World War III

[Prince Loeffler]

Can it be a possibilty that we may be heading to Nuclear War ? Are we ready ?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090619/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_us_nkorea

Here's the statement that stands out for me:

A Japanese newspaper reported Thursday that North Korea might fire its most advanced ballistic missile toward Hawaii around the Fourth of July holiday.

A new missile launch — though not expected to reach U.S. territory — would be a brazen slap in the face of the international community, which punished North Korea with new U.N. sanctions for conducting a second nuclear test on May 25 in defiance of a U.N. ban.

North Korea spurned the U.N. Security Council resolution with threats of war and pledges to expand its nuclear bomb-making program.

The missile now being readied in the North is believed to be a Taepodong-2 with a range of up to 4,000 miles and would be launched from North Korea's Dongchang-ni site on the northwestern coast, the Yomiuri newspaper said. It cited an analysis by Japan's Defense Ministry and intelligence gathered by U.S. reconnaissance satellites.

What if ?

[pgsmith]

What if ?
If they actually hit anything, I think the U.S. would probably launch a slew of cruise missles and take out their missle launch and fabrication facilities. As it is, they may well launch something in our general direction, but I think it would be passed of as simply more breast beating on their part.

[DustyMars]

Actually, our phased array radar could do that. :) Can you imagine an idiot under a tinfoil hat making war with us? Of course, if the "negotiator" has his way we'll be dust soon anyway. :(

[Senjojutsu]

Life imitates art...

Team America: World Police - Kim Jong Il & Hans Blix:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0hk9vaqWUg

Or else what?

Warning: Contains Profanity - NSFW or children - but it is funny and tragically maybe prophetic!
:eek:

[jdostie]

It's like Kim Jong Il is saying "I can launch nukes because I don't care, and nobody can do anything (or at least not proportional) to me because you don't want to hurt my neighbors." Just how far reaching would the affects of a few nukes set off in North Korea be? Whatever the case, I don't think he's saying "I can beat the US," but that if the US or anybody else for that matter does anything, he's going to take it out on whomever he "can" hurt.

It feels very much like a school bully saying "you can't touch me because I am a minor" while bullying other kids. Or someone with hostages that he is threatening; you've got him in your crosshairs, but he has a "dead-man switch" to cause something very bad to happen if you pull the trigger.

In the movies we'd send in Chuck Norris or Stephen Seagall with a few crack special forces units to simultaneously take out the nuke and missle production facilities and anything he had in storage. What bothers me is what we saw with Iraq - if there were weapons (I think there were, but that's beside the point), they probably got moved, and we didn't know where - or that we possibly/probably don't know where everything is - so that if we did some "surgical" strikes, they may well still have the capability of responding. And, I distrust the notion that they haven't had a good missle launch, and only have a small amount of nuclear material - something about that whole scenario doesn't feel right to me at all given how long they have been a supplier of missile technology and parts to others. . . I can't reconcile what we've seen with that.

[Fred27]

What if ?

If a fullblown nuclear war happens then you should pray you live inside a target area. You wouldnt want to survive a nuclear total war.

[DustyMars]

It's like Kim Jong Il is saying "I can launch nukes because I don't care, and nobody can do anything (or at least not proportional) to me because you don't want to hurt my neighbors." Just how far reaching would the affects of a few nukes set off in North Korea be? Whatever the case, I don't think he's saying "I can beat the US," but that if the US or anybody else for that matter does anything, he's going to take it out on whomever he "can" hurt.

It feels very much like a school bully saying "you can't touch me because I am a minor" while bullying other kids. Or someone with hostages that he is threatening; you've got him in your crosshairs, but he has a "dead-man switch" to cause something very bad to happen if you pull the trigger.

