Sources: North Korea test-fires missile

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by Daradon

That is true, weapons are used as bargaining power and as a deterrent from military action. Obviously they have only been used once in history.

And it's a bit of hypocracy to say, well we can hold these weapons but these countries cannot. I mean in reality, the U.S. is the only country to actually use them aggressively.

And as 'crazy' as Kim might be, N Korea WAS attacked this century, so there are some issues there for the people. The fact that they may have precipitated is probably a fact that they don't care about. They just care about the possibility if being occupied again.

The USA was attacked a few times this Century.. your point is?
And it's not hypocritical for the USA to have them and others to not have them, have you heard of the non-ploliferation (sp??) treaty?

Yes, the US used them, it was during a little thing called WW2.
I can't believe people would put Dubya and Kim Il on the same moral compass. crazy..

[White Doors]

http://www.rense.com/general37/nkorr.htm (Pretty scary paper... if this paper is correct, North Korea is much better prepared than most people realize. Also says in this article that North Korea had 100 nuclear missles in the year 2000.)

Well then that paper is crap. All reputable sources have never said above @ 13 nuclear weapons. Kim is sabre rattling for economic consessions.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Nehkara

This is a complex issue. Who has more to lose?

North Korea is poor and its people are not valued by Kim Jong Il.

Their intercontinental missiles can hit the entire west coast... do you risk losing California, if you are the US? That's 35 million people. A blow like that to the US could cripple not only them, but it could destabilize the world economy very severely.

... and who do I trust more? Neither. GWB has lied constantly throughout his presidency and is a complete numbskull. Kim Jong Il is crazy. It's a toss up.

Even if Bush has lied, and has acted like an arrogant fool, he isn't going around threatening nations with nuclear war.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Nehkara

You can add in Canada. Canada would attack an aggressive N. Korea.

That being said... North Korea has a huge military for it's relative small size and destitution. In 2001 they reportedly had: 700,000 troops, 8,000 artillery systems, and 2,000 tanks ready for deployment with some other figures being:

100,000 strong special forces
1 million total active soliders
6 million man reserve force
12000 total artillery pieces
1700 planes
800 ships (with the largest submarine fleet in the world)

Kim Jong Il isn't playing... if he wants a war... he has the goods to fight one. I hope it doesn't happen, it will make Iraq look like a day at Disneyland.

http://www.rense.com/general37/nkorr.htm (Pretty scary paper... if this paper is correct, North Korea is much better prepared than most people realize. Also says in this article that North Korea had 100 nuclear missles in the year 2000.)

Maybe you should start running the numbers of the allied nations that would oppose NK. Canada, US, Britain, Japan, possibly Israel, Australia, France, maybe Germany, Russia....I doubt NK wants to even start.

[FireFly]

You know, I've always overestimated how smart Kim Jung Il is. I never thought he'd be dumb enough to threaten nuclear war. Now, I always knew he was dumb enough to threaten to build nukes, but to say that if you get hit with a pre-emptive strike, you're going to wage all out nuclear war? Well what does that tell the allies?

I'll tell you what it tells them, if you're going to hit first, ensure that it's a difinitive blow and N. Korea is unable to respond. How do you avoid getting hit with a nuke by a country that only has a dozen? you annihilate them, that's how.

Slick move, Il. Very slick.

It's one thing to be crazy, it's another to be stupid. You get nothing now.

For years he's used the threat to secure energy resources, finances and the like. Now he has no bargaining chip. For him to have a bargaining chip, he'd have to be willing to hit first, and who is he going to hit, and what does he expect to accomplish from it? It doesn't matter who he hits, the only thing he'll accomplish is the complete destruction of N. Korea. Way to back yourself right into a corner.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Nehkara

You can add in Canada. Canada would attack an aggressive N. Korea.

That being said... North Korea has a huge military for it's relative small size and destitution. In 2001 they reportedly had: 700,000 troops, 8,000 artillery systems, and 2,000 tanks ready for deployment with some other figures being:

100,000 strong special forces
1 million total active soliders
6 million man reserve force
12000 total artillery pieces
1700 planes
800 ships (with the largest submarine fleet in the world)

Kim Jong Il isn't playing... if he wants a war... he has the goods to fight one. I hope it doesn't happen, it will make Iraq look like a day at Disneyland.

http://www.rense.com/general37/nkorr.htm (Pretty scary paper... if this paper is correct, North Korea is much better prepared than most people realize. Also says in this article that North Korea had 100 nuclear missles in the year 2000.)

The article is propaganda for the N. Koreans, I'd take everything in there with a grain of salt. The Director Centre for Korean Affairs leads me to be suspicious, especially considering that in 2000, the Koreans were still threatening the US and Japan that they would continue their development program unless they received help... they got that help and the program was supposedly suspended. Before getting the help the US and Japan toured Korean facilities to ensure that they didn't yet have nuclear capabilities. Certainly they have a bunch of crazies willing to fight, (when you're that poor you have nothing to lose,) but they're seriously overstating their readiness. Can you face a country with 10,000 nuclear weapons and really be prepared?

