NK tested their ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) the eve of 4th of July that can potentially reach the state of Alaska. What's everyone's thoughts on this? Back in May, a US-based missile interceptor was used to block an ICBM simulator and was confirmed not to be perfect. Trump stated today that he will consider "severe options" over their missile tests this week -- what kind of options will he pose? Trump is attending a summit in Germany at this moment and will be meeting Putin for the first time face to face post his election -- what would Putin's response be in regards to NK? All these questions would be interesting to discuss.
Thoughts?
we spend a sh*t ton on overpriced military equipment (most $ goes to the fat gov contractors) for it not to work.
NK is realistically a couple years away from this being a real-life reality. That said I see no need in giving them a free run to get there and something needs to be done.
Could you shed more color on why you think they're a couple years away from this being a reality?
Well first is launching missiles under test conditions is an easy task when you have ample time for planning and such. To get a truly reliable ICBM can take up to 10 years to meet all conditions (and this is NK's first ICBM and they have not been the very impressive so far).
LOL, that was a great laugh of the day.
So, even if they are able to develop a working ICBM, we do have defenses set up to intercept these bad boys, right?
US THAAD successfully intercepted an intermediate range ICBM test today. 14 for 14 on tests
There are a lot of IFs that all lead to Kim Jung Fools immediate demise.
IF Kim Jung Fool fires a missile at the United States (or any of our nation's allies)... IF the missile launch is successful, doesn't prematurely detonate or fails to re-enter the atmosphere... IF the missile passes through undeterred by THAAD... IF the missile has the distance to hit the coast of Alaska... IF the missile strikes a town in Alaska... IF that town has more than 3 residents excluding a grizzly bear, a Rainbow Trout, and a Moose...
AND, IF those stripes are still red and those stars still white on our flag... Kim will likely learn what it's like to poke a bear with a stick. NK would be a target in the coming day(s), and his "devastating strike" to the Rainbow Trout population of Alaska would go down as one of the dumbest decisions any natural born leader has made in the 21st century. He would only succeed in setting his own expiration date.
In order for China and Russian to save face, they would and should follow-suit behind the United States in ridding the rat king from his hill of garbage, but history (though bountiful with repetition) still may surprise us.
"IF that town has more than 3 residents including a grizzly bear, a Rainbow Trout, and a Moose..."
Literally laughed out loud! Good one! +1
Have to disagree that the resident count matters. If NK were to strike anywhere on U.S. soil or even x miles off the coast, there's no way the U.S. doesn't retaliate.
High IQ Americans decided to invade a country that had no intention to develop nukes (IRAQ) instead of invading a country which will actually produce nukes (North Korea).
There's no oil in NK brah
This guy fucks
I think the more important thing to consider is what will happen when NK has a fully-functional ICBM that can target mainland America. Sadly, I doubt our lawmakers give a shit about Alaska.
Save for some kind of SEAL team assault or targeted strike that somehow causes a change of government in NK, that change being to a government with sense, NK will eventually develop long-range ICBM's. The real question is what we'll do about it given that China won't want any US-backed state at its border nor will we back down on any Chinese-backed North Korean state. The only peaceful scenario I can see unfolding (and I'm no strategic analyst) is for a change of government in NK.
On the flip side, if things get hairy, expect another war on the peninsula, this time with near-certain risk of some type of nuclear detonation (likely on the peninsula and not mainland USA).
Even more interesting is what that second scenario would mean for the future of mutually-assured destruction. If people begin to use nukes in open warfare, there would have to be some escalation of pressure on nuclear proliferation (the US using 2 in 1945 was enough for the whole world to relent from their use indefinitely).
Kassad - good point on the change of government in NK. On the note that another war on the peninsula can ensue if things get hairy, I'm pretty sure the US will be just as involved as they would if a ICBM had hit Alaska or mainland for that matter. SK is an important ally to the US. Curious to hear how South Koreans feel about the potential (?) war in the peninsula if things had escalated.
Could.
That's the biggest thing to realize. They "could". You're still assuming that they'd be able to reach out before we "sacrifice" one of our boys in blue in the sky or at minimum launch our anti-missile defense systems (most of which are classified for this reason).
Even if they tried to shoot off, we'd have them blown off the map within a 2 hour period. What would be interesting is what happens after North Korea gets wiped away. Would South Korea take control? Would China force their hand and take over? Would there be tension and possibly conflict with China over the acquisition of the land? Very interesting scenario.
Who would want a nuclear waste zone anyway?