In the movies we'd send in Chuck Norris or Stephen Seagall with a few crack special forces units to simultaneously take out the nuke and missle production facilities and anything he had in storage. What bothers me is what we saw with Iraq - if there were weapons (I think there were, but that's beside the point), they probably got moved, and we didn't know where - or that we possibly/probably don't know where everything is - so that if we did some "surgical" strikes, they may well still have the capability of responding. And, I distrust the notion that they haven't had a good missle launch, and only have a small amount of nuclear material - something about that whole scenario doesn't feel right to me at all given how long they have been a supplier of missile technology and parts to others. . . I can't reconcile what we've seen with that.

The guy is a certified nut case, like all other dictators are, but even crazy people are dangerous. We can take them out in a moments notice; if we had the will. I doubt the current idiots have the will. We alwasy find ourselves on the shitty end of the stick and have to hire (elect) people to get us out of the mess. It never ends. :cry:

[DustyMars]

If a fullblown nuclear war happens then you should pray you live inside a target area. You wouldnt want to survive a nuclear total war.

we do not use dirty nukes now days. Good old clean, efficient neutron pulses just clean out the rats and leave the rat droppings. :D

BTW, I survived several wars, including WW III.

[Moenstah]

Every single mention of World War III is about as preposterous and populist as choosing a date for the Apocalypse.:D

[Prince Loeffler]

as choosing a date for the Apocalypse.:D

So you met my future ex-wife ? :D

[jdostie]

Every single mention of World War III is about as preposterous and populist as choosing a date for the Apocalypse.:D

Perhaps, but this guy is really unstable, and as I said before, he doesn't seem to think anyone can touch him. I don't pretend to be up enough what's available in our arsenal to "take him out" cleanly and without causing lots of problems for our allies in the area. Certainly, I know we can take him out, but I suspect the "collateral damage" whether direct, or indirect seems to be of concern. Hence my previous post. I am sure the Whitehouse knows what our military options are, and has a better sense about what the "collateral damage" may be. But after Iraq, (even before), unless the whole world is willing to step up against him, nobody wants to do anything.

We can take them out in a moments notice; if we had the will.

Well, we can make another UN resolution, and if that doesn't work, have a resolution saying that we really meant our previous resolution. And then we can resolve to have more resolutions proving our resolve not to tolerate this.
How exactly is the United Nations better than the League of Nations was again?

[DustyMars]

Perhaps, but this guy is really unstable, and as I said before, he doesn't seem to think anyone can touch him. I don't pretend to be up enough what's available in our arsenal to "take him out" cleanly and without causing lots of problems for our allies in the area. Certainly, I know we can take him out, but I suspect the "collateral damage" whether direct, or indirect seems to be of concern. Hence my previous post. I am sure the Whitehouse knows what our military options are, and has a better sense about what the "collateral damage" may be. But after Iraq, (even before), unless the whole world is willing to step up against him, nobody wants to do anything.



Well, we can make another UN resolution, and if that doesn't work, have a resolution saying that we really meant our previous resolution. And then we can resolve to have more resolutions proving our resolve not to tolerate this.
How exactly is the United Nations better than the League of Nations was again?

Ever wonder why those nitwits chose the Twin Towers instead of the UN building to ram? I think the UN would wilt if we stopped bailing them out. The UN and League of Nations is no better than Little League whale hunting.

[niten ninja]

unless the whole world is willing to step up against him, nobody wants to do anything.

Well, that's because he hasn't actually done anything yet. Sure he's shouted alot and tested some weapons, but that's different to actually marching across the border into South Korea.

[Fred27]

we do not use dirty nukes now days. Good old clean, efficient neutron pulses just clean out the rats and leave the rat droppings. :D


Well thats comforting...I think. Ah well, think positive eh? :D

[DustyMars]

I took a lot of work to save us from a nuclear war. I was stationed at Westover AFB, in Mass in October 1962 when we nearly came to blows with them. While I never had doubts who would win, it was scary never the less. The media and their cronies then got away with their version of the period; they are dead wrong about who had the upper hand. It is a different story now but the media takes to opposite view now; they still get it wrong. Now we really need to worry. :cry:

When old Harry signed off on nuking Japan in August 1945 my father was in training for the invasion of Japan, after fighting in France and Germany for over a year. I am certain he would have not made it home after the slaughter that would have been the case. Nukes helped prevent larger wars, for that I am glad. My early career was training crews for the ultimate Kamikaze cruise, B-52 missions to the USSR. :eek:

We have more to worry about with an unobserved asteroid than with a nuclear war; but, a small freighter and dirty bomb is a real threat too.

