North Korea

[Masbroughlad]

On the 105th 'birthday of the first supreme leader of North Korea, the country may test launch another missile. Will this provoke an attack from the USA?

Would this spread to WW3?

Worrying times.

 

[Darandio]

Would this spread to WW3?

Quite often it depends what you want to hear.

We're all going to die or it's very doubtful?

 

[Jordeh]

I've little doubt North Korea will test a nuclear bomb or missiles soon, probably tonight. However, the US will not respond with military action due to the devastating consequences of this. As soon as the North Korean regime feels remotely threatened, they will attack Seoul and this will therefore be avoided.

Most likely the US will put more pressure on China for sanctions on North Korea. North Korea will continue tests in the meantime. Perhaps one day they will be brought to the negotiating table to give up their nuclear weapons in return for a good deal.

Talk of WWIII is silly - whilst a full blown war in Korea is a very small possibility, there's no good reason why the Chinese and US would directly fight each other in a World War.

 

[Darandio]

Talk of WWIII is silly - whilst a full blown war in Korea is a very small possibility, there's no good reason why the Chinese and US would directly fight each other in a World War.

I think the problem is that some people misunderstand the modern relationship between North Korea and China and maybe believe it's in some way similar to that of Russia and Syria. 30 years ago maybe, not today.

In fact, the current military agreement between the two expires in 2021, I fancy it might not be renewed or at least used as leverage.

 

[TheEdge]

I think the problem is that some people misunderstand the modern relationship between North Korea and China and maybe believe it's in some way similar to that of Russia and Syria. 30 years ago maybe, not today.

In fact, the current military agreement between the two expires in 2021, I fancy it might not be renewed or at least used as leverage.

Well quite, it does seem like the Great Firewall has sprung a leak, there have been quite a few vocal criticisms of North Korea online and central government hasn't stepped in to remove them.

I get the feeling that China in general is almost embarrassed on the world stage by its silly little ally and its getting to the point where enough is enough.

 

[me123]

On the 105th 'birthday of the first supreme leader of North Korea, the country may test launch another missile. Will this provoke an attack from the USA?

Would this spread to WW3?

Worrying times.

I'm very concerned about the situation in North Korea. Drumpf has developed a taste for firing missiles; something that I'm sure surprises no-one. Whether these are rational and balanced decisions remains to be seen - I suspect that they are not. They are certainly unilateral decisions which always concerns me.

The tests by North Korea (the exact nature of them is unclear as per the very nature of the DPRK's propaganda machine) are obviously concerning in and of themselves. If the horror clown decides to flex his muscles and fire something at Pyongyang or any missile installation in the DPRK, this would likely cause significant diplomatic issues with Russia and China. The relationships are not as strong, granted, but I think that both countries would be concerned about an attack on NK by the US. Nuclear war is not outwith the realms of possibility - still unlikely, granted, but probably closer now than at any time in recent memory.

I would hope for a diplomatic solution - working with China and Russia (and frankly anyone else) to put sanctions on the Hermit Kingdom. I doubt Drumpf has the diplomatic skills to achieve... anything through this route.

 

[Darandio]

I'm very concerned about the situation in North Korea. Drumpf has developed a taste for firing missiles; something that I'm sure surprises no-one. Whether these are rational and balanced decisions remains to be seen - I suspect that they are not. They are certainly unilateral decisions which always concerns me.

The tests by North Korea (the exact nature of them is unclear as per the very nature of the DPRK's propaganda machine) are obviously concerning in and of themselves. If the horror clown decides to flex his muscles and fire something at Pyongyang or any missile installation in the DPRK, this would likely cause significant diplomatic issues with Russia and China. The relationships are not as strong, granted, but I think that both countries would be concerned about an attack on NK by the US. Nuclear war is not outwith the realms of possibility - still unlikely, granted, but probably closer now than at any time in recent memory.

I would hope for a diplomatic solution - working with China and Russia (and frankly anyone else) to put sanctions on the Hermit Kingdom. I doubt Drumpf has the diplomatic skills to achieve... anything through this route.

Sounds like you need to either get watching 'Bert the Turtle' or start planning your shelter.

