North Korea

[pixel]

Whatever happened to self-reliance?

How self-reliant do you want to be?
Read the abc article Rumpy linked to above: There is no military defense against a NK ICBM fired by the madman to hit Australia. You can hope it misses its target. You can track its descent and calculate the approximate location of impact. But you can't stop it with anything from boomerang to bullet.

Leaves diplomacy. Send Tony Abbott to talk his kind of sense to the young 'un Kim? Or let Barnaby lecture him about agriculture vs coal mines? Bore him to death with reruns of Home & Away or Neighbours?

 

[luutzu]

How self-reliant do you want to be?
Read the abc article Rumpy linked to above: There is no military defense against a NK ICBM fired by the madman to hit Australia. You can hope it misses its target. You can track its descent and calculate the approximate location of impact. But you can't stop it with anything from boomerang to bullet.

Leaves diplomacy. Send Tony Abbott to talk his kind of sense to the young 'un Kim? Or let Barnaby lecture him about agriculture vs coal mines? Bore him to death with reruns of Home & Away or Neighbours?

Can't be completely self-reliant, but couldn't we at least pretend to be somewhat industrious?

Don't think we need to ever worry about NK. They have quite a few target in the region that's more of a guarantee to draw the entire hemisphere into war. Hitting Australia and chances China and the US will just tell them to come down to say they're very sorry!

 

[ReXXar]

Good article by someone who actually knows his stuff:

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/there...-the-north-korea-problem-20170417-gvmek8.html

 

[McLovin]

Somewhere I said I'd dig up some info on the damage the North could actually do to Seoul....

This article gives a pretty balanced breakdown of what is achievable by NK.

https://worldview.stratfor.com/analysis/how-north-korea-would-retaliate

North Korea is powerless to prevent a U.S. strike on its nuclear program, but retaliation is well within its means. The significant military capability that North Korea has built up against South Korea is not advanced by Western standards, but there are practical ways Pyongyang could respond to aggression.

The North Korean military's most powerful tool is artillery. It cannot level Seoul as some reports have claimed, but it could do significant damage.

...

Tube and Rocket Artillery
The biggest anticipated cost of a North Korean artillery barrage in response to an attack would be the at least partial destruction of Seoul. But the volume of fire that the North can direct against the South Korean capital is limited by some important factors. Of the vast artillery force deployed by the North along the border, only a small portion — Koksan 170-mm self-propelled guns, as well as 240-mm and 300-mm multiple launch rocket systems — are capable of actually reaching Seoul. Broadly speaking, the bulk of Pyongyang's artillery can reach only into the northern border area of South Korea or the northern outskirts of Seoul.

All forms of North Korean artillery have problems with volume and effectiveness of fire, but those issues are often more pronounced for the longer-range systems. Problems include the high malfunction rate of indigenous ammunition, poorly trained artillery crews, and a reluctance to expend critical artillery assets by exposing their positions.

Based on the few artillery skirmishes that have occurred, roughly 25 percent of North Korean shells and rockets fail to detonate on target. Even allowing for improvements and assuming a massive counterstrike artillery volley would be more successful, a failure rate as high as 15 percent would take a significant bite out of the actual explosive power on target. The rate of fire and accuracy of North Korean artillery systems is also expected to be subpar. This belief is founded on the observably poor performance of North Korean artillery crews during past skirmishes and exercises. Though inaccuracy is less noticeable in a tactical sense — especially as part of a "countervalue attack," where civilian areas are targeted — at the higher level an artillery retaliation rapidly becomes a numbers game.

...

Although North Korea could technically open fire on South Korea with all of its artillery systems at once, this would open Pyongyang up to significant counter-battery fire and airstrikes that could rapidly reduce the artillery force it has so painstakingly built up. Instead, as other studies have shown, only a portion of North Korean artillery would be used at a time. This is particularly true for the advanced systems that are most important to Pyongyang: long-range artillery that is able to strike at Seoul. The heavier, more advanced systems are not only difficult to replace, but they are also priority targets for counter-battery fire and airstrikes. Even when firing, artillery systems would be able to do so only temporarily before relocating or otherwise trying to hide the system's firing location to avoid destruction.

And I like this quote, because it agrees with me!

