DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Those Nutty Norks » How M.A.D. is Kim Jong Il?

How M.A.D. is Kim Jong Il?

nork-teapo.jpg

A June 18 AP story reports that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) plans to launch a Taepodong-​​2 bal­lis­tic mis­sile toward Hawaii in early July — pos­si­ble on July 4.

The mis­sile has a max­i­mum range of 4,000 miles, and so will land at least 500 miles short of Hawaii. Coming so soon after Kim Jong Il’s second-​​ever nuclear test on May 25, one won­ders what the iso­lated and eccen­tric Communist dic­ta­tor is really up to.

Some ana­lysts have said that the nuclear test, in defi­ance of inter­na­tional pres­sures, was intended mainly for its effect on domes­tic DPRK pol­i­tics. Kim recently annointed his younger son, little-​​known Kim Jong Un, as his suc­ces­sor, in what pun­dits describe as a pecu­liar North Korean-​​style Communist dynasty. If found­ing father of the North Korean state, Kim Il Sung, can be labeled Kim I (“Kim the First”), that makes Kim Jong Il become Kim II. His sec­ond son, now ele­vated to crown prince, would then become Kim III when ail­ing Kim II dies, which might be soon. As one sign of the rais­ing of Kim Jong Un within North Korean pol­i­tics and soci­ety (the two are closely related), he was recently granted a spe­cial name, “Brilliant Comrade,” sim­i­lar in tone to his father’s “Dear Leader.”

In under­stand­ing Kim II’s real motives behind these dra­matic weapon tests, we need to remem­ber that he wants what he wants, not what we think he wants or ought to want. To fail to focus on the infa­mously enig­matic Kim solely from his own per­spec­tive is to com­mit “mir­ror­ing” — always a mis­take in mod­ern geopolitics.

Much of the time, a dictator’s top pri­or­ity is to main­tain his/​her own power. In the case of an actual or de facto monarch, there is also a pow­er­ful drive to keep the throne within the fam­ily, for a dynasty that goes on for many gen­er­a­tions. If Kim Jong Il is act­ing now like King Kim II, which he has been for years to some degree, he may be think­ing now as King Kim II as well. The self-​​imposed iso­la­tion of his well defended coun­try would be one ele­ment of the throne’s self-​​perpetuation. Establishing a clear heir to the throne would be another.

A very impor­tant third would be the need for for­eign exchange monies with which to feed and clothe his peo­ple — and with which to keep his mil­i­tary happy enough to main­tain him and his off­spring in power for­ever. A big inter­na­tional con­cern is that Kim II might sell a work­ing, weaponized nuke to ter­ror­ists, per­haps for the “black mar­ket going rate” of $100 mil­lion. In these monar­chi­cal terms, his goal in doing so would be to refill the royal cof­fers for a while.

If the sec­ond under­ground nuke test was a weird form of fire­works cel­e­bra­tion for Brilliant Comrade’s annoint­ment, the impend­ing ICBM test might be a ges­ture demand­ing inter­na­tional respect for this Kim Dynasty, com­bined with what could well be a ges­ture intended as a ran­som note in a case of global nuclear black­mail — more prop­erly, of grandiose extortion.

Why wouldn’t China offer to buy out any nukes that Kim II might move close to sell­ing, per­haps at a price of two or ten times the going rate for the ilk of al Qaeda? Beijing could sim­ply pro­vide to Kim Jong Il, as “for­eign aid,” a few brief­cases full of a tiny frac­tion of the U.S. Treasury bonds they own. This would be a bar­gain, com­pared to the ben­e­fits to ultra-​​ambitious and auto­cratic China of main­tain­ing peace and sta­bil­ity in Asia and pre­vent­ing the global desta­bi­liza­tion that a ter­ror­ist nuke blast would surely cre­ate. After all, China con­tin­ues to show some dis­re­gard for human rights, so why should it care overly much for the wel­fare of Kim II’s sub­jects? Foreign aid like this would actu­ally or at least poten­tially improve the wel­fare of those subjects.

It’s pos­si­ble, at least as a hypo­thet­i­cal case study worth a lit­tle think­ing about, that Kim II would be per­fectly happy for his North Korea to con­tinue on for­ever as some sort of Magical Kingdom, lost in a hid­den val­ley of his own cre­ation like a latter-​​day Red Shangri La. If so, then the multi­na­tional carrot-​​and-​​stick strat­egy com­bin­ing diplo­macy with sanc­tions needs enough flex­i­bil­ity to give Dear Leader and Brilliant Comrade what they desire. If the U.S. wants to con­tinue a lead­er­ship role in apply­ing “talk ther­apy” to solve the prob­lem of the Kims, then the Obama Administration might do well to view North Korea as some sort of evil but nego­tiable Camelot.