 

[Glenmutchkin]

On the 105th 'birthday of the first supreme leader of North Korea, the country may test launch another missile. Will this provoke an attack from the USA?

Would this spread to WW3?

Worrying times.

Have you tried Ladbrokes? Other bookmakers are available.

 

[Moonshot]

On the 105th 'birthday of the first supreme leader of North Korea, the country may test launch another missile. Will this provoke an attack from the USA?

Would this spread to WW3?

Worrying times.

I seriously doubt it......but an attack from the US would simple cripple N Korea in a matter of days. Removing the head of the serpent would seem a rational thing to do provided there are plans to put in place better leaders etc ..

 

[najaB]

On the 105th 'birthday of the first supreme leader of North Korea, the country may test launch another missile. Will this provoke an attack from the USA?

Would this spread to WW3?

Worrying times.

I doubt the US would directly attack the DPRK as they don't pose an immediate existential threat to either the mainland USA or South Korea.

 

[Jordeh]

I'm very concerned about the situation in North Korea. Drumpf has developed a taste for firing missiles; something that I'm sure surprises no-one. Whether these are rational and balanced decisions remains to be seen - I suspect that they are not. They are certainly unilateral decisions which always concerns me.

The tests by North Korea (the exact nature of them is unclear as per the very nature of the DPRK's propaganda machine) are obviously concerning in and of themselves. If the horror clown decides to flex his muscles and fire something at Pyongyang or any missile installation in the DPRK, this would likely cause significant diplomatic issues with Russia and China. The relationships are not as strong, granted, but I think that both countries would be concerned about an attack on NK by the US. Nuclear war is not outwith the realms of possibility - still unlikely, granted, but probably closer now than at any time in recent memory.

I would hope for a diplomatic solution - working with China and Russia (and frankly anyone else) to put sanctions on the Hermit Kingdom. I doubt Drumpf has the diplomatic skills to achieve... anything through this route.

Can't you just call him Donald Trump? No need to get into childish name calling. I had to pinch myself when I realised you were referring to Donald Trump as "the horror clown" instead of Kim Jong-Un.

Dropping some missiles on Syria and ISIS in Afghanistan is really quite different to attacking Pyongyang, which would just end up with South Korea being obliterated over night, that's virtually a guarantee. It therefore, will not happen.

Whereas you can drop missiles on Syria and ISIS in Afghanistan and as you can see, they can't really react.

 

[najaB]

Dropping some missiles on Syria and ISIS in Afghanistan is really quite different to attacking Pyongyang, which would just end up with South Korea being obliterated over night, that's virtually a guarantee. It therefore, will not happen.

Fifteen years ago i would have agreed, but both the capability and dedication of the DPRK's army is significantly less than it used to be. At the same time the ROK's is much better trained and equipped.

N Korea does have nukes, but not in large enough numbers to 'obliterate' S Korea.

 

[me123]

Can't you just call him Donald Trump? No need to get into childish name calling. I had to pinch myself when realised you were referring to Donald Trump as "the horror clown" instead of Kim Jong-Un.

Dropping some missiles on Syria and ISIS in Afghanistan is really quite different to attacking Pyongyang, which would just end up with South Korea being obliterated over night, that's virtually a guarantee. It therefore, will not happen.

Whereas you can drop missiles on Syria and ISIS in Afghanistan and as you can see, they can't really react.

I have gone over this before - I refuse to call that abhorrent thing by his name. If you wish to criticise me for this, please also criticise everyone else who mocks politicians in a similar way. And yes, "The Horror Clown" is another name for him. It doesn't apply to Kim Jong-Un, because he's not funny.

I do not believe that the current president of the US has the mental capacity for rational thinking to see the consequences of his actions. I think he would be quite likely to attack North Korea and ask questions later. That would be disastrous, but with someone like him at the helm I think it's certainly possible.

His attack on Syria was justified at least in part by protecting the US from chemical weaponry. The same justification could easily be used to target NK in the event of a nuclear test.

 

[Darandio]

N Korea does have nukes, but not in large enough numbers to 'obliterate' S Korea.

No, but they do have a hell of a lot of conventional weaponry aimed at Seoul.

That is a vital piece in this game of chess.