Washington Post reporting today,
"North Korea has successfully produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead that can fit inside its missiles, crossing a key threshold on the path to becoming a full-fledged nuclear power, U.S. intelligence officials have concluded in a confidential assessment."
Link to WaPo story
Whether true or not -- coming from the same intelligence community that concluded Russia "meddled" (whatever that means) in the 2016 presidential elections, and more importantly which also concluded that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction in the months leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq -- this would be an important precursor to justifying airstrikes / invasion / regime change. This narrative feels all too familiar.
I don't buy it. The fact that intelligence analysts have gone from saying a few months ago that NK's nuclear bombs were at WWII-level tech with an inventory of about 20, to suddenly having 60 atomic-era ICBMs is reminiscent of the release of bogus intelligence prior to the Iraq war. It is my personal belief that this move is being orchestrated by pro-war politicians on both sides of the aisle to build a bi-partisan consensus for military action.
This is a boil that has festered for too long, and there is no military solution to the situation that doesn't incur extensive civilian casualties in both NK and SK. I was hoping that recent foreign policy developments (i.e. no longer supporting the Free Syrian Army, instructing Mattis to bring Afghanistan to a close) suggested that Trump was shifting toward the military isolationism that he campaigned on. His warning of "fire and fury" towards NK is greatly concerning.
Hey folks,
Looking to offload some SF real estate property and other California properties in my portfolio. Can close quickly, motivated seller.
Got anything in Presidio Terrace?
If so, good luck with the future parking fees.
This is what happens when our Secretary of State office looks like an understaffed Sears. At this point, the US has allowed North Korea to get the military capacity that could decimate major populations (Seoul) before anyone is able to issue a counter strike. This is due to NK's clandestine missiles can be rolled out of caverns and pointed at populations within minutes. That means if we act forcefully, Seoul may perish.
Without the ability to involve ourselves in a forceful way, we have let NK go too far along to make an Iranian esque agreement. Thereby, Kim’s nuclear program is not going away anytime soon.
So what does this mean? Well, I think it's important to realize the different motivating influences in the region. Firstly, Kim Jong Un wants what hundreds of other world leaders throughout history have wanted, influence in their home region. Think of Russia with Putin, who wants control of Crimea and different ex-Soviet land as a way to bring Russia back to the glory of former days. There are stories of Putin asking historians about how his reign will be written about 100 years from now. This is the mindset of these guys, they want to be remembered like Napoleon or Otto Van Bismark. **They want to be pragmatic leaders with the capability to unite their nation and bring it to the worldwide forefront. **
Kim wants the same things. He reads the media like everyone else. He realizes he is the laughingstock of the world, and what better way to get a seat at the big boy table than to aim an ICBM at the world leaders. This has been the legacy of Kim’s father and grandfather, so in this sense, Kim is fulfilling the legacy of his family.
Secondly, another influence that comes into play is China. They want US influence away from their borders. We have been pressing on their doorstep for years, and NK provides a great way to scare the US from intervening any further. How so? NK comes out and says back out of SE Asia or we’ll blow you up, and so we back off. Remember, our Secretary of State office is incredibly understaffed, we can't make the kind of backdoor negotiations that other administrations have relied on because we literally have no one with experience in the region within our bureaucracy.
So say the US says we won't stop our influence in SE Asia. The only thing I see this doing is put us closer to war. In this scenario, China hasn't done anything in the public eye, yet they get what they want which is the US out of their turf. In order to foster this relationship, China allows trade between themselves and NK, which allows Kim to stave off worldwide sanctions and continue his quest for nuclear proliferation.
This is the problem with NK. How can we get them to the table, and at least slow, if not stop, their nuclear ambitions?Personally, I think we need to work on our anti-nuclear capabilities, and try to figure out a diplomatic solution. The only way we do that is find capable people with the ability to negotiate and put them in our State department. Unfortunately, Trump may have burned all of those bridges. Scary times indeed, but I'm comforted to know that the US could turn NK to glass in a matter of hours. That wouldn't look so good in a history book.
+1 well written.
As much as I dislike saying this, Trump is the guy if we want to take action, be aggressive, and do something about this. He is relatively fearless with his actions and is not afraid to pull the trigger on anything if needed, just like the air strike he pulled in Syria back in April, which showed the world that he is capable.
Question is - what's really pulling back NK from using their already developed nuclear power? Or are they just provoking for show and face?
DPRK already has nuclear capability. That genie is not going back into the bottle. The US should stop saber rattling, remove the 30,000 permanently stationed US soldiers from South Korea, and stop the military exercises on the peninsula.
