Will we go to war against North Korea if...

[Bronwyn]

So North Korea has a bomb. Technology to actually carry it will follow behind it. If North Korea chooses to launch one at South Korea, will America go to war against NK?

 

[SamSpade]

No. We'll arm South Korea and Japan with nukes until they back down (after Japan makes the necessary constitutional changes to permit it).

 

[Bronwyn]

I think with NK having nuke's will create a domino effect. Japan and SK will have to build up to counter the threat.

 

[Larry Gude]

It is time...

...for us to pull our military OUT of Korea, NOW.

Japan knows Goddamn well that, when it's time to pay the piper, there is only so far we will actually go in honoring our commitment to defend them as though the were US soil. It seems rational to presume they are building a military accordingly.

China has been happy to have us for a buffer and that has given them the rationale for not really do much to keep NK in global good graces. It's their problem.

In the mean time, all NK really wants is the perception that they are respected and are a regional power.

Not our business or problem many more.

TIME TO LEAVE.

 

[Bronwyn]

There has been a lot of talk about what it would do to our economy if NK were to drop one on Japan. That's aside from our "commitments" post WWII.
NK has a million man army that is chomping at the bit to do something... anything.
I am in no way an expert on the these contries and their political history etc. I am just at the beginning and trying to learn what is going on. I have a feeling that if this isn't handled right, we will be dealing with it for the next 100 years.

 

[Pete]

...for us to pull our military OUT of Korea, NOW.

Japan knows Goddamn well that, when it's time to pay the piper, there is only so far we will actually go in honoring our commitment to defend them as though the were US soil. It seems rational to presume they are building a military accordingly.

China has been happy to have us for a buffer and that has given them the rationale for not really do much to keep NK in global good graces. It's their problem.

In the mean time, all NK really wants is the perception that they are respected and are a regional power.

Not our business or problem many more.

TIME TO LEAVE.

Shirley you jest.

 

[Larry Gude]

Of course not...

Shirley you jest.

...and quit calling me Shirley.

Why stay? I'm listening.

 

[Bronwyn]

The Korean War, which took place from June 25, 1950 to July 27, 1953, was a war between North Korea and South Korea. As neither side surrendered and no treaty was signed concluding the war, the two countries are technically still at war.

South Korea, was supported by United Nations forces, principally from the United States.

Result Ceasefire; United Nations tactical victory; strategic stalemate.

The division of Korea into North Korea and South Korea stems from the 1945 Allied victory in World War II, ending Japan's 35-year occupation of Korea. In a proposal opposed by nearly all Koreans, the United States and the Soviet Union agreed to temporarily occupy the country as a trusteeship with the zone of control demarcated along the 38th Parallel. The purpose of this trusteeship was to establish a Korean provisional government which would become "free and independent in due course."[1] Though elections were scheduled, the two superpowers backed different leaders and two states were effectively established, each of which claimed sovereignty over the whole Korean peninsula.

 

[Pete]

...and quit calling me Shirley.

Why stay? I'm listening.

We have been the stabilizing force for the entire region. Kim Jong Ill is a loose cannon and he carries on his fathers desire to conquer South Korea. We have been the only deterrent. 1 Million man army, organic and imported weapons for decades, even if they are low tech. You only have to imagine how long the lunatic would wait to invade if we left. When he did it would throw Asia into turmoil.

Even if South Korea has better weapons the Asian methodology of was is to throw overwhelming numbers into the fray. If your kill ratio is 100 to 1 he will throw 150 and have plenty to spare.

China and Russia, his only allies albeit lukewarm cannot be relied upon not to support him if it looks like he could win. Japan would kirk out and since their post WWII military is weak by design they could not stop it. Japan also fears the North Koreans because for centuries the Koreans have hated Japan, particularly since Japanese atrocities during occupation in the early 1920's.

Now you have south Korea entrenched in a war, China sitting on the fence like the pink elephant in the room no one wants to mention, Japan kirking out, we would have to hustle back and join the fray. A few hundred miles south you have Taiwan and China would love to force it back into the fold and would no doubt use the war / distraction and turmoil to launch an invasion there. Who is going to stop it? We will be engaged in Korea and defending Japan.

 

[Larry Gude]

Hmm...

