topic Re: North Korea. in The Round Table

North Korea.

cee-dee — Fri, 09 Sep 2016 21:10:23 GMT

So, North Korea has detonated another nuclear device after test firing more missiles with an ever increasing range.

In the fullness of time, when they've managed to shrink the size of their nuclear devices to fit in/on missiles and when they've perfected both the devices and the missiles then stockpiled them, eventually they'll find some excuse to fire them either at Japan, the USA or both.

As they have absolutely no regard for the UN and with the above in mind, do you think anything should be "done" or do you think the World should wait until they use them and witness the response of the USA? It's probable that the US response would likely be the almost total annihilation of North Korea in one retaliatory hit.

What's your view on the subject?

Re: North Korea.

right-then-petal — Fri, 09 Sep 2016 22:48:46 GMT

Overthrow Or Take Him Out, before He Starts 3rd World War.

Re: North Korea.

astrologica — Sat, 10 Sep 2016 06:36:10 GMT

Mr Trump may become US President....maybe he would sort him out!! That's the stuff of nightmares😨.

Re: North Korea.

margaret*e — Sat, 10 Sep 2016 08:11:39 GMT

Waiting until they use them might be too late for all of us.

Re: North Korea.

cee-dee — Sat, 10 Sep 2016 10:08:55 GMT

Hmmmmm:-

http://news.sky.com/story/why-time-is-running-out-to-stop-paranoid-kim-jong-uns-nuclear-quest-10571085

I don't think it's Kim Jong-Un that's paranoid, he's just a weak figurehead. I think it's the military and scientific community that are promoting the paranoia so that they can increase their influence and their own wealth.

Once they have perfected their systems, they will use them on some pretext or other. Sanctions won't work. Although it's not a very "nice" thing to do, I think the only thing that will stop the madmen is the destruction of all their military and scientific bases before they manage to perfect and launch any nuclear missiles.

Re: North Korea.

**forum-decorum** — Sat, 10 Sep 2016 11:53:35 GMT

@cee-dee wrote:
Hmmmmm:-

http://news.sky.com/story/why-time-is-running-out-to-stop-paranoid-kim-jong-uns-nuclear-quest-10571085

I don't think it's Kim Jong-Un that's paranoid, he's just a weak figurehead. I think it's the military and scientific community that are promoting the paranoia so that they can increase their influence and their own wealth.

Once they have perfected their systems, they will use them on some pretext or other. Sanctions won't work. Although it's not a very "nice" thing to do, I think the only thing that will stop the madmen is the destruction of all their military and scientific bases before they manage to perfect and launch any nuclear missiles.

I agree with you there CD, regimes like that should never be allowed to continue. The truth of the matter is though there is not one worldly organisation equipped and capable of stopping it. There are far to many worldly organisations including governments who want the exact same thing as North Korea....world dominance, wealth and a great historic name.

You can rest assured (maybe you won't because you don't accept) that world war 3 will never be allowed to happen and all the opressive wicked regimes along with all destructive weapons will most definitely be destroyed.

It is a promise that ruin will come to those ruining the earth, you may not believe and accept it but it doesn't mean it won't happen.xxx

Re: North Korea.

jd.linklater — Sat, 10 Sep 2016 11:54:14 GMT

I don't know how the situation in N.Korea has gone on for so many years without a rebellion taking place or at least an attempt of some sort. A cursory look online shows very little evidence of any resistance groups with any clout. There has to be a revolution sometime in the future surely? A military coup looks rather unlikely at present but the Chinese are rapidly losing patience with Kim Jong Un so with their backing who knows???

We still don't know for certain how many of the claims over their nuclear capabilities are genuine or just posturing, let's face it, they are very good at posturing. But the situation is becoming more dangerous year on year so as you say an intervention of some sort seems to be inevitable. A pre-emptive strike would be preferable to waiting for them to attack one of their neighbours or even the US.

Re: North Korea.

cee-dee — Sat, 10 Sep 2016 12:21:28 GMT

There's absolutely no chance of a rebellion in North Korea because any minor disent is immediately jumped on. Utter a word of criticism and you're for it. You only have to look at the recent executions to see that.

Re: North Korea.

evoman3957 — Sat, 10 Sep 2016 12:49:55 GMT

A problem's only a problem if you let it exist !!

Re: North Korea.

jd.linklater — Sun, 11 Sep 2016 14:24:21 GMT

@evoman3957 wrote:
A problem's only a problem if you let it exist !!

