North Korea:

Imo, military action is unavoidable and the NK leader actually thinks he can defeat the US. Probably because China and Russia will likely side with his regime in the event we attack with major force. If that is truly an option, how long do we wait and allow the guy to hurl possible nukes at Japan and others.
I mean, isn't there a point where we must defend those we are sworn to protect?

I worry that we are losing credibility in the eyes of the world, almost as much as I worry a nuclear confrontation would escalate into world war and global destruction. Because there comes a point our military deterrent is weakened to an extremely dangerous level.

I pray POTUS makes the wisest choices, because I'm not so certain I would not have already sprayed that little country with about a third of our available conventional ordinance and warned others to stay out of it or face the same.

As an aside, is Japan capable of a unilateral military strike, and would they at any point consider it?

I am worried, but I don't think we're losing credibility. If anything 40 years of kicking this thing down the road has done that, and now we're just being forced to address the situation.

And we really aren't "forced". We could let him keep going, get a big pile of nuclear tipped ICBMs and hope for the best, and we may get there anyway, but it's better to at least try to stop this madness.

I don't think force is inevitable, but it's going to take a lot more brinkmanship before we get anywhere. We have to get Russia and China to decide it's in their best interest to fully support stopping him, and that means them thinking we're willing to impose serious trade sanctions and/or go to war.

Japan can't really strike on their own. But there is an increased chance that we will be moving Nukes to Japan and maybe South Korea. Moving them to South Korea may be the thing that gets chinese action b/c they will see that the NK thing has gone from being a win for them strategically to a negative.

That's the key, getting China to see that continuing the NK regime is now a net loser for them. Up till now it's been a net gain in their view.

IMO where we're missing our chance is to use Chinese support of the NK to isolate them more in the Pacific. We really should be trying to work against their efforts to become more of a regional and global influence. I'd be pointing out that they are willing to support an insane regime and see them get nukes in order to have influence, building military bases in the South China Sea, etc. They aren't the friends of their neighbors, just ask Tibet and Taiwan.

No doubt war with the NK would be a "real" war. Not these neo-British things where we're fighting hopelessly outmatched fiefdoms but a real war. Now we still vastly outmatch them and could crush them, but the casualties would be more like a real war. We couldn't avoid civilians, and they'd try to kill as many as possible.

And that's all IF the Chinese and Russians stay out of it. The Russians would, but not sure about the Chinese. We'd almost surely have to use nuclear weapons to do enough damage fast enough to keep South Korea from being harmed any more than minimally necessary, but then you're talking about radiation and basically a nightmare scenario for that region.

There are no good options. The best is to make it clear we will put nukes in SK and Japan in response, something China would deeply hate, and hope that's enough to get them to force NK to end their program.

They have that ability, cut off all the oil and it would work, but it will take a total embargo.

Even if that doesn't work hopefully it's enough to keep the Kim regime from doing anything with their nukes. But MAD doesn't work as well with crazy people.

The Japanese are a proud people and they have a military (7th ranked in size alone) that could defeat NK.
Thats only the military weaponry we know of.

Their tech weapons are another matter. And if they were to mobilize for all out war, that would in short order be one of the most powerful militaries in the world with manpower and finances to match nearly anyone globally.

I dont see how this could have been avoided, nor how POTUS can do anything but show patient resolve. Dealing with a self proclaimed deity and all.
And Rodman as our only liason...heck, no wonder they hate us.

Japan has some forces, esp. with the addition of their larger carriers, but attacking the NK conventionally would require a massive force and access through the SK that they wouldn't have.

I don't see any way to wage a conventional war against them. The buildup required would take months and the NK wouldn't just sit back and watch. At some point they'd attack preemptively.

If Japan attacked NK would still flatten Seoul and overrun SK. The US would have to be the lead nation with 30K troops already there, and it would have to be combined effort of SK, the US and Japan.

Just a complete mess no matter how you slice it. Our best hope is getting China more on board, and/or finding some way to get at Kim himself.

We need that laser from Real Genius, vaporize his butt from space.

Good points.

I just know the Japanese are a different breed (in a psychological sense) when it comes to national pride and dying for a cause. Every man, woman, and child. And that they are now a sleeping giant as a nation in their own right.

Was MacArthur right? Should we have pressed on and had nuclear war in 1951? Maybe. Our efforts in the late 1990s were ineffective. I fear Chamberlainesque.