– Joe Buff

Share |

June 23rd, 2009 | Those Nutty Norks | 454645 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2009/06/23/how-m-a-d-is-kim-jong-il/How+M.A.D.+is+Kim+Jong+Il%3F2009-06-23+17%3A41%3A52Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Joes Get New Grenade Slinger | Reporter’s Notebook: Murtha Speaks » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. CR says:
    June 23, 2009 at 1:17 pm

    Mad The guy has sur­vived this long not by being mad but play­ing a great game of brinks­man­ship. He knows how far to push and what is too far. Creating cri­sises keeps the atten­tion (which they crave) on N Korea and keeps them on the world stage.
    No way will he tar­get Hawaii…he’s not stupid.

    Reply
  2. John Moore says:
    June 23, 2009 at 2:01 pm

    What would our wimp in chief do any­ways.
    Have a smoke? Work in the gar­den com­mon this guy is weak.
    Spend how much trail­ing a ship, just putting along behind, either do some­thing or don’t but stop look­ing like such a dam WIMP!
    No dis­reespect to the armed forces or navy etc your all great just the boss much of a rock.

    Reply
  3. joe buff says:
    June 23, 2009 at 2:02 pm

    Flying Fart: Well we do have info on things Kim has done and is doing, plus some info on the things he wants or needs. I assure you in the most friendly imag­in­able terms that I have all my fin­gers on my lap­top key­board and none in any of my own or some­one else’s bod­ily ori­fices! By “traing” do you mean “try­ing”? But that is exactly the point. Sanctions haven’t worked yet so why should “even more sanc­tions now” do any good? And blockades/​quarantines can never be depended on to be 100% leakproof — every block­ade in his­tory has had its suc­cess­ful block­ade run­ners. Besides, block­ades that don’t aim to starve out a peo­ple alto­gether, such as quar­an­tines against nuclear weapons, just delay the prob­lem, they don’t solve any­thing. Remember, the Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved by back-​​channel nego­ti­a­tions about a quid pro quo between remov­ing USSR’s mis­siles on Cuba and our own mis­siles in Turkey.

    Reply
  4. AlexD says:
    June 23, 2009 at 2:23 pm

    There is noth­ing that says he is going to tar­get Hawaii…launching a mis­sile in the direc­tion of Hawaii != tar­get­ing.
    But I agree with the author — first and fore­most a dictator’s pri­or­ity is to stay in power. The prob­lem, how­ever, is what hap­pens when that power is on the brink of col­lapse and they have noth­ing to lose. What would the NK regime do if it had nuclear weapons and in some future con­flict, they were about to lose power?

    Reply
  5. gruntdoc91 says:
    June 23, 2009 at 2:41 pm

    when youre going for a high alti­tude EMP pulse 500 miles is enough to black out hawaii and maybe parts of CA. could you imag­ine all the looting/​mayhem from the ille­gals, black seperatists,muslims, and klans­men all at once.Osam i mean obama would focus on the social aspects of this and leave korea and our troop­ers there to their own fates.

    Reply
  6. CR says:
    June 23, 2009 at 2:42 pm

    Creating a per­pet­ual state of con­flict is an excel­lent way of keep­ing your pop­u­la­tions gaze focused on an exter­nal threat and not focused on the fact that your coun­try is slid­ing into poverty, third world sta­tus and irrelevance.

    Reply
  7. Ed says:
    June 23, 2009 at 2:47 pm

    What needs to hap­pen is to have some bombs with either cyril­lic or man­darin char­ac­ters come rain­ing down on Pyongyang. If it was their neigh­bors to the north that decided enough was enough, we could end this regime once and for all time. We won’t do it for one main rea­son, and that being lots of artillery that could rain shells onto the Korean Peninsula, espe­cially on a major met­ro­pol­i­tan area which is Seoul.
    We could eas­ily wipe North Korea off the map but know this, unless the South agrees to what we do, we won’t start a war that they will be pay­ing the heav­ier price for.