 

[najaB]

No, but they do have a hell of a lot of conventional weaponry aimed at Seoul.

That is a vital piece in this game of chess.

That's true, but that conventional weaponry needs large numbers of people to operate it - these days a lot of them would be as likely to defect as pull the trigger.

 

[Darandio]

Drumpf has developed a taste for firing missiles;

I think this needs clarifying as well. Developed a taste, how? If you mean Syria alone, did he really have a choice?

 

[me123]

That's true, but that conventional weaponry needs large numbers of people to operate it - these days a lot of them would be as likely to defect as pull the trigger.

I highly doubt that North Koreans are likely to defect. If they don't pull the trigger, someone else will pull another trigger - the one on the gun held at the defector's head. Plus, the cult of personality in North Korea is unlike anything we have experienced - I reckon the thought of defection simply wouldn't cross the minds of many of them.

 

[me123]

I think this needs clarifying as well. Developed a taste, how? If you mean Syria alone, did he really have a choice?

Syria and Afghanistan in very close proximity. He most certainly did have a choice in both instances. I think he was premature with his strike on Syria (although I think likely the outcome would be justified) and I think that multilateral action would have been preferable.

 

[Bevan Price]

I do not believe that the current president of the US has the mental capacity for rational thinking to see the consequences of his actions. I think he would be quite likely to attack North Korea and ask questions later. That would be disastrous, but with someone like him at the helm I think it's certainly possible.

.

Mr Trump has plenty of mental capacity - he would not have had the ability to make $ xxx,000,000,000 if he had been otherwise. However, I do believe he is a potentially dangerous hothead, typical of the "shoot first, ask questions after" style adopted by some of the gun-loving crowd in USA (including some of their police.). And that must give cause for concern about world safety.

 

[najaB]

I highly doubt that North Koreans are likely to defect. If they don't pull the trigger, someone else will pull another trigger - the one on the gun held at the defector's head. Plus, the cult of personality in North Korea is unlike anything we have experienced - I reckon the thought of defection simply wouldn't cross the minds of many of them.

While the regime has an iron grip and an air of invulnerability I agree. The people live in a culture of fear and obedience.

Once the cracks start to appear (and a large-scale attack would induce more than a few cracks) they will lose their power over the masses *very* quickly.

 

[Darandio]

Syria and Afghanistan in very close proximity. He most certainly did have a choice in both instances. I think he was premature with his strike on Syria (although I think likely the outcome would be justified) and I think that multilateral action would have been preferable.

I'm not really sure the strike in Afghanistan represents him developing a taste, strikes in the area are a fairly regular occurence and it was only really 'newsworthy' due to the type of bomb used.

In fact, he ordered strikes within 48 hours of taking office, Obama ordered strikes on two countries just hours before leaving office!

 

[najaB]

Mr Trump has plenty of mental capacity - he would not have had the ability to make $ xxx,000,000,000 if he had been otherwise.

There is a *lot* of debate over the value of X above - and a lot of signs that it may be zero (i.e. he's not a billionaire). As to the conjecture that financial success is an indicator of intelligence, the Kardashians are worth several hundred millions of pounds.

 

[Jordeh]

Fifteen years ago i would have agreed, but both the capability and dedication of the DPRK's army is significantly less than it used to be. At the same time the ROK's is much better trained and equipped.

N Korea does have nukes, but not in large enough numbers to 'obliterate' S Korea.

Well first off they have a nuclear bomb which they didn't 15 years ago. Mainly though I am referring to it having artillery trained on Seoul and other major cities, in a war that would in essence 'obliterate' South Korea. I've no doubt ROK or the US could also obliterate NK, but what's the point when you've lost your capital city anyway? Essentially it's mutually assured destruction. Whereas you can attack Syria and ISIS in Afghanistan, and there's basically nothing they can do to respond.

I have gone over this before - I refuse to call that abhorrent thing by his name. If you wish to criticise me for this, please also criticise everyone else who mocks politicians in a similar way. And yes, "The Horror Clown" is another name for him. It doesn't apply to Kim Jong-Un, because he's not funny.