North Korea has a large army. In sheer numbers North Korea has the troops to invade and take South Korea. Do we have the resolve to push the issue? Do we have the military assets conventionally with troops stretched in Iraq and Afghanistan. We sure can't pull any forces from Western Europe with the Russians on the move.

This is bad. Honestly I think we should work with the Chinese to seek regime change. China wants a buffer state between the pro US South Korea and itself. North Korea serves that purpose. A stable North Korea that pledges to get rid of nukes but maintains a large conventional force and is under Chinese protection should be enough. We need to get the Kim's out of power.

In the 1950s you have Soviet pilots and Chinese ground forces coming to the aid of North Korea. They will do so again.

Launching a missile at Japan was an act of war. We have not responded forcefully enough.

Now North Korea is getting in position to hit us directly (actually they already are as Guam is part of the US).

We need a draft and we need to prepare for the unthinkable on the Korean peninsula.

North Korea as a nuclear power selling its wares to every nutjob around is not an option we can live with. Russia-yes. China-yes. But North Korea-unequivocally no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UKHistory

Was MacArthur right? Should we have pressed on and had nuclear war in 1951? Maybe. Our efforts in the late 1990s were ineffective. I fear Chamberlainesque.

---

Chamberlainesque or not, they are still preferable to the horrors of a nuclear war. Fallout is no joke, it would be a pox on not just our children but our childrens childrens children. The mututations, increased cancer rates, etc. are unavoidable and quite frankly unacceptable. On the flip side, were we aggressive enough in the 90s? Nope. We made some smart moves in the 90s, like pushing to move NK to light water reactors from their previous USSR-lineage graphite, research, and other reactors. Light water reactors use low enrichment uranium, produce very few weapons grade isotopes and overall are a better technology. As for why is it preferable to what we had before? Graphite-moderated reactors, Chernobyl was a graphite-moderated reactor, need I say more. These are some of the MOST dangerous kinds of reactors to have because they have a positive Tco. Their other reactors required very high enrichment uranium (weapons grade) and produce loads of weapons grade isotopes (which is why the USA stuck with the types we did through the 60-80s). So the move Clinton made to migrate them to a modern light-water reactor was a smart move, the dumb part was that it was not contingent upon third-party destruction and removal of the old equipment. Of course, they fought this during negotiations and we know why. Had we done that though, there is very little chance that they are in the position that they are now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UKHistory

North Korea has a large army. In sheer numbers North Korea has the troops to invade and take South Korea. Do we have the resolve to push the issue?

---

They have a large extremely untrained, extremely ill-equipped, and EXTREMELY malnourished Army. All three of these serve to in essence decrease the effective size of their army by about ten-fold, if not more. The only thing is they can literally just throw bodies at a problem (a chilling literal use of the idiom). They don't care about loss of life and can use the cult of personality and relative isolation to manipulate these soldiers to die for the cause. From an equipment perspective, they are fighting with WWII/Korean War technology and they don't even have much of it at that. Some of it extends into the 70s and early 80s but that which does is even more limited. Mostly gifts and purchases from China or the USSR to their Soviet bretheren. Much of their military equipment was acquired during the Korean War or near after, when there was a clear need. From then on, upgrades and updates were not nearly as common. They maintained internal R&D to reverse engineer some designs and evolve them, but due to limited resources it only occurred in specific areas (rockets, nuclear reactors, and a few smaller items). They certainly don't have enough equipment period to equip their entire army, let alone modern and working equipment. Even the SK army is significantly more advanced and capable than the NK army, let alone SK plus USA and any others. While NK might be able to make some gains in a sneak attack and certainly inflict a bit of damage, they would be quickly repelled in a battle. Partly because of the state of their army and partly because they have no support branches. Their navy is functionally inoperative, they have some ships that work but many of the ships are maintained by scavenging parts from other non-working ships. This is not sustainable in a time of war. It is very likely that the US military could take their Navy out in a matter of hours. Same thing with their Air Force, the fighters they have are often not 100% operational. Many of those that ARE fully operational are antiquated and easily shot down by our latest technology. From what I have read, they do not have beyond-the-horizon capabilities, capabilities that are more or less standard in today's Air Forces. So even if the Army was able to reach Seoul (a disastrous proposition already) they certainly could not maintain it for any period of time. I don't believe SK or Japan would allow anything short of regime change should this happen and I believe that China would give tacit approval, if not outright perform the regime change themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UKHistory

This is bad. Honestly I think we should work with the Chinese to seek regime change. China wants a buffer state between the pro US South Korea and itself. North Korea serves that purpose. A stable North Korea that pledges to get rid of nukes but maintains a large conventional force and is under Chinese protection should be enough. We need to get the Kim's out of power.

