US considering Preemptive Strike against North Korea.

1874

1874 wrote: »

lighten up, its not like we live in North Korea.
I know South Korea has not had a perfect history, but it isn't death camps, cults of personality, and excessive spending on military might while thousands die in famines.

Leaving aside South Korea's history of military dictatorship, concentration camps, and excessive military spending, lets just dig down and try to understand what you mean by this statement, if anything.

It is true to say that a wealthy westerner would typically prefer to live in Seoul than in Pyongyang. That doesn't tell us much as to which regime is more liberating, or which one has the capacity to advance the common good, or which regime best resembles one's own political truth.

All this flimsy variable means is 'which regime is more popular with the USA and the rest of the G7"?

Socialism didn't recede because of its inherent failures. After all, North Korea was once an industrial powerhouse, whose industrial output increased by something like 25% per annum. It was once a bright star in the Asian economy, and made South Korea look like the backarse of Botswana.

Economic destruction only began in the 1980s in the DPRK, after decades of prosperous socialism, when the international network of socialist states began to break down.

Marx said that there could never be socialism in one country. Stalin disagreed with him. Stalin was incorrect. Badly. Socialism is nothing without interdependence. After the USSR and China fell fowl of international economic sanctions, it was only a matter of time until those sanctions were elaborated upon and applied to the smaller socialist states like DPRK and Cuba.

Cheerful Spring

The United States plans to carry out a new test of its THAAD missile defense system against an intermediate-range ballistic missile in the coming days, two U.S. officials told Reuters on Friday, as tensions with North Korea climb.

Despite being planned months ago, the U.S. missile defense test will gain significance in the wake of North Korea's launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) on July 4 that has heightened concerns about the threat from Pyongyang.

The test will be the first of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) to defend against a simulated attack by an intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM), one of the officials said. The THAAD interceptors will be fired from Alaska.

Irish Praetorian

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Leaving aside South Korea's history of military dictatorship, concentration camps, and excessive military spending, lets just dig down and try to understand what you mean by this statement, if anything.

It is true to say that a wealthy westerner would typically prefer to live in Seoul than in Pyongyang. That doesn't tell us much as to which regime is more liberating, or which one has the capacity to advance the common good, or which regime best resembles one's own political truth.

All this flimsy variable means is 'which regime is more popular with the USA and the rest of the G7"?

Socialism didn't recede because of its inherent failures. After all, North Korea was once an industrial powerhouse, whose industrial output increased by something like 25% per annum. It was once a bright star in the Asian economy, and made South Korea look like the backarse of Botswana.

Economic destruction only began in the 1980s in the DPRK, after decades of prosperous socialism, when the international network of socialist states began to break down.

Marx said that there could never be socialism in one country. Stalin disagreed with him. Stalin was incorrect. Badly. Socialism is nothing without interdependence. After the USSR and China fell fowl of international economic sanctions, it was only a matter of time until those sanctions were elaborated upon and applied to the smaller socialist states like DPRK and Cuba.

Two points, firstly why did it all begin to break down? By the 1980s 'Socialism' (I'm not sure if Communism or Sovietism would be more accurate) had spread further than ever before, encompassing an enormous swathe of the planet from Stettin to Saigon, with perhaps a third of the worlds population and territory to it's name. All this, and it had to imprison its own population to keep them from fleeing to the West, whilst similarly failing to elicit such a mass movement in its favour. And what sanctions applied in the 1980s again? I can only think of the grain ban and that was lifted in 1981. I might be labouring under a misapprehension in thinking Communism fell because it was and remains a fairly useless method of organizing an economy, but you might be able to correct me.

Secondly, what the hell kind of ideology wouldn't work with worldwide domination? I imagine German National Socialism would have been eminently peaceful when only ethnic Germans remained alive (excluding us pesky homosexuals mind you), but I don't see people going around in Swastika t-shirts arguing 'Nazism wasn't done properly'. Surely if you have an ideology that is predicated on world domination first, then utopia - it's a pretty crappy ideology? Especially when compared with ideologies (if I can use the term) like capitalism which manage for all their fault to be the envy of the world.

ilkhanid

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It is true to say that a wealthy westerner would typically prefer to live in Seoul than in Pyongyang. That doesn't tell us much as to which regime is more liberating, or which one has the capacity to advance the common good, or which regime best resembles one's own political truth. .