    Reply
  8. Warren says:
    June 23, 2009 at 3:22 pm

    I have to agree with the author, this is about noth­ing more than estab­lish­ing a per­ma­nent monar­chy. I feel sorry for the peo­ple of NK, they will be slaves for the next 1000 years because with nukes there is noth­ing any­body can do about it. Not that any­body would try. The U.S. and U.N. always talk about human rights, but never do any­thing to back up the talk. If we truly believed in human rights, we would launch a pre-​​emptive strike imme­di­ately. Short term would be pure hell (polit­i­cally, eco­nom­i­cally, death toll, etc.), but it would save mil­lions of humans from 1000 years of slav­ery. There is no other option. Once NK has a viable nuclear arse­nal, they have the ulti­mate black­mail, and the rest of the world can never do any­thing.
    “All that is nec­es­sary for evil to tri­umph is for good men to do noth­ing” — noth­ing is exactly what we have done, and all we will ever do as long as we con­tinue to elect chilren instead of real men.

    Reply
  9. Roy Smith says:
    June 23, 2009 at 3:41 pm

    North Korea actu­ally was lib­er­ated by Gen. MacArthur,but China entered the war & pushed our army back & Truman fired MacArthur before he could regain the ground lost to China. So you can blame Harry S Truman for the present sit­u­a­tion that North Korea is presently in as far as the suf­fer­ing & famine of her cit­i­zens.
    Kim Jong Il is noth­ing more than a pup­pet of China AND Russia. You can be sure that those are Chinese AND Russian mis­siles being launched by North Korea. North Korea is no bet­ter off than Zimbabwe under Robert Mugabe. If Mugabe started shoot­ing mis­siles every­where & tested nuclear weapons,NOBODY would believe that he was able to do it independently,but that he had for­eign help(like China). North Korea is the same. North Korea is China’s “Cuba.” I believe a mis­sile will be launched from North Korea & it will reach Hawaii &/​or the con­ti­nen­tal U.S.(maybe even New York City). The ques­tion should be,“who does the mis­sile actu­ally belong to?”“Does it belong to China or Russia?“
    Something is going to hap­pen to make us real­ize that our gov­ern­ment has been lying to us all along about what North Korea can & can­not do.
    “THE SCRIPT HAS NOW BEEN WRITTEN“
    “A hair-​​raising con­fronta­tion in Korea may, towards the end of the period, threaten man’s very sur­vival.“
    [Peter Lemesurier, “The Armageddon Script”, p. 223]

    Reply
  10. amateur historian says:
    June 23, 2009 at 4:01 pm

    Um, General MacArthur was fired because he wanted to bomb main­land China, and when the President said he couldn’t he tried to take the mat­ter pub­lic to force the President to let him. Firing him did two things: it stopped a nuclear (China was deeply allied with Russia at the time) war, and it pre­served the exis­tence of a mil­i­tary run by civil­ians. Overall I’d say we can thank Truman for that one.

    Reply
  11. Anon says:
    June 23, 2009 at 9:46 pm

    Here’s a hypo­thet­i­cal that has me a lit­tle con­cerned. Imagine NK fir­ing the ICBM as some sort of nuclear dirty bomb. Even if it can’t reach main­land Hawaii wouldn’t the cloud of radioac­tive mate­r­ial mov­ing east wipe all liv­ing things from the islands and pos­si­bly harm­ing the US if for some rea­son it did not rain? (Wasn’t this the way Russia avoided destroy­ing Moscow after Chernobyl, by cloud seed­ing over less pop­u­lated areas in-​​between?)

    Reply
  12. Cosmoskitten says:
    June 24, 2009 at 4:13 am

    To Anon at June 23, 2009 09:46 PM:
    Short answer: The fall­out from a sin­gle nuclear weapon is not that much to worry about. The effects are way over­rated by the gen­eral public.

    Reply
  13. Subby says:
    June 24, 2009 at 5:22 am

    I agree with Ed.
    But one of my biggest wor­ries is that China or Russia will use north korea to wage a proxy war on the us/​europe. And by that I mean facil­i­ate sell­ing nuclear mate­r­ial and knowl­edge to extrem­ists through north korea. One of the two coun­tries has already sold con­ven­tional weapons through them in the Iran-​​Iraq con­flict.
    As a regime it is too iso­lated, ecen­tric and unpre­dictable. It has already proven impen­e­tra­ble to spy­ing or manip­u­la­tion. It does this by keep­ing its mil­lions of cit­i­zens in the com­plete dark about the out­side world.
    I blame the chick­en­shit shal­low south kore­ans. I think we are screwed.
    In my opin­ion Barrack is just the man to cre­ate a war plan that actu­ally works, the prob­lem is exe­cut­ing it.

    Reply
  14. Valcan says:
    June 24, 2009 at 6:01 am

    In my opin­ion Barrack is just the man to cre­ate a war plan that actu­ally works, the prob­lem is exe­cut­ing it.
    Posted by: Subby at June 24, 2009 05:22 AM
    No, Barrack is just the man to make sure to cre­ate a peace plan!! Fuzzy bun­nies.
    Barrack Obama after all said he was against war so it will be a peace plan. He will then be ignored by any­one with a ounce of balls.
    Anyways this is all to do about noth­ing. Kimmy isnt mad…hes sad hes just so ronery oh so ronery!!

