet remain completely unaware of the operational deatails, given their infilatration by N.K. agents. It's a CIA operation, heavily funded and at the highest levels.

 

[Annie]

We need ony a score among the several thousand N.K. refugees who entered into South Korea from China to return to the border region, and be captured, processed (naturally also appearing to Chinese immigration as if they never left to S.K.), and then sent back to N.K. for sentence in their camps for a period from 3 months to several years.


The key aspect of this plan is that China and nor does N.K. have any record of S.K. immigration, and that punishment for emmgration remains light, especially among those first offendors or influential families among those who willingly escaped to S.K. and now volunteer for real action to free their own people from within.

This is the first class of recruits. It makes complete sense. We can prepare them for future drops or specific training and insert them back into the repatriation process without N.K. being aware of anything but the most extreme breaches of secrecy in our recruitment chain of command.

Again, I feel S.K. should only know of a plan at a high level and yet remain completely unaware of the operational deatails, given their infilatration by N.K. agents. It's a CIA operation, heavily funded and at the highest levels.

From that, I'll assume CIA, as you say in last paragraph! As long as we could get this or similar program off, without nukes, I think you would have the backing of the American citizenry.

Now WITH nukes, an all too real scenario. It would most definately come down to, 'they had the capability of reaching us', but didn't.

 

[Comrade]

From that, I'll assume CIA, as you say in last paragraph! As long as we could get this or similar program off, without nukes, I think you would have the backing of the American citizenry.

Now WITH nukes, an all too real scenario. It would most definately come down to, 'they had the capability of reaching us', but didn't.

Browse the witness accounts from this link:

http://nkhumanrights.or.kr/NKHR_new/index_eng_new.htm

There's a very digruntled and ambitious core of people from the countryside who seem to cross over almost three or four times before they find their way into the West.


I honestly feel these would be the perfect agents, sent back into China and without any sign of contact. And either return back into N.K. discreetly or allow themselves to be deported.

A few would die in prison but many more would make it back into their established homes and villiages and be able to recieve two-way transmitters at a pre-established time and place, agreed upon by sattlelight photos of his native region.

That's the start.

 

[Zhukov]

More than anything else, with respect to North Korea, our theme must be 'threaten'. We must hold the metaphorical gun to Kim's head.


Unfortunately, I think, that can't be adequately accomplished until a.) we have achieved a sufficient level of stability in Iraq that we are capable of extricating the bulk of our forces from that country, and b.) deal forcibly and finally with the belligerent terrorist state Iran, which is in my opinion a much more dangerous and immediate threat than North Korea to our short- and long-term security.

Whatever can be done in North Korea meanwhile without diluting our efforts elsewhere would of course be desirable but considering the poor state of affairs globally we find ourselves in a position where we must assiduously arrange our priorities.

Bottom line, and regrettably, a concerted effort in North Korea may ultimately have to wait. We must ‘threaten’ as much as possible, but rely on ‘containment’ and hope to slow North Korea’s development of offensive nuclear weapons technology.

 

[Comrade]

More than anything else, with respect to North Korea, our theme must be 'threaten'. We must hold the metaphorical gun to Kim's head.


Unfortunately, I think, that can't be adequately accomplished until a.) we have achieved a sufficient level of stability in Iraq that we are capable of extricating the bulk of our forces from that country, and b.) deal forcibly and finally with the belligerent terrorist state Iran, which is in my opinion a much more dangerous and immediate threat than North Korea to our short- and long-term security.

Whatever can be done in North Korea meanwhile without diluting our efforts elsewhere would of course be desirable but considering the poor state of affairs globally we find ourselves in a position where we must assiduously arrange our priorities.

Bottom line, and regrettably, a concerted effort in North Korea may ultimately have to wait. We must ‘threaten’ as much as possible, but rely on ‘containment’ and hope to slow North Korea’s development of offensive nuclear weapons technology.

We can't slow them, we can't trust them, we can't even check up on them with certainty.

I agree this a long term effort, until 2010 heralds the EM gun and we can make secret, pinpoint deliveries.