"wealthy" westerners? I dare say that people from Clonakilty, Ballinamore, Tallaght, Bolton or Leeds would also prefer to live in Seoul than Pyongyang. If you're trying to imply that South Korea is some kind of Dickensian, dystopian wretched hive full of bloated capitalist forcing the poor to work 17 hour days barefoot in sweat shops, then you're fantasizing. South Korea is no worse a country than neighbours like Singapore, Japan or Malaysia. And , yes, It does tell us. A regime that has hundreds of thousands of people trying to leave it and where you can be thrown in a labour camp for trying to do just that has no idea of the common good.The only good they see is 'what's good for the Kims'.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

All this flimsy variable means is 'which regime is more popular with the USA and the rest of the G7"?.

Or with anybody else in the world? North Korea doesn't have many friends, and it has a habit of alienating other states, Malaysia being only the latest example. Even China gets along with them through gritted teeth-so to speak.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Socialism didn't recede because of its inherent failures. After all, North Korea was once an industrial powerhouse, whose industrial output increased by something like 25% per annum. It was once a bright star in the Asian economy, and made South Korea look like the backarse of Botswana. .

there is more to "socialism" than Industrial output. I doubt you'd be a big fan of Britain, circa 1848 and it's smokey mill towns.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Economic destruction only began in the 1980s in the DPRK, after decades of prosperous socialism, when the international network of socialist states began to break down. .

By what measure prosperous? Queuing for onions, kettles and bicycles or whatever to find that the last one was gone as the district's or town's ration was gone? Queuing to buy things you didn't want so you could barter them to get things you did want? Always waiting for the realm of necessity to end, the real socialism that was just around-but not yet-the corner?

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Marx said that there could never be socialism in one country. Stalin disagreed with him. Stalin was incorrect. Badly. Socialism is nothing without interdependence. After the USSR and China fell fowl of international economic sanctions, it was only a matter of time until those sanctions were elaborated upon and applied to the smaller socialist states like DPRK and Cuba.

China fell "fowl" of sanctions? And there was I imagining that the leadership of China, realising the blind alley that Mao has led them down decided to catch up with the rest of the world and dumped the Command Economy, for make no mistake, that was all it was, not this fanciful "socialism" you imagine.
In the USSR, Gorbachev also realized that the old system was sclerotic and based on lies and dysfunction. A system so rigid that an honest attempt to reform it broke it to pieces was always riding for a fall. When the French Ancien Regime fell it was taken as evidence-rightly- that the anachronistic system was on its last legs. It couldn't contain the energies unleashed by even limited freedom. The USSR was the same. It's fossilized, inflexible system didn't have the ability to adapt. Yet you think this was some kind of tragedy, instead of an inevitable end. "Actually existing Socialism" has no future. There were only two alternatives. When a limited degree of political pluralism was allowed the forces that blew up ran out of control of the reformers. The only alternative was to retain the authoritarianism with limited reforms, but to bring in economic reforms that introduced a market economy. Either way, the old way couldn't hold.

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

...I don't see people going around in Swastika t-shirts arguing 'Nazism wasn't done properly'. Surely if you have an ideology that is predicated on world domination first, then utopia - it's a pretty crappy ideology? Especially when compared with ideologies (if I can use the term) like capitalism which manage for all their fault to be the envy of the world.

Indeed. A system that requires every one of multiple conditions to be operative to succeed is unworkable. It asks too much of people. Like radical Islam, that demands instant perfection, if it isn't supplied, resorts to violence or simply calls the imperfect, perfect. Whereas the market system has the advantage that it can muddle along, can operate in many varieties depending on the culture and is pretty much what people do anyway if left to their own devices; make,buy and sell, trade, employ,grow and market.

Zebra3

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Even the NBC report thought it was a provocation.

A tv channel well known for its neutrality......

Cheerful Spring

For the second time in two days, US Air Force bombers put on a show of force in East Asia.

B-1 Lancer bombers from Guam flew over the Korean Peninsula Friday in response to North Korea's increasing ballistic missile and nuclear threat, according to the US Pacific Air Forces.


http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/08/asia/us-bombers-north-korea-icbm-test/index.html

Manic Moran

InTheTrees wrote: »

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Well ... we seem to agree that the North Korean "threat" is greatly exaggerated.