---

China no longer cares about the buffer state and hasn't for a long time (since the 90s, at the very latest early-2000s). SK is one of their biggest trading partners. Any "expert" who claims China cares about the buffer state is either uneducated on Sino-NK relations (and not an expert) or hasn't updated their knowledge. The bigger issue is humanitarian, the area of China that is located near NK is already one of the least developed and most rural parts of China. China cannot afford and does not want a huge influx of highly uneducated refugees needing heavy support. It already has a hard time handling the amount of poor and uneducated in that region, millions more would be a disaster. China values stability over almost anything else at this time. They are in a precarious stage of their growth and they know it. They will make moves as long as they think they are not too destabilizing nearby and they certainly don't want a humanitarian disaster on their borders. This will change in the coming 5-10yrs as they establish a more dominant financial and military position in the world (much to the chagrin of the USA).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UKHistory

In the 1950s you have Soviet pilots and Chinese ground forces coming to the aid of North Korea. They will do so again.

---

Russia is the main supporter of NK at this point. An unstable NK which is aggressive against SK, Japan and USA serves Russia's interest very well. It distracts the rest of the world from Russia and serves as a cost drain that Russia doesn't have to deal with. China will support, if and only if, NK does not attack. As I said before, they don't want instability on their borders. If NK attacks SK, China is very liable to overtake NK themselves. Isolate those regions from China proper and do what they want with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UKHistory

Launching a missile at Japan was an act of war. We have not responded forcefully enough.

Now North Korea is getting in position to hit us directly (actually they already are as Guam is part of the US).

---

Agreed about launching the missile over Japan being an act of war. Japan is already starting to react and realize that they can't be as passive as they desire.

Having a missile that can reach us and a missile that can hit things accurately are two different things. With nuclear weapons and fallout its a bit more of a moot point, but it is still an important distinction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UKHistory

We need a draft and we need to prepare for the unthinkable on the Korean peninsula.

---

I would be VERY VERY VERY surprised if we didn't already have dozens of invasion plans, both offensive and defensive, ready as needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UKHistory

North Korea as a nuclear power selling its wares to every nutjob around is not an option we can live with. Russia-yes. China-yes. But North Korea-unequivocally no.

---

Both Russia and China are relatively rational actors, they behave in their own best interests, as expected. The same can be said about Iran, Pakistan (to some degree) and India. I know some will say Iran is not, but for all intents and purposes they behave quite rationally. They make moves in their own best interest, they try to get away with what they can, they are not Iran of 1970-80. Not to say they are good, but they are much more rational and predictable in behvaior. Additionally, pretty much all mentioned understand that nobody wins when it comes to Nuclear War, the only way to win is to not play. NK is fatalistic enough to not give a damn.

Great post Pedro.

Your conclusion is the main problem: the NK is not a rational actor. Other nations will engage in hostile actions, etc. but they are acting in what they see as their best interests as a NATION. the NK is acting it what it sees as the regime's best interests, but they are so isolated and IMO myopic that they probably can't tell what that is, and seem determined to pursue this course even though others woudl actually do more to secure their rule.

Re their military IMO Pedro nailed it. Numerically they look good and they do have some better trained special forces, etc., but this is a lot like Saddam and his forces. Poorly trained, poorly equipped, not really ready for a real war with modern weapons. One Apache helicopter can take out their tanks as fast as it can fire missiles, it will just be how many times they have to reload.

The problem is they have massive bodies to throw into battle and artillery, and they will aim it all at Seoul, try to inflict maximum casualties.

But at this point I'm sure we have multiple plans to engage NK and try to take out their artillery and force-forward assets to keep them from hitting SK any harder than possible. But it will still be an ugly, brutal situation.

NK won't observe any rules of war, and won't care how much damage is done to their own people.

Last thought, on the Chamberlain reference. Many observers used that exact analogy when Clinton sent Carter over for that deal,and Carter looked almost like him in his declaration of a good deal. It was a farce b/c, like the deal in Munich, it depended on an insane tyrant keeping his word. Not going to happen.