This coupled with some effective negotiation is the key to a safe nuclear landscape in my opinion.
Hopefully this happens so my Gold ETF will skyrocket.
News today: NK threatens US that they will hit Guam, part of US territory, with ballistic missiles.
Thoughts?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/08/09/guam-under-gun-nor…
I thought Guam was on the verge of tipping over?
Pretty sure NK is just making threats so that other countries take them seriously, it's got to suck being the laughing stock of the world for so long. Basically the kid who got bullied all of middle school telling the popular kids that he's going to shoot up the cafeteria or something like that.
...did you just express sympathy for a literal mentally ill lunatic who starves his people and enforces possibly the most hateful, authoritarian government on the face of this planet today?
Public school education is really starting to have an effect...
The man is pure evil. Their ruling family has utterly destroyed the people of that country. Nobody did this to them. This is about the 10th time I've seen someone write something like this today, the best I can figure is that you get all your news from Salon or Slate or some such.
It would be in the United States interest to let them carry out an attack against one of our territories or allies because it would completely justify not only disabling their nuclear program but removing their leader from power. But since this won't ever happen since Beijing ultimately pulls the strings and war on that peninsula would be bad for regional stability and business, there's not much to worry about.
If they have any brains they would not do it. I would not be surprised to see a war with NK starting at some within the next 10 years though.
Pretty much. The sooner that regime change occurs in the country, the better it will be for everyone else. The longer Pyongyang plays the time, the more advanced weaponry they can develop the more clout they will build up in making their threats and throwing their tantrums.
..
A thing that a lot of people seem to ignore is that NK regime is DEEPLY connected with China and (in a lesser but not by far extend ) Russia. Where do they get all these things needed to develop ICBM or after WWII warheads? China's hand is deeply behind it , the Chinese used NK to force political decisions in US for some time now. War on NK means war on China's backyard. US could use tactical Nukes which would demonstrate power but not destroy everything so the HOW is not the main issue. The main issue is the after. Chinese and Russian won't give up their puppet to US and US won't give the land to Chinese and Russian once they make an attack.
Agreed - and I don't think China is going to easily cut ties with NK without a significant incentive/motivation, despite the danger NK imposes with their nuclear capabilities. Maybe, perhaps, cutting back on trade with China may induce this?
NK is no threat to China, the opposite. China pretends to care because that's the right appearances. I think this whole crisis is a byproduct of Trump harsh rhetoric on China and the absence of any better scapegoats for the internal problems Trump faces. As you can imagine the unknowns are too many to make educated guess. What I am more intrigued about is whether China will agree to the US actually going to a small scale war with guaranteed results to support the Trump or if it will make his life even harder. Make no mistake NK guy phones China for permission to fart, so nothin happens there without their consent. So theoretically a small scale and successful war would boost Trump's numbers and buy him some time in the office. ( This is also reinforced by the fact that he has too many military people in his cabinet) . But Iraq/Afghanistan also started out as small scale little intervention and we see the results. Even Russians cannot disengage from Syria without appearing weak. Its a doubled edge sword.
It's funny we're discussing this now. I'm getting pro-war ads from the Hoover Institution on YouTube now.
These guys sound like they miss the Cold War days.
Anyone else feel like NK is one big distraction?
We have missile defense systems that could knock their nuke out of the sky.
Inventore consequuntur sint ut sed et. Deserunt quae vel quae et laudantium sint dolor mollitia. Fuga quidem quo dolor possimus qui ipsa reprehenderit. Est ad impedit aliquam culpa et. Ipsam praesentium ex qui minus.
Eos et molestias laudantium ex. Et eveniet sed dignissimos sit explicabo aut earum. Sint at aut molestias accusamus in velit temporibus.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Corrupti delectus praesentium non error possimus repellendus. Est consequatur praesentium temporibus deserunt. Ullam fuga ex in molestias maxime.
Consequatur rerum aut quisquam et. Et velit ullam est consequatur dolorem.
Et dolores labore vitae necessitatibus est. Beatae quos iure et itaque. Eum facere aliquam est minima deserunt molestias perspiciatis. Autem quis commodi quis quam. Est aliquid dicta rerum harum aut et explicabo.
Aliquid quo alias sed delectus sint nulla dolor. Et dolorum ratione sit sit dolorem. Pariatur quasi iusto voluptatem.
Facere similique explicabo incidunt quis similique tempore. Mollitia nulla quam et et tenetur dolorum explicabo. Error voluptatem perferendis molestiae doloremque aut reiciendis explicabo.