No we haven't.

Forget missiles. Seoul is within artillery range of north Korea. North Korean soldiers could be in the city within hours.

Not in any numbers. Take a drive from Seoul up to the DMZ and keep an eye out the window for military construction. I have never seen anything like it, and that includes the inner-German border in the 1980s. There are multiple defensive lines from the Border to Seoul, and these aren't piddly little maginot line fortresses either. These are continuous physical barriers, ovrwatched by fires, which require deliberate breaching to get through, to the extent that the gaps through which the roads pass are themselves prepared for blockage by demolition of overhead obstacles. This sort of thing. https://i1241.photobucket.com/albums/gg503/Shaaarrrp/3.jpg or http://www.performance-vision.com/Korea/Korea-1972-07-TankTraps.jpg After Seoul was captured and then recaptured, twice, with the destruction that followed, the RoK is doing everything it can to avoid a fifth Battle for Seoul.

Irish Praetorian

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not in any numbers. Take a drive from Seoul up to the DMZ and keep an eye out the window for military construction. I have never seen anything like it, and that includes the inner-German border in the 1980s. There are multiple defensive lines from the Border to Seoul, and these aren't piddly little maginot line fortresses either. These are continuous physical barriers, ovrwatched by fires, which require deliberate breaching to get through, to the extent that the gaps through which the roads pass are themselves prepared for blockage by demolition of overhead obstacles. This sort of thing. https://i1241.photobucket.com/albums/gg503/Shaaarrrp/3.jpg or http://www.performance-vision.com/Korea/Korea-1972-07-TankTraps.jpg After Seoul was captured and then recaptured, twice, with the destruction that followed, the RoK is doing everything it can to avoid a fifth Battle for Seoul.

I think youve given a pretty detailed overview of how serious the south koreans take their defense. It strikes me that the threat to seoul is not that the nk army will take it, but rather thar its massed artillery will cause so much destruction with only a minimum operating window, that it would make the south koreans think twice about trying anything. A sort of mutually assured destruction on the cheap, without the need for nuclear weaponry.

Of course the problem for the north koreans is that even with all that firepower their neighbours are getting tired of rewarding their threats, hence the search for bigger weaponry to keep the tribute economy going.

Gringo180

Gatling wrote: »

15,000 artillery please targeted at Seoul home to 10 million south Koreans ,

Not really sure why that wouldn't be threatening ,

It's like when people say Nato has completely surrounded russia ,but facts say that Nato countries only share a border with 1/16th of russia

Cuba dont share a border with the U.S but the yanks were very close to ending human life on this planet when the Soviets were going to install missiles on the island. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Luckily the Russians arent as crazy today to react to Nato provocation on there doorstep as the Americans were back then.

South Korea probably needs to practice evacuating Seoul a few times and after 2 or 3 blast the North so that they incur minimum casualties. Buildings/factories can be rebuilt as costly as that would be.

Also cant believe people are defending North Korea. Seems some people are too far gone with their anti americanism that they dont realise when to stop. America can be justifiably criticised for many things since WW2. But not Korea.

Lastly too many US presidents ignored this issue so we have a situation where we have someone as mad as Trump forced into dealing with this.

Capt'n Midnight

Gatling wrote: »

Worse is russia drew up plans to nuke china after several fallings out afterwards

It's reasonable to assume that all competent military have made plans for as many contingencies as they could reasonably expect.

We had plans to invade the North. Against an opponent who'd have total air and naval supremacy.

We had plans, but it was more to show why this would have not worked rather than a blueprint for success.


The French used to hold exercises against an invasion from the west. When both they and the UK were nuclear powers.

Capt'n Midnight

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Koreans should be allowed to determine their own fate in the 50's.

Because that worked out in Vietnam.

ArchXStanton

[Deleted User] wrote: »

South Korea probably needs to practice evacuating Seoul a few times and after 2 or 3 blast the North so that they incur minimum casualties. Buildings/factories can be rebuilt as costly as that would be.

Also cant believe people are defending North Korea. Seems some people are too far gone with their anti americanism that they dont realise when to stop. America can be justifiably criticised for many things since WW2. But not Korea.

Lastly too many US presidents ignored this issue so we have a situation where we have someone as mad as Trump forced into dealing with this.