But we need to start creating a spy network right now, we have thousands of N.K. refugees who were brave and capable enough to reach S.K. and if we can get a score to return to their homes and prepare for this now, we should. This is a good idea we can act on, right now. Agree?

 

[Zhukov]

But we need to start creating a spy network right now, we have thousands of N.K. refugees who were brave and capable enough to reach S.K. and if we can get a score to return to their homes and prepare for this now, we should. This is a good idea we can act on, right now. Agree?

It is a good idea, and I would hope that to some degree it is something we are currently working on. Hopefully our intelligence services haven't become as risk-adverse as it lately seems that they have.

We can't slow them, we can't trust them,

No, we certainly can't trust them, but in the event that there exists any raw materials or technological know-how which they might need to strengthen their nuclear posture it is certainly possible that we can deny them that in and so doing, slow them. Of course, that would be impossible without Bejing's assistance.

 

[NATO AIR]

i'd say what zhukov's first post listed is our best option. i have a sinking feeling my service here in Japan will be headlined by a war with China or North Korea or both. The war with China we can win for sure, and the cost to them will likely be so great it could unleash the democratic revolution or at least a lot more reform than what is happening now. the north korean war on the other hand will be apocalyptic for residents in japan, south korea and north korea.

the best we can do is let china know we will revoke most favored nation status unless they start leaning on north korea. we have to tie north korea's behavior to china, otherwise we will not make ANY progress with north korea at all. china gives them all their fuel, and the best we could hope for would be for north korea to do something so stupid or over the edge that china would cut that fuel off. north korea has tons of bio and chem weapons with the missiles to shoot them off, not to mention the nukes they have or will have soon. millions will die unless we get smart and stop giving china a free ride on north korea.

the only good news is japan is scared shitless of the north koreans and is revamping its military as we speak to focus on containing, stopping or destroying the north korean threat. though this makes china nervous, its good news for us and makes a good ally a great one in dark times.

and considering my carrier is target no.1 for the chinese or north koreans.... i really wish the japanese good luck with the advanced THEATER missile defence technology they're developing (which is more feasible and can be more successful than an elaborate missile defense system that's all over the place)

 

[wade]

What options exists with respect to North Korea?


1. Cut off all aid and witness a breakdown in their society.

#1 Ensures a complete collapse of NK society. Mass starvation and suffering and eventual anarchy outside of Pyongyang. But the leaders will remain in power and their army will continue to be favorably supplied, above all else. Before that goes, the only option left would be war, or the credible threat of it. More likely, they'll find a backdoor and stay afloat long enough to drive home the fact it's our actions that punish their subjects while they remain in power and suffer no pain. That's a really bad idea but not insane. It's reversable.



2. Declare war and attempt to quickly depose the regime.

#2 Guarantees a massive loss of life in both countries, and among their eight nukes some will likely kill millions in S.K., US, or Japan. UNLESS we bring the missle defense program online this is a bad option. Seoul will be a smoldering ash heap in any case. And being the aggressor, China panics and maybe comes in against the attack to protect their borders and this buffer state. South Korea would never agree to Seoul being destroyed, under immediate fire from tens of thousands of artillery shells. The WORST option of all is this one.


3. Assasinate "dear leader" and other key government officials.

#3 Assumes the next piece of shit who rises in his place is going to throw away his life goal and let his family and future die on the vine for some reform. Or he tries to do so and is killed by others who are just happy to be elite in the party structure. And if we try and fail to kill Kim Il the little pissant will probably retaliate. So that plan doesn't offer much possibility either way. This option is not too risky but offers no reward.


4. Nuke the whole site from orbit.

#4 This is a nasty and murderous kind of thing to do. China will react, and Seoul is toasted, and the world is pissed off.

And even then a few nukes may get through to us and millions die in the US or Japan.

Still, in my opinion, a surpise attack, knowing in advance the locations of the launch sites, and hitting the leadership alongside in tandem, that's probably our best shot at some kind of "win" in the following years. We wait longer than that, and more nukes and longer ranged missiles end this option.

But if it succeed, were still left with some toxic nationa full of dead and dying North Koreans. That's wrong.

And of course, Seoul is a heap of smoldering ash.


5. Wait and see.

#5 Is the status-quo now, of course.