We have been the stabilizing force for the entire region. Kim Jong Ill is a loose cannon and he carries on his fathers desire to conquer South Korea. We have been the only deterrent. 1 Million man army, organic and imported weapons for decades, even if they are low tech. You only have to imagine how long the lunatic would wait to invade if we left. When he did it would throw Asia into turmoil.

Even if South Korea has better weapons the Asian methodology of was is to throw overwhelming numbers into the fray. If your kill ratio is 100 to 1 he will throw 150 and have plenty to spare.

China and Russia, his only allies albeit lukewarm cannot be relied upon not to support him if it looks like he could win. Japan would kirk out and since their post WWII military is weak by design they could not stop it. Japan also fears the North Koreans because for centuries the Koreans have hated Japan, particularly since Japanese atrocities during occupation in the early 30's.

Now you have south Korea entrenched in a war, China sitting on the fence like the pink elephant in the room no one wants to mention, Japan kirking out, we would have to hustle back and join the fray. A few hundred miles south you have Taiwan and China would love to force it back into the fold and would no doubt use the war / distraction and turmoil to launch an invasion there. Who is going to stop it? We will be engaged in Korea and defending Japan.

...I say again, why stay?

At present, if NK were to attack Japan by sticking one of their 'nuclear' weapons in a chicken basket, cover it in blankets and ship it FedEx, it MIGHT work. We don't need 35,000 pairs of boots on the ground to push a button on them if they do it.

China has in incredible amount of export business that will be absolutely threatened by instability and/or war on the peninsula. If Iraq has proved nothing else it is that the US can withstand near $4 a gallon gas AND have an expanding economy. It may be uncomfortable not being able to buy cheap plasmas for awhile from the Chinese, but we, and the world, knows our economy is far more robust than anyone thought just two years ago. It's gonna hurt them far more than us.

Our troops serve as a 50 year old trip wire. Kim ain't afraid of 35,000 US troops; it's what attacking them would bring that is the deterrent. That deterrent is far more accurate and powerful these days making our guys, literally, nothing more than sacrifices if NK moves.

China does NOT want to deal with the results of the US using nuclear weapons, our only chance of stopping NK. It's their backyard.

Let them start raking the leaves.

 

[jetmonkey]

I haven't been paying attention, but I thought the scientists said this was possible a bluff; the explosion was too small to be nucular, and no radiation was detected in the environment. May have been a non-nucular device or a dud?

 

[Pete]

...I say again, why stay?

At present, if NK were to attack Japan by sticking one of their 'nuclear' weapons in a chicken basket, cover it in blankets and ship it FedEx, it MIGHT work. We don't need 35,000 pairs of boots on the ground to push a button on them if they do it.

You know there is a profound difference in attacking an ally of ours and actually attacking US Troops. Those 35,000 troops over there are an effective force and provide a big red STOP sign and it has worked for over 50 years. Why leave and temp the lunatic? It gives us a presence, a base of operations and advertises our intent very clearly. How do you suppose the SK government will feel when the US, who pledged to the end support pulls up and leaves right when their arch enemy gains nuclear capability. Our world rep would chance from "The great Satan" to "The great Chicken Shiat".

China has in incredible amount of export business that will be absolutely threatened by instability and/or war on the peninsula. If Iraq has proved nothing else it is that the US can withstand near $4 a gallon gas AND have an expanding economy. It may be uncomfortable not being able to buy cheap plasmas for awhile from the Chinese, but we, and the world, knows our economy is far more robust than anyone thought just two years ago. It's gonna hurt them far more than us.

I think you overrestimate the power of our economy. In China and North Korea they peddle their bikes down to get their pound of rice and half a chicken and go home and cook it over a wood fire and eat before the power grid closes down for the night at 8. I think they are going to be much less affected than the typical American. The stock market would go berzerk, the commodities market would follow, gas would not be $4 a gallon it would be $10 if you could get it at all and Americans would be in the rafters because we are soft and our balls are in the vice and someone else controls the handle. Aside from cash, the #1, most important, premo valuable thing in a global economy is exports. Last time I looked we were not the export power we used to be. When the dollar tanks what are we going to use to stabilize it?

Our troops serve as a 50 year old trip wire. Kim ain't afraid of 35,000 US troops; it's what attacking them would bring that is the deterrent. That deterrent is far more accurate and powerful these days making our guys, literally, nothing more than sacrifices if NK moves.