    Reply
  15. Oblat says:
    June 24, 2009 at 6:45 am

    North Korea shows that if you play hard­ball with the US they always have to talk in the end. China knows that as does Iran. The mis­takes that Saddam made in try­ing to appease the US just made his regime appear weak.
    American del­e­ga­tions are not viewed the same way any­more. It’s a hell of a legacy that Bush has left behind.

    Reply
  16. Wembley says:
    June 24, 2009 at 7:40 am

    If you’ve got any evi­dence that there is such a thing as a black mar­ket in nuclear weapons where a war­head can be sold for $100m (or any other amount), it would be inter­est­ing to see it. As far as I am aware there has never been any sug­ges­tiong that such a mar­ket exists out­side the minds of thriller-​​writers and the fan­tasy of wannabe ter­ror­ists.
    Of course there is a trade in nuclear tech­nol­ogy –thanks to AQ Khan & Co — but sell­ing war­heads to ter­ror­ists is pure Tom Clancy.

    Reply
  17. joe buff says:
    June 24, 2009 at 9:43 am

    Wembley: Your point is very well taken, but rest assured I haven’t read any Clancy since he had Jack Ryan become POTUS! The info comes from things I’ve seen scat­tered in the non-​​fiction press the past few years, mostly regard­ing poten­tially for-​​sale “loose nukes” from poorly secured former-​​Soviet stocks. The experts quoted were anony­mous “informed U.S. gov­ern­ment sources.” Presumably any actual “Tango A-​​Bomb” sale by DPRK would involve a process of nego­ti­a­tion, with the start­ing point bid/​asked prices fluc­tu­at­ing depen­dent on things like infla­tion, global eco­nomic con­di­tions, for­eign cur­rency exchange rates, and so on.

    Reply
  18. freefallingbomb says:
    June 24, 2009 at 9:53 am

    To the poster “Roy Smith”:
    ————————————————————————————————————————
    You wrote: “The ques­tion should be,‘who does the mis­sile actu­ally belong to?’ ‘Does it belong to China or Russia?’ “
    1) Why bother with the missile’s exact ori­gins: Is any mis­sile really so dan­ger­ous? Why not check­ing the war­head design?
    2) You can always find out “after­wards”.
    3) Speaking of nuclear pro­lif­er­a­tors: Did you ever blame and defend some pun­ish­ment for the British and the French (the U.S. Americans?) for sup­ply­ing all sorts of nuke tech to psy­chopath nation “Israel” since the ‘50s, includ­ing nuclear-​​capable attack planes? Or do you believe that the Jews invented it all by them­selves by smash­ing their heads against the Wailing Wall?
    Is “Israel” maybe untouch­able for you…?
    ————————————————————————————————————————
    You wrote: “I believe a mis­sile will be launched from North Korea & it will reach Hawaii &/​or the con­ti­nen­tal U.S.(maybe even New York City).“
    1) So what? The test mis­sile will most prob­a­bly be fired bear­ing no war­head at all. Even crash­ing civil­ian Russian satel­lites have more radioac­tive mat

    Reply
  19. Vince says:
    June 24, 2009 at 10:38 am

    If North Koreas has nukes or not is really irrel­e­vant.
    If they were mad they just have to fire some shells into Seoul to cause a mass panic. Just to make their point at the bar­gain­ing table.
    Fact they did not done that by now is bea­cuse they like their regime to sur­vive.
    North Korea doesnt need Nukes to inplict mass casul­ties.
    They pro­lly have nuclear weapons and that puts them in a long line if crazy coun­tries.
    i name a few: Israel, Pakistan, India, South Africa, Brazil some for­mer Soviet States etc.
    For more then 50 years theres been an armed truth. Only way i see this to change is some sit­u­a­tion like USA for exam­ple lost its cool after 9/​11 and went after the so called Weapons of Mass Distruction in Iraq.
    Its all pol­i­tics , media and lob­bies.
    There is no excuse to start a war with North Korea whatsoever.