[Moenstah]

So you met my future ex-wife ? :D

If she looks like a red harlot: yes
:cool:

[niten ninja]

I'm curious, what were their orders for after Doomsday?

[Moenstah]

The communist regime in North-Korea has for the past years only remained in control thanks to dollars, oil, and support from the People's Republic of China and maybe even the Russians).

They clearly use the a-bomb as a means of political leverage, as they're pretty desperate. That's it, they won't go crazy; their neighbouring allies won't allow it at their doorstep, and they lack the military power and nuclear power to offer a real threat to the US itself.

[DustyMars]

I'm curious, what were their orders for after Doomsday?

Be afraid, very afraid :laugh: Or, enjoy the peace and quite, 6-feet under :)

The Wing Commander never told us that.

[DustyMars]

The communist regime in North-Korea has for the past years only remained in control thanks to dollars, oil, and support from the People's Republic of China and maybe even the Russians).

They clearly use the a-bomb as a means of political leverage, as they're pretty desperate. That's it, they won't go crazy; their neighbouring allies won't allow it at their doorstep, and they lack the military power and nuclear power to offer a real threat to the US itself.


I know what would scare the gibbers out of them; give the Japanese the nuke! Hum, that would scare us as well!!!! :D It's all a game, I think. :look:

[Moenstah]

I know what would scare the gibbers out of them; give the Japanese the nuke! Hum, that would scare us as well!!!! :D It's all a game, I think. :look:

According to some analist, the Japanese and de South-Koreans could have them within half a year. They have the knowledge, and the material and the resources... Luckily, they've shown constraint so far.

[Fred27]

According to some analist, the Japanese and de South-Koreans could have them within half a year. They have the knowledge, and the material and the resources... Luckily, they've shown constraint so far.

I dont think the Japanese constitution allows nuclear weapons in their arsenal

[DustyMars]

I dont think the Japanese constitution allows nuclear weapons in their arsenal

Just a hint that they would change their constitution send chills up the Chinese backsides. That is the four Aces in the hand.

[Moenstah]

I dont think the Japanese constitution allows nuclear weapons in their arsenal

Constitutions can be changed. And nukes can be used for 'self defense'

[niten ninja]

Just a hint that they would change their constitution send chills up the Chinese backsides.

I wouldn't say it worries the Chinese leadership, as much as it's simply prudent to keep a large potential rival out of the military sphere. It isn't like the Japanese would be a threat, even with nuclear weapons.

[jdostie]

Well, that's because he hasn't actually done anything yet. Sure he's shouted alot and tested some weapons, but that's different to actually marching across the border into South Korea.

I know, and I agree to a point. What we could do though without violating anything is be ready to blow any missiles out of the sky the moment they leave Korean air space. It would be a good test of our missile defense capability and send a message. Any missile leaving their air space can be considered hostile.

You know it's the same problem, guy acts in a threatening manner, and the police can't do anything. Then he does something - oh, they can arrest him, but it doesn't undo what he did - and if what he did was drop a nuke or two . . .

[niten ninja]

The problem is, you can't arrest a country. Further, what happens if the missle defence system fails it's "test"? That's tipping your hand so to speak.

In any case, is he likely to do anything? I would suggest probably not. There's nothing to be gained by it. And to be honest, N. Korea has no enemies, to the US, Japan, S. Korea etc. it's simply an irrelevancy.

[jdostie]

The problem is, you can't arrest a country. Further, what happens if the missile defense system fails it's "test"? That's tipping your hand so to speak.