In fairness north Korea aren't going supporting people who chop the heads off men women and children,the US should be dragged through every court in the land when or if the whole Syria thing blows over...not to mention routinely ignoring international law,but use it as a stick to beat others

ilkhanid

ArchXStanton wrote: »

In fairness north Korea aren't going supporting people who chop the heads off men women and children,the US should be dragged through every court in the land when or if the whole Syria thing blows over...not to mention routinely ignoring international law,but use it as a stick to beat others

The US alone? As if every country with an interest in the Syrian war hasn't at one time or another supported people who if they don't chop the heads off people, hang them, shoot them, burn them, blow them up and cut their throats.
As for "In fairness" we know little of what the North Koreans do in the dark. I wouldn't imagine for a moment that they wouldn't work with the most unsavoury of parties and do the dirtiest of deals to advance their weapons projects. Two countries of note have done business with the DPRK. Pakistan,who has helped it with nuclear technology and Zimbabwe. North Korea trained and equipped the infamous '5th Brigade', Mugabe's personal thugs who murdered several thousand of civilians in Matabeleland in the mid-1980s.

SeanW

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Leaving aside South Korea's history of military dictatorship, concentration camps, and excessive military spending, lets just dig down and try to understand what you mean by this statement, if anything.

You mean "let's ignore North Korea's current military dictatorship, concentration camps and grave human rights abuses? It took me literally 5 seconds to find this on DuckDuckGo:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_North_Korea

It is true to say that a wealthy westerner any sane person, including many North Koreans would typically prefer to live in Seoul than in Pyongyang.

FYP.

Socialism didn't recede because of its inherent failures. After all, North Korea was once an industrial powerhouse, whose industrial output increased by something like 25% per annum.

On what planet does this make any sense? The biggest mass killers in history were mainly Socialists. Mao Zedong killed 60 million in China. Stalin killed 40 million. Adolf Hitler is only Number 3 with 30 million, while Socialists like Kim Il Sung and Pol Pot are also included in the Top 10.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2091670/Hitler-Stalin-The-murderous-regimes-world.html. Socialism fails when there is noone left to kill or enslave, or the people become weary of being killed or enslaved.

Don't be surprised to see Hugo Chavez/Nicholas Maduro on the Top 10 list within a decade.

Deleted User wrote: »

South Korea probably needs to practice evacuating Seoul a few times and after 2 or 3 blast the North so that they incur minimum casualties. Buildings/factories can be rebuilt as costly as that would be.

If it were me, I would just use a few MOABs on those artillery positions for openers. There would be no need to declare war first, North Korea did not declare war on South Korea before bombing Flight 858, they did not declare war on Japan before invading their country and kidnapping their citizens, and they did not declare war on the United States before murdering Otto Warmbier. They also did not declare war on the South before invading it in 1950 nor did the Chinese declare war before getting involved when the North Koreans were about to fall. A surprise attack would be perfectly justifiable, including whatever force may be required to prevent the launch of a nuclear weapon or other crimes against civilians.

ArchXStanton wrote: »

In fairness north Korea aren't going supporting people who chop the heads off men women and children,the US should be dragged through every court in the land when or if the whole Syria thing blows over...not to mention routinely ignoring international law,but use it as a stick to beat others

No, they just run their entire country as a prison camp, enslave their people, use perceived political opponents and their families as test subjects for chemical weapons, bomb civilian airliners, invade other countries to kidnap their citizens, arrest foreigners on bogus charges and the murder them ... the difference between North Korea and ISIS is largely theoretical. Both threaten the peace and security of free people just by existing.

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I posted this link months ago in this thread (#767, p52) and might as well post it again.
This childish act of using a North Korean flag as target practice close to the 38th parallel border is nothing more than blatant provocation and aggression.

So bombing a civilian airliner, kidnapping, murder, keeping massive artillery batteries aimed at civilians are not provocation, but using a flag in war games is?

I would laugh if this were not so dumb.

archer22 wrote: »

In August 1945 the Americans were still in Okinawa shaking in their boots looking across at Japan, and sweating imagining that they might lose up a million troops trying to take it.

Meanwhile the Soviets in just 4 weeks had smashed Japanese armies over a million strong and were racing down the Japanese northern islands...many believe this Soviet offensive is the real reason Japan surrendered.