"Artillery is not that lethal," says Anthony Cordesman, who holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), and is a national security analyst for ABC News. "It takes a long time for it to produce the densities of fire to go beyond terrorism and harassment." Even in a worst-case scenario, where both U.S. and South Korean forces are somehow paralyzed or otherwise engaged, and North Korea fires its 170mm artillery batteries and 240mm rocket launchers with total impunity, the grim reality wouldn't live up to the hype. Buildings would be perforated, fires would inevitably rage and an unknown number of people would die. Seoul would be under siege—but it wouldn't be flattened, destroyed or leveled.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6212/north-korea-and-flattening-seoul/

 

[notting]

The only valid response is an all out attack on Chinese Communist Party or just continue building up the forces around it and let China continue to hemorrhage and start telling the truth about China in all media and remove their growing propaganda in our politics, media and universities.

The second is the smarter

 

[SirRumpole]

It would be interesting to know what North Korea actually wants.

Does it really want war with the South or does Kim what's his face just want some recognition and 'respect' in the wider world ?

Surely they must know that they would get flattened if war actually started, so I would say they just want bragging rights in the region and a feeding of their egos.

Unfortunately appeasement to this sort of psychopaths doesn't really work, it's probably a matter of letting them play their games but letting them know that if they actually hurt anyone then their necks are on the block.

 

[notting]

They want support from China so they do as they are told by China no matter how insane it looks.
China wants to destroy South Korea and get the free world influence out of Asia all together.

As a first step.

China is baiting the US, not even sending back an all but dead yank has worked so far.

"In an interview with the Wall Street Journal last week, Trump said Xi told him during a recent summit that “Korea actually used to be a part of China.” The comments sparked outrage in Seoul and became an issue in South Korea’s presidential race, prompting the foreign ministry to seek to verify what Xi actually said."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...rump-it-s-actually-never-been-a-part-of-china

 

[luutzu]

Somewhere I said I'd dig up some info on the damage the North could actually do to Seoul....

This article gives a pretty balanced breakdown of what is achievable by NK.

https://worldview.stratfor.com/analysis/how-north-korea-would-retaliate



And I like this quote, because it agrees with me!



http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6212/north-korea-and-flattening-seoul/

I guess it's only... "Buildings would be perforated, fires would inevitably rage and an unknown number of people would die. Seoul would be under siege—but it wouldn't be flattened, destroyed or leveled."

That's alright then. I guess, if you're not one of those dead or alive, in the area.

Read headline that Hawaii will now have to adapt to living with NK and its ICBMs. I guess they haven't gotten used to all them naval bases and arsenals all these years

 

[notting]

A U.S.-led effort to broker a United Nations Security Council statement condemning North Korea’s latest missile test has broken down, according to two officials, a setback for the Trump administration on one of its top foreign policy priorities.

Among the five permanent members of the Security Council, the U.S., France and U.K. were unable to overcome Russian and Chinese objections to a draft statement critical of Pyongyang’s July 4 test of a missile that could strike parts of the U.S., according to the officials, who asked not to be identified discussing private negotiations.

 

[Value Collector]

And I like this quote, because it agrees with me!

I guess the author of the quote is correct, unless as I pointed out earlier the rounds being used turn out to be nuclear rounds or chemical rounds rather than traditional HE rounds.

I am no expert on NK's weapons systems and I have no insights to what there intents are, But I don't think they would actually go for a nuclear war (maybe I am over estimating how rational they are though), But yeah I can't see why they couldn't level cities in SK if they decided to, and had the time to put the relative war heads/shells together.

 

[Gringotts Bank]

We've had the news saturation phase, now the relative quiet. Get your shorts on.

 

[Wysiwyg]

insane
ɪnˈseɪn/
adjective
adjective: insane
1.
in a state of mind which prevents normal perception, behaviour, or social interaction; seriously mentally ill.

The videos and pictures of missile testing show an individual directing proceedings that matches the above definition. It will be incredible if the ego retreats now. Big missile, small you-know-what. Oh and people with stubby arms and a fat guts can't fight.

 

[luutzu]

The videos and pictures of missile testing show an individual directing proceedings that matches the above definition. It will be incredible if the ego retreats now. Big missile, small you-know-what. Oh and people with stubby arms and a fat guts can't fight.