Exactly and Kim knows if they left it would mark a departure from our resolve. Given the spasms some of our most vocal public and congress are having about Iraq is it an absolute certainty that the US would come hustling back if NK poured 700,000 troops across the border Superbowl Sunday?

Those 35,000 and their equipment is a good and effective deterent, removing them is like replaying a tape of Siagon and using Korean sub-titles.

China does NOT want to deal with the results of the US using nuclear weapons, our only chance of stopping NK. It's their backyard.

China doesn't have to because we would not use nuclear weapons.

 

[PsyOps]

Given Japan or SK don’t have a military able to fend of a N. Korean nuclear attack and subsequent military assault, to arm Japan and S. Korea with nukes would only mean they would use them in a counter-strike. With nuclear-armed China (and Russia for that matter) at the backdoor of all this, and given their unwillingness to apply even the slightest of punishment on NK, there is only one foreseeable outcome. The US (and, geez I can’t believe I’m saying this, the inept UN) must maintain control of this situation to preclude nuclear tit-for-tat. The US is the only country that has the resources and capacity to make a conventional counter-strike in response to a nuclear attack by NK.

But to the original question… It seems a bit naïve (with all due respect) to even have to ask this question. Why do we question what constitutes an act of war? Al Qaeda hit the US with hijacked airplanes. No bombs, no guns. It was an act of war that deserved a response of declared war. An unprovoked, offensive nuclear strike (something that has never happened in global history) would be the ultimate act of war and must be responded to in the most lethal manner possible. The US is the only country that has the capacity to make a non-nuclear military strike. Yes, we will go to war and yes we should go to war! I hope Americans are preparing themselves for the inevitable.

 

[generic]

I haven't been paying attention, but I thought the scientists said this was possible a bluff; the explosion was too small to be nucular, and no radiation was detected in the environment. May have been a non-nucular device or a dud?

jetmonkey, good point here is the link, also another interesting link concerning NK.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/13/nkorea.test.sample/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/16/nkorea.hunger.ap/index.html

 

[somd whisper]

Given Japan or SK don’t have a military able to fend of a N. Korean nuclear attack and subsequent military assault, to arm Japan and S. Korea with nukes would only mean they would use them in a counter-strike. With nuclear-armed China (and Russia for that matter) at the backdoor of all this, and given their unwillingness to apply even the slightest of punishment on NK, there is only one foreseeable outcome. The US (and, geez I can’t believe I’m saying this, the inept UN) must maintain control of this situation to preclude nuclear tit-for-tat. The US is the only country that has the resources and capacity to make a conventional counter-strike in response to a nuclear attack by NK.

But to the original question… It seems a bit naïve (with all due respect) to even have to ask this question. Why do we question what constitutes an act of war? Al Qaeda hit the US with hijacked airplanes. No bombs, no guns. It was an act of war that deserved a response of declared war. An unprovoked, offensive nuclear strike (something that has never happened in global history) would be the ultimate act of war and must be responded to in the most lethal manner possible. The US is the only country that has the capacity to make a non-nuclear military strike. Yes, we will go to war and yes we should go to war! I hope Americans are preparing themselves for the inevitable.

How do you see this effect us here in the states?

 

[Larry Gude]

Oh I dunno...

Those 35,000 troops over there are an effective force and provide a big red STOP sign and it has worked for over 50 years. Why leave and temp the lunatic?

...how about the argument that if he is so effing crazy AND is developing the bomb, why maybe, just maybe he's crazy enough to wipe Red Cloud off the face of the earth?

It's one thing for them to face a conventional force, quite another to face annihilation. For the sake of what?

and advertises our intent very clearly. How do you suppose the SK government will feel when the US, who pledged to the end support pulls up and leaves right when their arch enemy gains nuclear capability. Our world rep would chance from "The great Satan" to "The great Chicken Shiat".

And just what is our intent? The South is stable and prosperous. They have something to fight for. China is stable and prosperous; they have something to fight for. As for our global image, what are we going to be thought of if he nukes 2nd ID, the Great Idiots? I submit to you that getting out of Korea would enhance our image with we, the people. it ain't our gig any more. That's a good thing. Job done, c'yah! Our interests in the region is trade with the Chinese and the South. We need 35,000 troops to trade with them? It's in THEIR interest to stabilize. WE'RE the customer. Let them do it.