    Reply
  20. Greg says:
    June 24, 2009 at 10:45 am

    @freefallingbomb
    You said: Speaking of nuclear pro­lif­er­a­tors: Did you ever blame and defend some pun­ish­ment for the British and the French (the U.S. Americans?) for sup­ply­ing all sorts of nuke tech to psy­chopath nation “Israel” since the ‘50s, includ­ing nuclear-​​capable attack planes? Or do you believe that the Jews invented it all by them­selves by smash­ing their heads against the Wailing Wall?
    Is “Israel” maybe untouch­able for you…?
    ————————————————-
    Please tell me wtf Isreal has to do with North Korea. You are com­pletely off topic and you seem like a wack job to me.
    you said: So what? The test mis­sile will most prob­a­bly be fired bear­ing no war­head at all. Even crash­ing civil­ian Russian satel­lites have more radioac­tive mat

    Reply
  21. cr says:
    June 24, 2009 at 10:54 am

    This would seem to be a golden oppor­tu­nity for China to step up diplo­mat­i­cally and show they are a player on the world stage that can use diplo­macy to affect cur­rent events and defuse crises in their sphere of influence.

    Reply
  22. Subby says:
    June 24, 2009 at 10:58 am

    Well I did say Barrack would have prob­lems exe­cut­ing his war plan. That he will actu­ally have one that works is not to be doubted. He is fore­most a thinker and a prag­ma­tist, if push comes to shove, vic­tory is cer­tain.
    I just don’t buy that South Korea can be pushed that far, and North Korea can’t be counted on to esca­late, they are shrewed show­men only, they know they don’t stand a chance if there is actu­ally a war.
    I think what will hap­pen is every­one, espe­cially South Korea will sit on their hands, until the shit hits the fan, but by then it’ll be too late cause some­one already got nuked.
    Do our mis­sile defences even work?, if they do then we haven’t reached boil­ing point anyway.

    Reply
  23. Ed says:
    June 24, 2009 at 11:08 am

    The most pre­ferred option in my mind is an inva­sion of North Korea…by China. North Korea might have the ben­e­fits of their ter­rain if the ROKs and the US decided to take uni­lat­eral action, but they have no such lux­ury on the north­ern bor­der. Their major defense net­works are all pointed at their main ene­mies in the south.
    If China were to invade them we could watch and wait for an open­ing to have the ROKs, and the ROKs only to move north and cap­ture Pyongyang. The US can sim­ply pro­vide logis­ti­cal sup­port to the ROKS if requested and give assur­ances to the Chinese that we will let the Government of South Korea move to meet them in the coun­try to hand over the rest.
    We should not need to be involved in actual kinetic actions if the south got some help from the largest neigh­bor in the region. If the North decided to invade the ROK, then we should go full out to defeat the regime in the North. But let it be known now, if that hap­pens, it will be the Koreans that will take the high­est cost in blood­hsed. Hopefully China will real­ize that the true prob­lem is the North and pos­si­bly decide to take actions.

    Reply
  24. freefallingbomb says:
    June 24, 2009 at 12:19 pm

    To the poster “Greg”:
    ————————————————————————————————————————
    You wrote: “If the mis­sile hit hawaii, i fear that we would vapor­ize NK. Not that I want to nuke anyone,but hey it is what it is. If Kim wants to stand up and play a mans game he can get smacked down.“
    Here, very piece­meal for you:
    1) Nobody said that North Korea isn’t going to per­form that mis­sile test.
    2) Nobody said that North Korea isn’t aim­ing at Pearl Harbour.
    3) Nobody said that North Korea will miss Pearl Harbour, even with its very first mis­sile.
    4) Nobody said that the U.S.A. aren’t going to nuke North Korea entirely in return, whether that first mis­sile had any type of war­head screwed on or not.
    The (your) prob­lem starts after­wards: Once again, what are you going to do about that last lit­tle North Korean nuke that sur­vived the nuclear attack safe and sound? You can impos­si­bly avoid it, no mat­ter who car­ries it into the U.S.A. and how and when and where (or even the post­ing of all its detailed con­struc­tion plans all over the Internet, for that mat­ter). Nuke North Korea and the first mil­i­tary bomb ever to hit the con­ti­nen­tal U.S.A. will be a nuclear one.
    That’s why I also started to rea­son (with my pre­vi­ous post) pre­cisely where you stopped to think with your answer to me (con­grat­u­la­tions).
    ————————————————————————————————————————
    You wrote: “…all of your com­ments are so biased“
    The U.S.A. is no longer a good, peace­ful nation, but the new Nazi Empire. If the U.S.A. get nuked, half (?) of the World will feel ecsta­tic instead of pity­ing you.
    And since even the fanat­i­cal North Koreans “may have made” some super­fi­cial plans for a nuclear war /​ retal­i­a­tion against the U.S.A., just give it a few more days and keep under­es­ti­mat­ing every enemy’s I.Q. !