However, they're also losing the support of their citizens. After the border partially opened to the South, North Koreans realized just how impoverished they really were. They know who's doing it to them, and they don't support their government like they did before. They realize they're facing a death sentence.

[CaptainCrunch]

Just to break things down

NK Navy

22 Romeo class submarines, these are 1950's design with noisy powerplants, they have had upgrades on thier sensor suites, however thier crews are not that good.

4 Whisky class submarines. Transfered from the soviet navy in 1974, still on the roles but considered to be unusable

22 Sango Ho infiltration subs, these are very small stealthy subs designed to insert special forces teams, they are not made for active combat roles.

40 Yugo class 2 man subs for infiltration.

So while they have a lot of boats they are of poor quality and are a poor match for a modern submarine. This is what the British call a target rich environment

1 Soho class frigate, considered to be a failure due to its unique design (Catamaran), fairly quick by very noisy.

2 Najin class anti sub frigates. small frigates one for each coast, they are thier fleets flagships. But they are not good boats and have poor combat value

These are thier largest boats and they have poor combat value. After that they have about 60 small boats that are missile or torpedo boats, and its unlikely that they would survive any kind of engagement with a carrier battle group.

The NK navy is extremely poor and not a real threat.

The NK airforce is approx 1700 planes strong but the bulk of it consists of older Mig 23 Floggers which were designed in the early 60's and some squadron's of the advanced Mig 29, but in the face of a determined air attack by a nation with advanced fighters its unlikely that they could retain air supremecy for very long. What kills the NK airforce is the fact that they have a severe shortage of fuel and the average pilot gets less then 10 hours of flight training for year. Compare that to 300 hours by the U.S. airforce and you have very inexperienced pilots in dogged old planes.

Where the strength lies is with its on the ground army, the North Korean's have about 1.4 million men in the active service including 100,000 men in thier special forces branch. And while the combat training for the infiltration units is impressive it drops off significantly for thier regular army troops. While better fed then thier civilian counterparts the average North Korean soldier is basically on a starvation diet. Thier tank force is mainly build comprised of vintage T55 tanks with some T72's sprinkled in . While the North Korean's have 11000 artillary pieces the majority of them are hardened and imobile, and would fall victim to counter battery fire and air strikes. So while they might have an effective first punch, it would likely be thier last, and thier troops would go unsupported in the field. While I'm not saying that North Korean's would surrender at all. My gut instinct tells me that thier military would suffer far more devestating losses to a technological superior foe that would gain air, logistical and artillary support and have greater mobility and speed.

It would still be a meat grinder to go into, but I think that it would be easier to destroy the KPA in the field then we're giving credit for.

But the whole scenario changes if Kim has a nuclear curtain there. Thats the doomsday scenario.

[Red Mile Style]

First of all, N.Korea is not acting offensively. Their policy clearly states it would be a defensive tactic - the basis of possessing nuclear warheads. Don't mess with us or we'll nuke you. It is a deterrant from outside attacks. What president would risk getting nuked? A very, very dumb one. N.Korea is playing the same game as everyone else, and personally I do not know which leader I trust more - Bush or Jong Il.

I doubt Canada would go up against any state that possessed nuclear weapons. It would be stupid and not very strategic. Canada's policy is never on the offense, which makes me believe that we would stay the explicit delete out of N.Korea. The only reason why Canada would send troops to N.Korea would be because of NATO.

[FireFly]

But no one has ever threatened N. Korea, and they keep threatening everyone else... I'm not quite certain what they're defending themselves from, other countries are just trying to help out...

[Flames_Gimp]

The US doesn't think there is anyway N.Korea could have developed a nuclear warhead small even to fit on the small inter-continental rockets, well they hope lol

still pretty crazy that they actually have threatened a nuclear attack in retaliation to any pre-emptive strikes!

[Flames_Gimp]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

What president would risk getting nuked? A very, very dumb one.

uhhh, Bush anyone? LOL

[HOZ]

Just out of Japan and back in Canada. Dodged a few missiles on the way!

Anyways, one of the things not talked about is the capabilities of DRPK. 6 missiles fired in bad weather (been ****ing rain on and off in Japan for the last week).

These missiles had the capability of going OVER Japan like the last one. They all failed to pass 200KM.

Obviously Kimmy boy likes his name in lights and we have over estimated their capabilities.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

uhhh, Bush anyone? LOL

JFK
Reagan
and every other one except Carter

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

First of all, N.Korea is not acting offensively. Their policy clearly states it would be a defensive tactic - the basis of possessing nuclear warheads. Don't mess with us or we'll nuke you. It is a deterrant from outside attacks. What president would risk getting nuked? A very, very dumb one. N.Korea is playing the same game as everyone else, and personally I do not know which leader I trust more - Bush or Jong Il.

I doubt Canada would go up against any state that possessed nuclear weapons. It would be stupid and not very strategic. Canada's policy is never on the offense, which makes me believe that we would stay the explicit delete out of N.Korea. The only reason why Canada would send troops to N.Korea would be because of NATO.