It doesn't sound like the South Koreans are going to let it exist. Or is this just more tit-for-tat sabre rattling?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-37331852

Re: North Korea.

evoman3957 — Sun, 11 Sep 2016 15:58:40 GMT

The united nations is the most dysfunctional and impotent organisation that's ever existed, when they have taken action ( usually over comparatively insignificant events ) they have blown their own trumpet without modesty. However, when serious events occur, they're ALL TALK and no action, either because they can't reach agreement on what to do ( because their different members have different vested interests in the situations ) or because they haven't got the backbone to do what needs to be done. Everybody knows this, so the countries that are left to confront their own dilemmas; have no option but to do what needs to be done. Iran has vowed to wipe Israel off of the Earth, so Israel has always vowed ; that if Iran DOES develop a nuclear weapons capability, they ( Israel ) WILL launch a preemptive nuclear strike on Iran ( why do you think everybody was so keen to reach an agreement with Iran, to stop its development of nuclear weaponry ). So too, when we reach the inevitable turning point with North Korea ( inevitable, because unless the UN do what is necesary......that's exactly what it will be.....inevitable ); South Korea WILL launch a nuclear attack on North Korea, certainly totally annihilating Pyongyang and all its nuclear testing sites and facilities.

Re: North Korea.

cee-dee — Sun, 11 Sep 2016 17:42:48 GMT

Reducing Pyongyang to ashes would only cause a full-blown series of nuclear strikes all over the place.

It's all the military sites which would need to be neutralised at the same time to prevent North Korea launching retaliatory action not only agains the South but Japan and the USA.

Mouthing off like that about Pyongyang sounds like retaliatory bravado to me.

Re: North Korea.

evoman3957 — Sun, 11 Sep 2016 20:28:31 GMT

Well, waiting until you get hit first before striking back; is all very spiffing and civilized, as long as the first punch didn't knock you out.........isn't it !! Still, we shall see what we shall see won't we; some people will say the meek shall inherit the Earth.........ME, I say they'll be dead before they get the chance.

Re: North Korea.

cee-dee — Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:08:45 GMT

A pre-emptive strike on NKs nuclear and other military sites would get Worldwide condemnation against whoever made the strikes. On the other hand, NK would get the same condemnation if they struck first.

If several countries tried to get UN "backing" for some sort of action, those at the UN would talk tough 'till the cows came home and do nothing.

NK has no regard whatsoever for the UN because all it seems to be is a talking shop and if the UN ever sanctions any form of "action" anywhere, they tie both hands behind the backs of any "coalition" force or "allied action" so that whoever they're trying to deal with can play with no rules at all while "the allies" are crippled with "rules of engagement".

In the end, there's only two ways to deal with such a situation. Either keep your nose out of it and let them all get on with it or get in there and deal with the madmen once and for all.

Re: North Korea.

evoman3957 — Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:56:26 GMT

So we agree then

Re: North Korea.

cee-dee — Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:57:05 GMT

Yes.

Re: North Korea.

soppysofty — Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:58:14 GMT

I do not understand the paranoia here.

Both the USA and the UK (among many other countries) possess the technology to know if a missile has been launched and where it is heading.

We also have weapons that can take out any missile in flight.

For North Korea to succeed it would need to launch over 100 weapons at the same time to different locations which would mean that 'the west' would not have enough counter strikes to take out all of the missiles.

North Korea's economy is such that it would only be able to launch a maximum of 10 missiles at any time before it had to make new missiles.

With the first set destroyed it would be inevitable that the west would send in ground troops to neutralise any missile bases.

The special forces could achieve such an action within days and would set North Korea's nuclear plans back by over 50 years.

Re: North Korea.

cee-dee — Sun, 11 Sep 2016 22:02:32 GMT

That's not so. The anti-missile missiles can only strike incoming missiles, they can't "chase after" missiles that have been fired from long distance. Even then, there's the fall-out from a destroyed missile to deal with.

Re: North Korea.

**forum-decorum** — Sun, 11 Sep 2016 22:46:25 GMT

@evoman3957 wrote:
Well, waiting until you get hit first before striking back; is all very spiffing and civilized, as long as the first punch didn't knock you out.........isn't it !! Still, we shall see what we shall see won't we; some people will say the meek shall inherit the Earth.........ME, I say they'll be dead before they get the chance.

Re: North Korea.

cee-dee — Sun, 25 Sep 2016 17:26:58 GMT

Brinkmanship here?

http://news.sky.com/story/north-korea-says-us-could-spark-nuclear-war-as-bombers-fly-close-to-border-10590312