This is simply not true. Counter-invading Manchuria was easier because it was part of the mainland and it was not particularly mountainous. The Japanese home islands however are virtually all mountains rising up from the sea, any invasion by either the US or the Soviet Union would have been a bloody uphill battle from the sea.

Most likely both the US and USSR would have invaded simultaneously, with the US taking the South and the USSR taking the North, leading to a divided Japan today, similar to Korea.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Rrmqju74A8

Zebra3

Gatling wrote: »

Remind me how russia got on in Afghanistan and how bad did they look skulking back to Moscow ,

They lost more aircraft to a rag tag militia as they did in Korea .
450 aircraft wasn't it and 15,000 men lost

The Soviet Union certainly did lose a lot in Afghanistan and good enough for them for invading another sovereign state.

Of course, I'm very interested with your description of the "rag tag militia". Would you like to give a more accurate description of them? "Islamic extremists" maybe?

And would you like to inform everyone on here who was funding these Islamic extremists?

You are very selective with your facts on here.

The_Valeyard

Zebra3 wrote: »

The Soviet Union certainly did lose a lot in Afghanistan and good enough for them for invading another sovereign state.

Of course, I'm very interested with your description of the "rag tag militia". Would you like to give a more accurate description of them? "Islamic extremists" maybe?

And would you like to inform everyone on here who was funding these Islamic extremists?

You are very selective with your facts on here.

Bit like how the Russians today are funding and supplying the Taliban with weapons.

Elmer Blooker

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Bit like how the Russians today are funding and supplying the Taliban with weapons.

.... must be true if the usual reliable sources say so. :rolleyes:
A "senior" official mind you ... I think everyone knows the Taliban are supplied through Pakistan.

A senior U.S. military official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence on the issue, said the Russians have increased their supply of equipment and small arms to the Taliban over the past 18 months. The official said the Russians have been sending weapons,

4068ac1elhodqr

The tabloid papers are claiming they're getting ready for another big test shortly.

Cheerful Spring

Deleted User wrote: »

South Korea probably needs to practice evacuating Seoul a few times and after 2 or 3 blast the North so that they incur minimum casualties. Buildings/factories can be rebuilt as costly as that would be.

Also cant believe people are defending North Korea. Seems some people are too far gone with their anti americanism that they dont realise when to stop. America can be justifiably criticised for many things since WW2. But not Korea.

Lastly too many US presidents ignored this issue so we have a situation where we have someone as mad as Trump forced into dealing with this.

North Korea got it's problems most people would not deny that, but some of the people on here, only blame them for this mess. For me that just show's how narrow minded their thinking is.

Cheerful Spring

Evie Big Troop wrote: »

The tabloid papers are claiming they're getting ready for another big test shortly.

America is just as idiotic

North Korea has accused Washington of pushing the peninsula to the "tipping point" of nuclear war after a practice bombing run by two US planes.

Pyongyang branded the drill a "dangerous military provocation" in a region it dubbed the "world's biggest tinderbox".

he North's state-run Rodong newspaper accused Washington and Seoul of ratcheting up tensions with the drill, in an editorial titled "Don't play with fire on a powder keg."

http://news.sky.com/story/north-korea-warns-over-nuclear-tipping-point-after-us-practice-bombing-run-10942244

4068ac1elhodqr

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

America is just as idiotic

North Korea has accused Washington of pushing the peninsula to the "tipping point" of nuclear war after a practice bombing run by two US planes.

Pyongyang branded the drill a "dangerous military provocation" in a region it dubbed the "world's biggest tinderbox".

he North's state-run Rodong newspaper accused Washington and Seoul of ratcheting up tensions with the drill, in an editorial titled "Don't play with fire on a powder keg."

http://news.sky.com/story/north-korea-warns-over-nuclear-tipping-point-after-us-practice-bombing-run-10942244

North Korea is just as idiotic

Washington researchers have accused NK of site preparation for a fresh N-test, which will push the peninsula towards a "tipping point".

As you can see, neither side is perfect in this.

At the recent G20, the topic never came up for group discussion, so the rest of the world really doesn't care that much as it's 'pretty far away', apart from SK/Japan who would be directly threatened by further ground tests and launches.