I do not believe that the current president of the US has the mental capacity for rational thinking to see the consequences of his actions. I think he would be quite likely to attack North Korea and ask questions later. That would be disastrous, but with someone like him at the helm I think it's certainly possible.

His attack on Syria was justified at least in part by protecting the US from chemical weaponry. The same justification could easily be used to target NK in the event of a nuclear test.

There's so many valid criticisms of Trump that there's no need to mock him calling him a different name (which btw is something he does to opponents) - but whatever helps you sleep at night.

His mental capacity may well be up for debate but let's not forget he is surrounded by Generals and he did not become US president by accident. I see no reason to cry wolf on this occasion.

There would be no justification for attacking North Korea as it would result in devastation to South Korea - something which is widely accepted.

 

[najaB]

There's so many valid criticisms of Trump that there's no need to mock him calling him a different name...

Just to point out, Drumpf is one way that his family name can be anglicised - Trump is another. So technically it's not mocking him.

 

[najaB]

Well first off they have a nuclear bomb which they didn't 15 years ago. Mainly though I am referring to it having artillery trained on Seoul and other major cities, in a war that would in essence 'obliterate' South Korea. I've no doubt ROK or the US could also obliterate NK, but what's the point when you've lost your capital city anyway?

No doubt that the DPRK could do a lot of damage to Seoul, but it takes surprisingly long and an alarmingly large amount of explosives to 'obliterate' a city of ten million.

 

[me123]

His mental capacity may well be up for debate but let's not forget he is surrounded by Generals and he did not become US president by accident. I see no reason to cry wolf on this occasion.

There would be no justification for attacking North Korea as it would result in devastation to South Korea - something which is widely accepted.

Ultimately, POTUS has the final say on many things like missile strikes. He can command a strike whenever he feels like it. He has surrounded himself with friends and family as his advisors, so I'm not hugely confident that there will be a lot of informed debate about the merits of doing so. The generals can discuss all they want, but short of a military coup they will have no option but to execute the orders of their commander in chief.

The devastation in South Korea may well be accepted - and of course, it will happen. But I'm sure Drumpf would quite happily put "America First", and attack North Korea to prevent the US from nuclear missiles. Perhaps he considers it to be "fake news". Perhaps he simply won't care.

 

[Jordeh]

Ultimately, POTUS has the final say on many things like missile strikes. He can command a strike whenever he feels like it. He has surrounded himself with friends and family as his advisors, so I'm not hugely confident that there will be a lot of informed debate about the merits of doing so. The generals can discuss all they want, but short of a military coup they will have no option but to execute the orders of their commander in chief.

The devastation in South Korea may well be accepted - and of course, it will happen. But I'm sure Drumpf would quite happily put "America First", and attack North Korea to prevent the US from nuclear missiles. Perhaps he considers it to be "fake news". Perhaps he simply won't care.

I understand you don't like Trump and feel the need to call him names, but realistically he's not going to attack North Korea.

 

[me123]

You're assuming that he'll behave like any rational human being, though. Evidence thus far is to the contrary.

 

[southern442]

There's so many valid criticisms of Trump that there's no need to mock him calling him a different name (which btw is something he does to opponents) - but whatever helps you sleep at night.

His mental capacity may well be up for debate but let's not forget he is surrounded by Generals and he did not become US president by accident. I see no reason to cry wolf on this occasion.

There would be no justification for attacking North Korea as it would result in devastation to South Korea - something which is widely accepted.

You're right. Sometimes we act as if nobody in Trump's administration has the faintest idea of what's going on, but actually, they do have brains (to some extent) and they know that attacking North Korea now would result in a very strong attack on South Korea, which is (on paper at least) the exact opposite of what they want to happen. In the same way, North Korea know any attack on anywhere will be met with a powerful response. There will be no military intervention right now, what is happening at the moment is more of a standoff, or war of face.

 

[Jordeh]

You're assuming that he'll behave like any rational human being, though. Evidence thus far is to the contrary.

Rubbish, what actual harm has he done so far to suggest he could start a major war?

He might be full of ridiculous ideas like the Mexican Wall and the immigration ban but it's not remotely similar to starting a catastrophic war that would lead to the death of millions. He's shown to have backed away from many things he's said on the campaign trail, especially in recent weeks.