    Reply
  25. flying fart proudly joned says:
    June 24, 2009 at 12:49 pm

    Remember, the Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved by back-​​channel nego­ti­a­tions about a quid pro quo between remov­ing USSR’s mis­siles on Cuba and our own mis­siles in Turkey.–
    well.. so why are you still try­ing to under­stad­ing him? it is also use­less like every­thing what you have counted here..
    Backdoor pol­icy will never work with N-Korea.(aside that the whole talk­ing with N-​​K in 90’ens was “back-​​channel”) North Korea is not the Soviet Union either will this only sup­port chi­nese power inside of Korea and Asian Far East.
    –I have to agree with the author, this is about noth­ing more than estab­lish­ing a per­ma­nent monar­chy.–
    per­ma­nen monar­chy? you mean to instaly a dynasty?

    Reply
  26. Greg says:
    June 24, 2009 at 12:54 pm

    @freefallingbomb
    Once again you aren’t writ­ing clearly. I am hav­ing trou­ble try­ing to under­stand what you are say­ing. Are you say­ing that we are going to Nuke NK? Why in the world would we do that? Are you say­ing if we attack North Korea, they have or will sneak a nuclear bomb into the coun­try. So Its per­fectly fine and moral for NK to threaten their neigh­bors, we are the bad guys for try­ing to stop the threat? I really don’t fol­low your logic. You men­tioned that we are the new Nazis. Is that the case, or does some of the world want us to look like that while they do their evil deeds.

    Reply
  27. Valcan says:
    June 24, 2009 at 2:39 pm

    Well though i do think free falling bomb and fart are pretty crazy they have a point israel and north korea are con­nected.
    North korea and syria have been found to have colaber­ated on there nuke projects with iran. So in a way yes they are con­nected.
    Also that whole israel has had nukes for years but hasent threat­ened to wipe jor­dan, syria, iran egypt etc. off the map even though they were kinda invaded a few times.
    Basicaly we have proff we can trust the israelies with nukes. Judging from the actions of rogue states like north korea syria iran what makes you think you can trust them?

    Reply
  28. flying fart proudly joned says:
    June 24, 2009 at 3:09 pm

    what­ever you say japan­ese are ready to oppose the korean rock­ets! ;)
    http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​n​l​-​S​i​9​M​9​sYY

    Reply
  29. flying fart proudly joned says:
    June 24, 2009 at 3:10 pm

    Also that whole israel has had nukes for years but hasent threat­ened to wipe jor­dan, syria, iran egypt etc.———–
    WHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.. some­one needs here to take the his­tory lessons. i bet it is you.

    Reply
  30. joe buff says:
    June 24, 2009 at 5:31 pm

    FlyingFart: Back-​​channel diplo­macy means things that are done entirely in secret, allow­ing both par­ties to save face and nego­ti­ate frankly in ways not pos­si­ble oth­er­wise. The attempts by the Clinton Administration to reign in DPRK nuclear devel­op­ment were not back chan­nel, they were reg­u­lar meet­ings with press aware­ness and with many aides on both sides present. An exam­ple of back chan­nel diplo­macy is Henry Kissinger’s secret first trip to China. Also, for clar­ity I am inter­ested in under­stand­ing Kim II bet­ter in order to con­sider how best to resolve the con­flict that DPRK keeps pro­vok­ing and stok­ing. Sanctions don’t work well at all. Military chest-​​thumping can just paint every­one into a corner.

    Reply
  31. Joseph Steinberg says:
    June 24, 2009 at 11:03 pm

    Why wouldn’t China offer to buy out any nukes that Kim II might move close to sell­ing, per­haps at a price of two or ten times the going rate for the ilk of al Qaeda?
    Because the extor­tion would never cease! And then, Beijing would have fewer T-​​bills and Pyongyang would have even more lever­age over Washington.

    Reply
  32. Subby says:
    June 24, 2009 at 11:31 pm

    Firstly, noone cares about North Koreans. The whole pur­pose of the dis­cus­sion is that North Korea will soon have a nuclear arse­nal and we can’t let that hap­pen. Some peo­ple think they can be bar­gained with through backchan­nels oth­ers think we should invade. Both are unre­al­is­tic, we have absolutely no lever­age or spies or sab­o­tage capa­bil­ity in North Korea, so the bar­gain­ing option will only buy time and maybe not even that. Invasion is too costly in the one thing we can’t build more of, and thats sol­diers lives.
    The best we can do is prob­a­bly seize the cap­i­tal and install a phony gov­ern­ment by brib­ing some north kore­ans, this will lure out the van­guard, who will then be bar­gained with open­ing up their regime to spies, in this way they can be con­trolled to some degree. But even this will be a sig­nif­i­cant mil­i­tary pro­ce­dure and do we even have the intel­li­gence required to pull it off. I don’t believe so. Like I said we are screwed, some­ones gonna get nuked either way.