Cheerful Spring

Evie Big Troop wrote: »

North Korea is just as idiotic

Washington researchers have accused NK of site preparation for a fresh N-test, which will push the peninsula towards a "tipping point".

As you can see, neither side is perfect in this.

At the recent G20, the topic never came up for group discussion, so the rest of the world really doesn't care that much as it's 'pretty far away', apart from SK/Japan who would be directly threatened by further ground tests and launches.

I doubt South Korea and Japan and China want a war. Trump i feel is on he's own with this and that's likely the reason it has not started yet. How do you move millions of citizens to safe zones?

Raycyst

I think Trump thinks N.Korea is the issue which will allow him to appear presidential and which will save his reputation. He wants to bring N.Korea into line and he thinks it'll be easy and when it happens he'll be lauded as a hero.

I think Trump couldn't be more wrong.

N.Korea is not an easy problem to solve, like Israel for example, and I also suspect that China will support N.Korea if it comes to it.


I don't know what'd happen if America was to massively attack NK in some mad attempt to destroy NK capabilities in a first strike attack. NK would likely attack Seoul and Japan. NK have submarines and they can push nuclear bombs out of passenger aircraft if they have to.


America can not guarantee that NK can be wiped out in a single attack and therefore huge number of people, like millions, could die if they attempt it. Trump seems like the man to attempt it.

SeanW

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I doubt South Korea and Japan and China want a war.

Most sane people don't "want" a war, for example, the United Kingdom went to great lengths with a policy of appeasement to avoid war with Nazi Germany in the mid to late 1930s, right up until the Nazis invaded Poland.

The same thing is happening today. You're right about one thing though, millions could die if something is done to try to stop the Kims now because it is almost too late. This would be no different to what happened in World War II, when millions died because the civilised world waited until it was almost too late to stop Herr Hitler.

Gatling

Raycyst wrote: »

INK would likely attack Seoul and Japan. NK have submarines and they can push nuclear bombs out of passenger aircraft if they have to.

Meanwhile back in reality ,

In the last north Korean attack on south Korea they launched some 400 rockets and artillery to which only 80 managed to hit south Korean territory ,

While north Korea posses a large amount of artillery pieces most would likely only get to be fired once before been targeting directly by south Korean and american forces in retaliation strikes ,

While the North isn't been underestimated the idea they could killl hundreds of thousands in a short period is geusstimation an worse case scenario,

Expanding on manic Moran's post last night ,

South Korea has 260 miles of electric fences along the DMZ ,
Backed up with a massive amount of sensors from thermal imaging ,infra red and motion detection , along with sizemic sensors to detect large movements of vehicles,
Unmanned Automoted Gun systems including full automatic 40 mm grenade launchers and various heavy machine guns ,
Several miles of landmines ,
And multiple impenetrable fortresses ,

And that's before you get to the artillery and airpower ,

And this is only on the south Korean side.

Zebra3

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Bit like how the Russians today are funding and supplying the Taliban with weapons.

Which pales into insignificance to the US and British support for the Islamic extremists running Saudi Arabia.

And we all know who the House of Saud funds.....

Raycyst

For example, an out of the box idea.

Can NK make 'dirty mortars' of some sort?

In other words, normal mortar artillery but with some nuclear material attached and aimed at Seoul.


If the wind was blowing north to south they could blow up nuclear bombs at their own border and they'd only be 35 km or so from Seoul. Could the wind take radiation downstream into Seoul?


What about cyber capabilities? Maybe they might hack a UK sub and fire off a missile or two. Maybe at us!

The_Valeyard

Zebra3 wrote: »

Which pales into insignificance to the US and British support for the Islamic extremists running Saudi Arabia.

And we all know who the House of Saud funds.....

Way to move those goalposts.

ilkhanid

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

North Korea got it's problems most people would not deny that, but some of the people on here, only blame them for this mess. For me that just show's how narrow minded their thinking is.

Euphemism of the year! Especially for the implication that they are stuff that, you know, just happened to it and not the fault of the vile socipaths in charge.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

North Korea has accused Washington of pushing the peninsula to the "tipping point" of nuclear war after a practice bombing run by two US planes.

Pyongyang branded the drill a "dangerous military provocation" in a region it dubbed the "world's biggest tinderbox".
he North's state-run Rodong newspaper accused.....

At that point we turn our attention elsewhere.