I think you overestimate the power of our economy. In China and North Korea they peddle their bikes down to get their pound of rice and half a chicken and go home and cook it over a wood fire and eat before the power grid closes down for the night at 8. I think they are going to be much less affected than the typical American. The stock market would go berzerk, the commodities market would follow, gas would not be $4 a gallon it would be $10 if you could get it at all and Americans would be in the rafters because we are soft and our balls are in the vice and someone else controls the handle. Aside from cash, the #1, most important, premo valuable thing in a global economy is exports. Last time I looked we were not the export power we used to be. When the dollar tanks what are we going to use to stabilize it?

There's a solid disagreement there. If gas goes to $10, ethanol would become a major supplement in one crop cycle, 6 months, and become THE fuel in 3 cycles as infrastructure comes on line; 1 year and a half. In the mean time federal subsidy with deficit spending would ease much of the pump and home heating pain and the Chinese and global money would be buying up our debt in record levels in a rush to get there money protected from manufacturing downturn in China.

Guess what else? Raising costs of limited goods from China means...economic viability back here; a resurgence of domestic manufacturing. China can NOT risk that long term seismic shift.

It's precisely because we are an IMPORT power that our influence over China is so strong. Who would YOU rather be? The customer putting a buck back in your pocket or the producer with full shelves and no customers? The pressure on them would be FAR greater than on us.

is it an absolute certainty that the US would come hustling back if NK poured 700,000 troops across the border Superbowl Sunday?

Allow me to clarify; we would NOT come back. We have no need or national interest to do so. If we did anything, we nuke them, which is what we would do anyway if they over ran the South. So, we get our guys out of the way first.

China doesn't have to because we would not use nuclear weapons.

So, if Kim nukes Red Cloud, wiping out 35,000 US service personnel in an
instant, sends 700,000 troops pouring over the border, we won't nuke them? Why Pete, what names would the world hurl at us then? Stupid chicken ####s?

THEN WHY ARE WE THERE AT ALL if we will NOT confront the challenge that we face in the first place?

I'm hearing a 50 year old attitude on your part; develop and stabilize the region through economic development. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. We customer, they producer. It is up to them now.

 

[itsbob]

So North Korea has a bomb. Technology to actually carry it will follow behind it. If North Korea chooses to launch one at South Korea, will America go to war against NK?

IF they launch one at S Korea, you better believe we'd go to war with them


BUT the latest is they don't have a bomb and the whole test was a ruse, and if it was an ACTUAL nuclear weapons test then it was a dismal failure.

 

[Larry Gude]

That does not compute...

The US is the only country that has the capacity to make a non-nuclear military strike. Yes, we will go to war and yes we should go to war! I hope Americans are preparing themselves for the inevitable.

...if NK nukes SK or Japan we are NOT sending divisions over there. We're just not. The American people are not going to accept sending conventional forces over to confront a nuclear aggressor. We WILL nuke them. We will have to...or do nothing.

I am trying to make clear; China and South Korea have WAY MORE on the line than we do because THEY are the producers of so much we buy. For us, it is, at most, a short term inconvenience as we go buy elsewhere. For them, it is an unacceptable change in their national identities.

China does not want to lose NK as a strategic buffer, right? I that at least agreed upon? So, NK needs to be appeased or subdued. China doesn't want to own 'em, just shut 'em up. Our presence is an unnecessary, outdated complication.

Where is our national interest in having troops in the region anymore?

 

[jetmonkey]

jetmonkey, good point here is the link, also another interesting link concerning NK.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/13/nkorea.test.sample/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/16/nkorea.hunger.ap/index.html

From Wahington Post on Sunday

The North said immediately when it conducted the test that no radioactivity leaked from the site. Experts believe the explosion was relatively small _ far less than even the first atomic bombs used by the U.S. against Japan in World War II.

Although anonymous U.S. officials have said they detected radiation after the reported nuclear blast, no country has come out with a firm affirmation the test was genuine except Russia.

Could go either way I guess. I really hate anonymous officials, though. Man up or shut up, you attention whores.

 

[Larry Gude]

Isn't it actually...

From Wahington Post on Sunday

Could go either way I guess. I really hate anonymous officials, though. Man up or shut up, you attention whores.

...irrelevent?

I mean, if it was a dud or a fake, does that mean, whew, we can forget about it? I think not. This is like Kitty Hawk for them; It might have only gone 120 feet, but the goal is much greater. So, the question, as with Iran, is how close are they to being an actual nuclear threat? What to do with that time?