    Reply
  33. Roy Smith says:
    June 25, 2009 at 2:37 am

    North Korea is China’s lap­dog & bitch. I say that because North Korea,by threat­en­ing South Korea,Japan,& the U.S.,IS doing China’s will.
    I can­not help but roll my eyes in total dis­gust with all of these peo­ple who describe China as our friend. China is going to march into North Korea & dis­arm them & drive Kim Jong Il from power? You tell me who is being delu­sional & either smok­ing pot or some other psy­chotropic drug?
    China does not view the U.S. as their most impor­tant trad­ing partner,let’s get that STRONG DELUSION out of the way right now.
    China does how­ever view our land,our ter­ri­tory as their “Lebensraum(like Nazi Germany viewed Poland,Russia(USSR),& the rest of the nations east of them.
    Why do you think that china has been poi­son­ing our food & med­i­cine that they have been sell­ing us. Remember all of the “made in China” prod­ucts being recalled for safety rea­sons? remem­ber our pets being poi­soned? Remember all the lead paint in our children’s toys? My brother died in 2007 after being put on a heparin drip(he devel­oped a brain hem­or­rhage). Now we hear about Heparin pro­duced in China being unsafe & the cause of many patient deaths in the U.S.
    Where am I going with this? China is doing with us what we did with the American Indians when we took away their land. Just like we gave Indians small­pox infested blan­kets to kill them off & take their land,China is doing her best to poi­son us & kill us will faulty products.“But they need our money!!!!!” You dumbass,they don’t want our money,they want us GONE(dead,extinct) so they can take our land,cities,& houses.
    Please,somebody say again how China is our best buddy(“where would Wal-​​Mart be with­out China?”) & will help us with North Korea so that I can mock,ridicule,& laugh you to scorn.

    Reply
  34. flying fart proudly joned says:
    June 25, 2009 at 12:03 pm

    FlyingFart: Back-​​channel diplo­macy means things that are done entirely in secret, allow­ing both par­ties to save face and nego­ti­ate frankly in ways not pos­si­ble oth­er­wise. The attempts by the Clinton Administration to reign in DPRK nuclear devel­op­ment were not back chan­nel, they were reg­u­lar meet­ings with press aware­ness and with many aides on both sides present.—
    I know what Back-​​channel diplo­macy does mean. Those reg­u­lar meet­ings were the prod­uct of the long and hard back-​​ddor diplo­macy.
    —-An exam­ple of back chan­nel diplo­macy is Henry Kissinger’s secret first trip to China.—-
    no, that was sell­ing amer­i­can and forign­ers lifes for own polit­i­cal career.
    —Also, for clar­ity I am inter­ested in under­stand­ing Kim II bet­ter in order to con­sider how best to resolve the con­flict that DPRK keeps pro­vok­ing and stok­ing. Sanctions don’t work well at all. Military chest-​​thumping can just paint every­one into a cor­ner.—
    Seriously. Kim II is going to install his son into own posi­tion, he is going to have nuclear weapons and he is going to make own polit­i­cal vic­tory. offi­cialy and inof­fi­cialy Kim II is over and out with a great smile on his face. You are to late to under­stand him. Neither can you under­stand him because you have no per­sonal infor­ma­tion (not spec­u­la­tions) about him, wich was not con­trolled by his will. you lost, he is vic­toruos and going to left the battle-​​place already.

    Reply
  35. freefallingbomb says:
    June 25, 2009 at 8:51 pm

    To the poster “DBK”:
    You wrote: “Perhaps the Korean War will resume to be finally resolved. But it will be very bloody. I would expect much help from the Brits or Canadians orG­er­mans, much less the Japanese (despite their evi­dent fear).“
    I would evi­dently be afraid too if I had to attack a neigh­bour­ing, irra­tional nuclear power with CONVENTIONAL means only, espe­cially one who still har­bours ran­cors against me because of my mon­stru­ous World War Two atroc­i­ties! And the Japanese also know what it feels like to get nuked. But if the U.S.A. still pre­ferred (or needed…) to fight a nuclear North Korea backed by the Japanese Armed Forces, wouldn’t that be a good oppor­tu­nity now to finally let them buy those F-22’s, dumbed-​​down or not? Or should the Japanese sur­prise the North Koreans on horses, so that you U.S. Americans will always feel safe enough that they will never be able to chal­lenge you again mil­i­tar­ily? Come on, admit it, that’s the only true rea­son behind your refusal: You’re most afraid of the recon­struc­tion of the Japanese Military, because you know exactly that what goes around comes around!