Saw an interview with a former CIA analyst, I think... anyway, he raised a good point when shown a video of some former US intel chief worrying about Trump's stability with the nukes... The guy said... Trump being unstable aside, why in the heck should anyone be comfortable with anyone with nukes?

I mean, there's a handful of people, on all sides, who has the power to destroy all life on earth.

That's insane!

 

[Wysiwyg]

I mean, there's a handful of people, on all sides, who has the power to destroy all life on earth.
That's insane!

There aren't enough nuclear weapons in the world to destroy all life. Molten planet and Ice Age has not been able to do this. There will be millions of people killed and countless other organisms but not all life. The DD preppers will have the best chance at survival post nuclear destruction and all life forms have adaptive capability.

Trump being unstable aside, why in the heck should anyone be comfortable with anyone with nukes?

Yes no nuclear weapons is the safest way forward for the human race. I suppose that is why not all countries are allowed to hold them at present. Reasons being potential to use them indiscriminately for attack and threaten neighbours.

 

[luutzu]

There aren't enough nuclear weapons in the world to destroy all life. Molten planet and Ice Age has not been able to do this. There will be millions of people killed and countless other organisms but not all life. The DD preppers will have the best chance at survival post nuclear destruction and all life forms have adaptive capability.
Yes no nuclear weapons is the safest way forward for the human race. I suppose that is why not all countries are allowed to hold them at present. Reasons being potential to use them indiscriminately for attack and threaten neighbours.

Heard that the nukes themselves doesn't need to directly end life on Earth. It's what they cause - that nuclear winter from the ashes and clouds and fire from forests (potentially if strike near it).

So the smoke would cover the planet for years, killing all plants and crops and food. Ending that cycle and we at the top will end soon after. Just like the dinosaurs. Most weren't killed by that asteroids scientists believe hit the Yucatan area.

So maybe not literally all life, definitely life as we know it for a long long time.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Kim Jong Un is an unpleasant little bastard whose regime and that of his father and grandfather has killed and starved millions of their own people.

I say bomb the crap out of their facilities and Pyongyang. The latter is full of his cronies.

By the way I have it on good authority that he has a chip inserted in his ass which was put there by a CIA paid gastroenterologist during a colonoscopy. So he has more than skid marks. He is a marked man.

gg

 

[pixel]

Saw an interview with a former CIA analyst, I think... anyway, he raised a good point when shown a video of some former US intel chief worrying about Trump's stability with the nukes... The guy said... Trump being unstable aside, why in the heck should anyone be comfortable with anyone with nukes?

I mean, there's a handful of people, on all sides, who has the power to destroy all life on earth.

That's insane!

The problem is, you can't un-invent an invention. It's widely known, and anybody with the necessary means can repeat the manufacture, regardless of his level of insanity.
The Greeks wrote a legend around that knowledge: Once Pandora's box was opened and her "gifts" were out, nobody was able to catch them all and stuff them back in again.

 

[SirRumpole]

Heard that the nukes themselves doesn't need to directly end life on Earth. It's what they cause - that nuclear winter from the ashes and clouds and fire from forests (potentially if strike near it).

The US also had a device called a "neutron bomb", which doesn't create an explosion as such, just a shower of high speed neutrons that kill people but leaves infrastructure alone.

They were supposed to have been dismantled, but who knows what they still have in the black arsenal.

 

[Smurf1976]

The problem is, you can't un-invent an invention. It's widely known, and anybody with the necessary means can repeat the manufacture

Indeed. It might have been hard to work it out in the first place but the means is widely enough known now that anyone with heavy manufacturing capability and access to raw materials could get themselves some nukes if they really wanted to. And there's enough deposits of uranium in the ground, and enough of the stuff around above ground, that cutting off the supply of materials won't stop them either. Sad but that's how it is.

 

[SirRumpole]

Indeed. It might have been hard to work it out in the first place but the means is widely enough known now that anyone with heavy manufacturing capability and access to raw materials could get themselves some nukes if they really wanted to. And there's enough deposits of uranium in the ground, and enough of the stuff around above ground, that cutting off the supply of materials won't stop them either. Sad but that's how it is.

Very true. A few nukes on missiles in the NT or on our subs wouldn't go astray for us either.