We give them enough oil and subsidy so that Kim has enough to stay in power and maintain his army, without getting nervous about how he can still keep his regime going.

He's also looking at options 1-4 as well, and notes that every one leave him dead.

Kim prefers #5 but talks alot about 1-4 so we can get back to #5 and more money for his regime.

And some day, he'll pop off and up goes the third portrait on the walls of every home and office. We'll probably fund that as well.

And several hundred Mirved ICBM's can reach the continents and we'll have to basically fold to more demands and perhaps even face their nukes at the hands of those terrorist groups they sponsor. Unless the missle defence tech kicks into high gear and outpaces their own missile tech we need to nuke them right now, to get out from under this losing battle.


BUT....


6. Be a creative genuis


All the conventional options suck, so brainstorm.

I like the idea of loading up a high altitude aircraft service with stacks of literature, small and cheap two-way radios ($10 each now!), and dishes for tv. Sure, many will go to waste but many will fall into the hands of those who dare to discover the outside world.

Anyone have more ideas?

How about resuming talks with NK, accepting their offer of 2000 to stop their nuclear weapons program, stop their long range missile program, agree not to export any missile or nuclear tech, allow international inspection and 24/7 access, etc... all for gradual normalization of relations over a period of years and some kind of re-unification talks with SK in the future (this last one was non-specific)?

At the best, it works. At the worst, we are no worse off than we are, and NK probably does not advance it's tech or export it for at least a few years.

Asside: This kim guy is a nut. I bet if he were offered some kind of movie studio and a goodly yearly buget, he'd leave NK to become a film maker! He seems quite obsessed with film making.

Wade.

 

[wade]

Absolutely. The offensive capability in N.K. will exceed our capacity for defence as they attain modern deployment and greater range and numbers, even nuclear subs, while our defense tech is very difficult and slow going.

We have to hit them once our ABM defense is still good enough and their development remains primitive.

We can't wait.

Umm, your belief in our ability to successfully intercept all their missiles is totally unfounded. We could not stop them from destroying Soul, it's nearly impossible. We probably could not stop them from destroying Tokyo and Peking as well. We might be able to stop missiles headed for the USA, but if they fired a dozen, I'd bet at least one would get through (assuming they actually can get here successfully). And in many cases, even successful interception does not mean no signficant damage will result. The course of the missile will still probably land a big chunk of weapons grade plutonium or uranium in our neighborhood.

And do you think China is going to accept the losses it incures on our behalf without responding?

I think you are falling for the hype. Remember how our Patriots were shooting the scuds out of the sky with ease? Remember what the truth turned out to be?

Do you have a hi-tech background Comrade?

Wade.

 

[freeandfun1]

How about resuming talks with NK, accepting their offer of 2000 to stop their nuclear weapons program, stop their long range missile program, agree not to export any missile or nuclear tech, allow international inspection and 24/7 access, etc... all for gradual normalization of relations over a period of years and some kind of re-unification talks with SK in the future (this last one was non-specific)?

At the best, it works. At the worst, we are no worse off than we are, and NK probably does not advance it's tech or export it for at least a few years.

Asside: This kim guy is a nut. I bet if he were offered some kind of movie studio and a goodly yearly buget, he'd leave NK to become a film maker! He seems quite obsessed with film making.

Wade.

He didn't like the 1994 agreement so he decided he wanted to change it. You cannot keep renegotiating deals every time they (the NK's) want to change something.

Look at the history of Panmunjom and how many times the NK's would change what they wanted. It is part of their culture. The SK's are much the same way in business. They will place an order with you, take delivery and then try to renegotiate the price.

That is exactly what Kim was doing. He agreed to the 1994 agreement and then admitted he NEVER abided by it and wanted us to renegotiate a new deal with him. He has proven time and time again that he cannot be trusted. The Japanese, Chinese and South Koreans understand that as does Bush. However, due to your obvious lack of international experience, in Asia at least, YOU don't.

 

[CSM]

Also, the assumption is that NK will abide by the results of the negotiation and their recent history shows that they will not. The premise also is that NK will negotiate in good faith, which again, recent history shows they will not.