In any case, is he likely to do anything? I would suggest probably not. There's nothing to be gained by it. And to be honest, N. Korea has no enemies, to the US, Japan, S. Korea etc. it's simply an irrelevancy.

I'd considered that too. Of course, if it doesn't work, it's a strategic question whether you want to find that out now (along with the world) when the stakes are smaller, or later when the stakes are much higher. So, N. Korea is no "real threat," if we do nothing about that, and nothing about Iran, nuclear proliferation is back on the table. Every country (perhaps not every, but you get the idea) will start building and stockpiling as a deterrent to the next guy just like in the cold war, but on a larger scale. It's a tough question because I know I feel like "hey, the US needs to have them as a deterrent against the other guy," but I'm in the US. Suppose I lived somewhere else - say South Korea or Japan, I might well want a nuclear program to deter North Korea - and feel entirely justified in it - as perhaps the North Korean's feel.

[DustyMars]

I'd considered that too. Of course, if it doesn't work, it's a strategic question whether you want to find that out now (along with the world) when the stakes are smaller, or later when the stakes are much higher. So, N. Korea is no "real threat," if we do nothing about that, and nothing about Iran, nuclear proliferation is back on the table. Every country (perhaps not every, but you get the idea) will start building and stockpiling as a deterrent to the next guy just like in the cold war, but on a larger scale. It's a tough question because I know I feel like "hey, the US needs to have them as a deterrent against the other guy," but I'm in the US. Suppose I lived somewhere else - say South Korea or Japan, I might well want a nuclear program to deter North Korea - and feel entirely justified in it - as perhaps the North Korean's feel.

When dealing with these people, i.e., Iran, North Korea and other closed societies it is not like dealing with mealy mouth politicians; the dictators of those countries. They only understand one thing; brut force. Negotiating with them is futile, but some never learn that. You have to threaten to blow them off the planet and worse things to get their attention, then you need to actually use some brut force on them. During the few days between the two a-bomb drops on Japan, Gen LeMay sent up there 800 sorties a day, dropping tons of fire bombs and high explosives. They still would not give up, even after August 9, but what did to convince them was a threat to drop more a-bombs in top of the Emperor himself!

We lost Vietnam from the Oval Office. We bombed those people in the dirt, we did everything we could to defeat them, and actually won all the battles; but the Oval Office didn’t want to piss off China and the USSR. For what? They really didn’t want to mess with the most powerful country in history. But, we failed to use brut force against the people who only know brut force.

Not fair. Life is anything but fair.

[niten ninja]

They only understand one thing; brut force

You're correct. That's why military force rarely works in these situations, because that's what they understand. Military violence from a foreign nation simply gives the dictator something to rally his people around. Dictatorships don't survive long on simple oppression, they need some kind of legitimacy and external enemies are very useful for that.

I don't agree with your catagorisation of all countries into "closed" or "open" societies. N. Korea really is closed off, and seems to have next to no relations with the external world, but Iran? I don't think that's the same situation, as last weeks event showed, there's a pretty big group of people in it who really dislike their government. Further, would you include China in your "closed" group?

[DustyMars]

You're correct. That's why military force rarely works in these situations, because that's what they understand. Military violence from a foreign nation simply gives the dictator something to rally his people around. Dictatorships don't survive long on simple oppression, they need some kind of legitimacy and external enemies are very useful for that.

I don't agree with your catagorisation of all countries into "closed" or "open" societies. N. Korea really is closed off, and seems to have next to no relations with the external world, but Iran? I don't think that's the same situation, as last weeks event showed, there's a pretty big group of people in it who really dislike their government. Further, would you include China in your "closed" group?

Yes. Would you consider China as "open"? While it is hard to remember a time when China was a free nations, if that is what is really was, that country has been a closed society nearly all my life. Now we just play like we buy from each other, they supply cheap labor, we pay the price. Maybe someday the people will open it up. The majority of their people lives out in the boon docks and embrace Communism with a small bunch in the cities that enjoy a semblance of the free market. Communists tend to be very slow about things; that includes learning.