    Reply
  36. drago says:
    June 26, 2009 at 9:40 am

    The only way to know for sure is to bomb him and see what hap­pens.
    If you only have a few nukes, and your tar­gets are Japan, USA and South Korea, which would you choose? The only coun­try in that list that has ever com­mit­ted the worst atroc­i­ties on the Koreans is Japan.
    Patriotic, unapolo­getic Japs every­where have every rea­son to be afraid, very afraid >:)

    Reply
  37. freefallingbomb says:
    June 26, 2009 at 4:40 pm

    During the Cold War some promi­nent U.S. American strate­gists argued pub­licly that the U.S.A. shouldn’t imperil their exis­tence over the defense of their European allies (despite big-​​mouthed pledges of “nuclear umbrel­las” and “mutual assis­tance”, etc. etc.), sug­gest­ing instead that the U.S.A. should “first try to sort mat­ters out” with the Soviet Union on a “lower, local, tac­ti­cal level” before going full broad­side, mean­ing: Turning Europe and Russia into a flu­o­res­cent waste­land while at the same time pre­serv­ing the American con­ti­nent won­der­fully intact. But now an increas­ing num­ber of posters here in this dis­cus­sion forum enthu­si­as­ti­cally sup­ports the idea of nuk­ing North Korea (and get­ting nuked in return) “pre-​​emptively” or for as lit­tle as a stray mis­sile falling into a Hawaiian vol­cano. Not being able to find one or two U.S. American cities one hour later (their own cities?) and /​ or the prospect of North Korea glob­al­iz­ing nuclear ter­ror­ism for decades, until their last unspent nukes run out of shelf life, doesn’t dis­con­cert them con­sid­er­ably (a severe form of “what shall not hap­pen, can­not hap­pen”?).
    Either the U.S.A. build big nukes only to aim them at small, weak ene­mies (cow­ards, pyro­ma­ni­acs) or the value of Human lives in the U.S.A. has sunk appre­cia­bly (nihilists, suicidals) .

    Reply
  38. Nico says:
    June 27, 2009 at 12:15 am

    I’m no polit­i­cal or mil­i­tary expert, but shouldn’t the US should per­suade Japan to alter its con­sti­tu­tion and allow an offense-​​capable mil­i­tary? The US needs a capa­ble, pow­er­ful mil­i­tary ally in the region to coun­ter­act an irra­tional Nork gov’t, espe­cially with over­stretched mil­i­tary resources. I don’t think a mil­i­tary draft would sound all that appeal­ing to the American pub­lic, no mat­ter how euphamisti­cally the media tries to present it.
    Pres. Obama increase defense spend­ing to antic­i­pate a mil­i­tary blowup in the Korean Penninsula and allow for the sus­tain­ment of 3 MCOs over­seas. Sure, it isn’t cheap or appeal­ing in the midst of a reces­sion, but it could pre­vent an unnec­es­sar­ily elon­gated and bloody war.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Most Popular Posts
    • The Osprey has Landed
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Keep it Simple
    • What 60 Minutes Got Right (Thanks to Us)
    Recent Comments
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      Dear WJS; I didn't get my information from the book. I used...
      Zandor
    • Inside the Mind Control Conspiracy, Part II
      This is not sci-fi movie stuff, after the cold...
      batvette
    • Inside the Mind Control Conspiracy, Part II
      While I applaud Sharon's media exposure...
      batvette
    • Airbag Defense
      Dear taliban or aqaeda figther. Inotice tht you forgot why to send your women to...
      :)
    • Caught on Tape: JSF
      Part II : http://www.youtube.com/watc...
      freefallingbomb
    • Caught on Tape: JSF
      To the poster "Vstress" : Part I : You wrote: "I...
      freefallingbomb
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      As long as we know where you got your information from. Thanks. :P
      WJS
    • The Osprey has Landed
      To the poster "Valcan" : You wrote: "Of...
      freefallingbomb
    • Airbag Defense
      To the poster "Rock Man" : You wrote: "From detection...
      freefallingbomb
    • The Osprey has Landed
      No offense bomb but considering 50cal machineguns can be used against...
      Valcan
    Recent Articles
    • Stitching a Stretchy Crotch
    • Classified Bids Submitted For UK UAV
    • Caught on Tape: JSF
    • The Osprey has Landed
    • What 60 Minutes Got Right (Thanks to Us)
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage