North Korea

[Muninn]

Clinton: N. Korea must face consequences

This situation is getting pretty scary and I'm in a country that's close enough to get into trouble!   

Anyone wanna help me fed-ex myself somewhere safer? :P

But, really, what are your thoughts on this situation? You think a war will really break out?  Do you think the North is being honest in claiming their innocence? Is Kim Jong Il nuts?

[Zakharra]

Kim Jong Il nuts?

He is nuts and should have stopped a bullet long ago.

[GolGol]

Kim Jong Il is nuts. But at a same time rather funny. Just watch Team America :p

And I think there is little risk of war actually breaking out. North Korea does not want it and neither does anyone else. The difference is though that North Korea does not want peace either in order to keep their seclusion from the rest of the world and at the same time benefit from help packages.

That's my opinion at least :p

[Muninn]

Kim Jong Il is nuts. But at a same time rather funny. Just watch Team America :p

And I think there is little risk of war actually breaking out. North Korea does not want it and neither does anyone else. The difference is though that North Korea does not want peace either in order to keep their seclusion from the rest of the world and at the same time benefit from help packages.

That's my opinion at least :p

This is true but the North is apparently quite quick to threaten war with anything they don't like - stop us from making a nuclear power plant where we can refine uranium? IF YOU DO SOMETHING WE'RE GONNA RECOGNIZE THIS AS AN ACT OF WAR. 
Stop us from test-firing our "satellite?" WE'RE GONNA DECLARE WAR. 
Oh, we totally didn't blow up that ship, nosiree, and if you try to blame us and punish us even though you have evidence WE'RE GONNA CALL THIS AN ACT OF WAR!!! >:(

Of course, this is a sarcastic oversimplification but you get the point.  The situation seems very volatile.  Or, rather, it has been for a long time and it's just getting worse...

[Stan']

North Korea would be mad to start a war.  Do they not realise how many countries would be against them?

[Muninn]

North Korea would be mad to start a war.  Do they not realise how many countries would be against them?

Oh I agree, Stan, but they can still do a hell of a lot of damage before they are stopped (Soul is very close to the border I believe and if the North has some decent firepower they can lay into it pretty hard) and invading would be extremely difficult - what with the citizens being essentially brain-washed to follow their glorious leader to their grave. Also, their leader is off his rocker anyways, so if they do declare war it wouldn't be too surprising.

[Callie Del Noire]

Oh I agree, Stan, but they can still do a hell of a lot of damage before they are stopped (Soul is very close to the border I believe and if the North has some decent firepower they can lay into it pretty hard) and invading would be extremely difficult - what with the citizens being essentially brain-washed to follow their glorious leader to their grave. Also, their leader is off his rocker anyways, so if they do declare war it wouldn't be too surprising.

South Korea is in a bad spot. Seoul has been zeroed out by North Korean artillery YEARS ago. Add in the fact that I'm willing to Kim Jong Il is going to hammer the Japanese on the way out (the Japanese/Koreans have been at each others throats for centuries.. Japanese metallurgy was helped by the kidnapping of Korean artisans way back when). He's already show he can put a missile pretty much anywhere in the main islands when he tested his missiles back in the 90s (if I recall right.. he put a pair in the ocean on the other side of Japan).

He's a CERTIFIABLE nutjob who I'm willing to be has had anyone that remotely resembles a threat to him internally in the ground and the only country he really has to worry about is to the north. The Chinese are the only folks who can roll over his army quickly, the rest of us are out numbered and would require a long protracted fight to stop. (and at a cost to South Korea, and possibly Japan, that can be described as catastrophic).

The man has literally starved his people to death and I'm sure if he dies anyway besides a quick dropping dead on the spot that he's quite likely to try and take a BUNCH of folks with him on the way out.

I'm willing to bet there is a department somewhere in Seoul that is trying to figure out how they can help rebuild the North when he finally shuffles off the mortal coil and the North Korean government implode economically. It's not 'if' but 'when'. This year, or ten down the line.

[HockeyGod]

The U.S. will once again step in and do what the U.N. should be doing. It's time for North Korea to be shown the light - Kim Jong Il's repressive regime will hopefully come to an end in my lifetime.

[Callie Del Noire]

The U.S. will once again step in and do what the U.N. should be doing. It's time for North Korea to be shown the light - Kim Jong Il's repressive regime will hopefully come to an end in my lifetime.

With what? We're downsized to the point we'd not be able to do much (short of tactical weapons) if he rolled south on us.