[Moenstah]

O btw, the rocket shield proposed by some in the US military: as far as I know, it doesn't work. Will it ever work? Martin van Creveld wrote a 'nice' review about it in his The Culture of War

[elder999]

we do not use dirty nukes now days. Good old clean, efficient neutron pulses just clean out the rats and leave the rat droppings. :D

BTW, I survived several wars, including WW III.

Hate to disagree with you here, Jeff, but there are no neutron bombs in our arsenal-though we could easily make some.

The fallout from our thermonuclear weapons could be....exciting, to say the least-remember, even though it's a fusion weapon, the primary and tertiary portions of reaction are fission-hence: fission, fusion, fission-or, fission, fission, fusion, depending upon who, and what design you believe. The second fission portion typically has been quite dirtym though.

And, no, we're no where near "nuclear war," for the most part. One of these nutballs probably will get around to lobbing one at someone, and, if we're smart, we'll stay out of it, nuclear-wise. Odds are good an Iran-Israeli conflict would pretty much wipe up large swaths of Middle-eastern real estate, but it's just as likely that Israel will launch some sort of preemptive strike on Iran before they get there.It's hard to say which way things would go with the Koreas, but I doubt North Korea would use it on the South, or anyone, for that matter-from what I've seen, they're more likely to sell it.

The best bet for a nuclear exchange in the near future remains Pakistan-India, though, since Iran isn't quite a player yet.Again, it's likely that we'd make a lot of noise, but not really do much besides provide aid after the fact: both countries are, ostensibly, our allies, though a Taliban controlled Pakistan makes for interesting speculation, however unlikely. Any other scenario requires a speculative set of conditions I'm not even prepared to go into here.....

Quite right about WWIII, though-it lasted quite a while, too.:laugh:

[DustyMars]

Like I inferred; push the Japanese to change their Constitution and the Chinese will panic. Pugh the Japanese to buy a nuke and the Chinese will take out N. Korea themselves. Yes, Israel would like to blow the poop out of some of Iran, but they probably would not like to kill a bunch of Iranians.

My solution is to build some neutron babies and promise to give some to Japan. Simple. Or do anything but what we're doing now. 2010 is coming.

[niten ninja]

Yes. Would you consider China as "open"? While it is hard to remember a time when China was a free nations, if that is what is really was, that country has been a closed society nearly all my life. Now we just play like we buy from each other, they supply cheap labor, we pay the price. Maybe someday the people will open it up. The majority of their people lives out in the boon docks and embrace Communism with a small bunch in the cities that enjoy a semblance of the free market. Communists tend to be very slow about things; that includes learning.

Your information appears to be a little old. One of the most commented upon features of modern day China is the lack of communism, like a lack of any welfare benefits.

[Moenstah]

Nah, don't like fall out, let's respond with conventional political, economical and military means first. I know you guys like the occasional nuclear light show, but I like clean salad and non nuclear seasoned meat with my barbecue.

[e-budoka]

Nah, don't like fall out, let's respond with conventional political, economical and military means first. I know you guys like the occasional nuclear light show, but I like clean salad and non nuclear seasoned meat with my barbecue.

motion seconded.

[DustyMars]

The last reading I did on China, some time back, the population of the major cities was around 5% and the rest were in the outback, farmers, etc. The demographics stated most city dwellers tended to be more "free market" but the rest wee hard communists. Show me otherwise because my information comes from reliable sources, not the State Run media, or the American Pravda.

[kenkyusha]

Like I inferred; push the
In this case, it would be implied (meant to suggest) as opposed to inferred (drew from an implication).

Be well,
Jigme

[Trevor Johnson]

One of the things I keep noticing in common between N Korea and Iran is their love of taking hostages, like journalists or students from other countries, by arresting them and trying them for "hostile acts" against the country. They then try to use them as bargaining chips. Both are doing it now, in fact...