Are you stupid? Seriously, you think NK is developing Nuclear weapons because they feel the need to defend themselves? Who exactly is threatening them?

There is no "don't mess with us or we'll nuke you" attitude in this world anymore. NK is playing with fire, and will utter certainty will they get burned. I find it pathetic that people will defend a country that has clearly broken international law by firing a long-range missile, that in its working stage would be perfectly capable of reaching Alaska and parts of the West Coast. Sick.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by HOZ

JFK
Reagan
and every other one except Carter

Hell, JFK solved a major problem by going to the brink of nuclear war.

I wonder how Americans would have felt, knowing that the Soviet Union has Nuclear missiles armed and ready right off the coast of Florida.

NK has only aquired nuclear weapons for one reason; to **** off the Western World. Il must be in dire need of attention.

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by Azure

Are you stupid? Seriously, you think NK is developing Nuclear weapons because they feel the need to defend themselves? Who exactly is threatening them?

There is no "don't mess with us or we'll nuke you" attitude in this world anymore. NK is playing with fire, and will utter certainty will they get burned. I find it pathetic that people will defend a country that has clearly broken international law by firing a long-range missile, that in its working stage would be perfectly capable of reaching Alaska and parts of the West Coast. Sick.

Why does any state proliferate arms? A state is going to have to seriously consider occupying N.Korea now because the risk of nuclear warfare is at hand. It is strategically the smartest thing N.Korea can do. At this exact moment, there is no one particular state that is threatening their sovereignty, but why would a state wait until a state is a direct threat, when it is far too late to do anything?

Are you stupid? If you think that there is no "don't mess with us or we'll nuke you" attitude in this world, you should probably pick up a newspaper. Hell, turn on CNN. One of the only reasons Israel is still surviving amoungst Arab states is because of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons is a HUGE deterrant of warfare.

If you think it's sick that N.Korea has missles that could potential hit the west coast, you are completely naive to what lies directly beneath the 49th parallel. I am surprised that some idiot American hasn't accidentally nuked all of Canada by pushing a button at one of the silos directly below us. Now thats sick. The fact that we are so close to the U.S. is sick. The way the U.S. retalliated against Japan for Pearl Harbour is sick.

I think it is funny how you quote international law to defend the U.S. that repeatedly disregards international law without a blink of an eye. The U.S. administration's foreign policies are the reason why N.Korea has made this decision, instead of blaming N.Korea for reacting to the threat of the Americans, maybe you should be questioning why they need those weapons in the first place.

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by Azure

Hell, JFK solved a major problem by going to the brink of nuclear war.

I wonder how Americans would have felt, knowing that the Soviet Union has Nuclear missiles armed and ready right off the coast of Florida.

NK has only aquired nuclear weapons for one reason; to **** off the Western World. Il must be in dire need of attention.

Exactly, JFK solved the problem by using the "don't mess with us or we'll nuke you" attitude. I am glad you realized this.

If the only reason why N.Korea attained nuclear weapons was to **** off the Western World, why does the U.S. have so damn many of them - far more than the rest of the world multiplied by 100. Was it to **** off the rest of the planet? Well, I guess it worked, because they sure are mad.

The reality is the U.S. is going to think twice before it arbitrarily invades N.Korea now, unlike they did in Afghanistan or Iraq. And if they do decide to invade, they better have damn good, and I mean DAMN good evidence, to pursuade the American people that they should go to war with a state that holds nuclear weapons. A nuclear attack would be like Pearl Harbour and 9/11 times 1000.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

Why does any state proliferate arms? A state is going to have to seriously consider occupying N.Korea now because the risk of nuclear warfare is at hand. It is strategically the smartest thing N.Korea can do. At this exact moment, there is no one particular state that is threatening their sovereignty, but why would a state wait until a state is a direct threat, when it is far too late to do anything?

Are you stupid? If you think that there is no "don't mess with us or we'll nuke you" attitude in this world, you should probably pick up a newspaper. Hell, turn on CNN. One of the only reasons Israel is still surviving amoungst Arab states is because of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons is a HUGE deterrant of warfare.

If you think it's sick that N.Korea has missles that could potential hit the west coast, you are completely naive to what lies directly beneath the 49th parallel. I am surprised that some idiot American hasn't accidentally nuked all of Canada by pushing a button at one of the silos directly below us. Now thats sick. The fact that we are so close to the U.S. is sick. The way the U.S. retalliated against Japan for Pearl Harbour is sick.

I think it is funny how you quote international law to defend the U.S. that repeatedly disregards international law without a blink of an eye. The U.S. administration's foreign policies are the reason why N.Korea has made this decision, instead of blaming N.Korea for reacting to the threat of the Americans, maybe you should be questioning why they need those weapons in the first place.

The US defending themselves from an unprovoked attack at pearl harbour is sick??? What planet are you living on?

[White Doors]

A far away planet. At least he is consistent in his stupidity.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Azure

Are you stupid?

Wow... thats a real jerkish thing to say in the middle of a normal debate. Have some respect for other posters, even if their point of view doesn't exactly match yours. Its common courtesy, helps keep this board a nice place for everyone.