At this point I don't know what China is thinking. They've long enjoyed having NK pull resources from us, but as Pedro mentions now SK is a major trade partner, and so is the US. On one hand economically they're trying to join the world as a major influence, but they still continue to prop up this regime and are aggressively pursuing military options in the South China Sea as well.

It's not inconsistent, but it is pushing the boundaries all at the same time.

The US hasn't played this very well, and we should be taking advantage of their more threatening moves to try to secure better ties in the region. I do think Trump's mention of India is a big deal, we have been neutral with them and Pakistan dancing on that fence, but Pakistan has been a tepid ally at best. Time to work harder with India and try to upend BRICS as much as possible.

Of course I'd begin to reject the One China policy altogether, and work to move nuclear deterrents into SK and Japan. China may or may not want a buffer there, but they definitely don't want US medium range missiles there. We removed nuclear options there in 1991, and those were outdated munitions, but it may be time to put something far more advanced in their place.

This is basically a cold war with the Russians and Chinese. As usual the US is behind the curve in acting, but there is still time.

Actually I am thinking Carter went over on his own and Clinton was not exactly thrilled by the action. At least initially.

Missiles May Be Final Nail for Japan's Pacifism

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingcat

Missiles May Be Final Nail for Japan's Pacifism

---

japan has been re-militarizing for some time, and this will certainly only accelerate the pace.

We probably need more help in the region, but Abe has also been pushing for other reforms that have people nervous about Japan returning to a less democratic leadership.

China is pushing this response. They may be sorry what they get from it, from both Japan and SK, but especially Japan. They are already far superior in their Navy to any Pacific nation, and that will only grow with their new carrier class coming on line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UKHistory

Actually I am thinking Carter went over on his own and Clinton was not exactly thrilled by the action. At least initially.

---

Yes and no. Clinton supported him going, and he was briefed and supported by the State Dept. The part where there was issue is that Carter announced at least part of a "deal" without getting it blessed, either the deal or the announcement as it is told. Essentially Carter vastly overstepped his authority and bounds, and was public about it to boot.

that meeting wasn't the final deal, but the final deal worked out with Clinton was aid in exchange for them ending their nuclear program. Boy that was a good deal wasn't it?

Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize, Clinton declared an end to nuclearization of the Korean penninsula, and the Kim regime played them like cheap fiddles. They got $4 billion in US money, and didn't change a thing.

Fools. Utter fools.

North Korea is doing their usual shakedown of the US. They want Trump to send them food and money like his predecessors did. I don't think that is going to happen in this case. North Korea cannot afford a war of any kind, and needs to come up with an exit strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KeithKSR

North Korea is doing their usual shakedown of the US. They want Trump to send them food and money like his predecessors did. I don't think that is going to happen in this case. North Korea cannot afford a war of any kind, and needs to come up with an exit strategy.

---

Maybe dad but I actually think son is stupid or crazy or brainwashed enough to believe that he actually could destroy the USA, and might actually try

China announced today that their banks would no longer be doing business with North Korea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by badrose

China announced today that their banks would no longer be doing business with North Korea.

---

I suspect this is a token move more for PR, and won't actually happen. I hope I'm wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doc

I suspect this is a token move more for PR, and won't actually happen. I hope I'm wrong.

---

It will probably have leaks, but I'll take it as a positive step. It sounds like the US has some knowledge of exactly what is going on, so maybe our intelligence can help keep them in check at least some.

I seriously doubt it will be 100%, but every bit will help. Gotta make his elite inner circle suffer. Normally that stuff is meaningless, but with some of these regimes that rely on keeping those people in luxury it can make a difference.

It wasn't just that. Anyone who does business with NK will be sanctioned.

Since starting a nuclear war is likely to prove unpopular, just finding every possible way to up sanctions is still the best course.

But go ahead and move the bombers and carriers into jump position just in case this lunatic does something really dumb. I'm sure the subs are already on station. It's stunning how fast a SLBM could hit a target on a peninsula, just in case.

Of course the key is just getting China and even Russia to believe we are willing to risk that war in order to avoid living with a nuclear Kim regime. That's the key.

It was the key for Reagan in negotiations, and it will be the key for Trump. That's one place where they are very similar, even if Reagan delivered that message with the warmth of your grandpa and Trump does it with the tone of a Brooklyn cabbie.