The miliarty is already over extended.

[Muninn]

South Korea is in a bad spot. Seoul has been zeroed out by North Korean artillery YEARS ago. Add in the fact that I'm willing to Kim Jong Il is going to hammer the Japanese on the way out (the Japanese/Koreans have been at each others throats for centuries.. Japanese metallurgy was helped by the kidnapping of Korean artisans way back when). He's already show he can put a missile pretty much anywhere in the main islands when he tested his missiles back in the 90s (if I recall right.. he put a pair in the ocean on the other side of Japan).

He's a CERTIFIABLE nutjob who I'm willing to be has had anyone that remotely resembles a threat to him internally in the ground and the only country he really has to worry about is to the north. The Chinese are the only folks who can roll over his army quickly, the rest of us are out numbered and would require a long protracted fight to stop. (and at a cost to South Korea, and possibly Japan, that can be described as catastrophic).

The man has literally starved his people to death and I'm sure if he dies anyway besides a quick dropping dead on the spot that he's quite likely to try and take a BUNCH of folks with him on the way out.

I'm willing to bet there is a department somewhere in Seoul that is trying to figure out how they can help rebuild the North when he finally shuffles off the mortal coil and the North Korean government implode economically. It's not 'if' but 'when'. This year, or ten down the line.

Yeah, Korea and Japan have a loooot of tension and that is mostly Japan's fault.  Love the country and its people but they are a racist lot.  The city I am currently living in was actually firebombed to the ground during the war and was rebuilt (its ugly IMHO).  To keep the people's spirits up they started to plant roses and now they have a rose festival every year (ended just last weekend).  I don't even wanna think what would happen if North Korea tried to do something... 

For right now it seems that China is trying not to take sides and being the big brother here, trying to keep the two from going at each other's throats.  We'll see how that works...

My Chinese friend's uncle is a violinist and he and his troupe ended up being invited into the North (likely to perform for Kim Jong Il himself) and one thing he noted or interest: the streets are essentially devoid of trash.  There is nothing because his people have nothing.  And while his people starve millions are spent on flippin' FIREWORKS for his birthday.  >:(

As for Kim Jong Il's sanity - I think anyone who places THEMSELF as a friggin' GOD and savior of his country and brainwashes his people to believe that has got to have more than a few screws loose.

[general9991824]

I have to agree that Kim Jong Il is pretty much batshit crazy at this point.  Which means logic might not have anything to do with his decision process. 

From what I've seen, DPRK has three big threats it can throw at ROK and Japan: a large contingent of special forces, overwhelming artillery capability, and big brother China. 

The North has proven several times in the past that it is capable of infiltrating the South with commando forces, and if things go hot, you can expect to see thousands popping up behind the main lines and causing chaos to the civilian population.  The South then has the tough choice of letting them go nuts and accept high civilian casualties, or diverting troops from the front lines. 

The next immediate threat is the huge artillery contingent the North has within range of Seoul.  While the equipment dates back to the 60's or 70's, most of the world's advancement in the last 50 years has been in accuracy.  However, if you're terror shelling a large city, accuracy doesn't matter too much.  Throw on top of that the fact that most of the cannons are stored in hardened bunkers, and counterattack becomes very difficult. 

The third big problem is China.  If the South and their allies could fight the North in a vacuum, they could bring their big guns to bear.  Heavy shelling of Seoul would be met with a nuclear counter attack or at the least heavy bombing.  However if things get too hot on the North, China will step in to prevent a flood of refugees coming across the Yalu. 

As much as I’d like to see the North taken out, a military conflict is a net loss for everyone.  It sucks, but committing millions of Koreans (on both sides) to death to avenge the lives of less than 50 sailors isn’t logical. 

I think at this point the best shot is to exert as much pressure as possible on the North and China.  If Beijing is embarrassed enough by their crazy neighbor they may either pull back on their aid, or possibly eliminate him themselves.  Hopefully Kim’s son will be a little more pragmatic.  If he plays his cards right, he could transition from the isolated crazy person his father was to the forward thinking leader that pulled his people closer to China’s system. 

[HockeyGod]

With what? We're downsized to the point we'd not be able to do much (short of tactical weapons) if he rolled south on us.

The miliarty is already over extended.

It would require strategic redeployment. We spend 10 times more on our military than the next closest nation. North Korea is a tiny country and we've learned a lot tactically since Vietnam. I'm an extreme pacifist, but frankly I'm also completely against repressive regimes.

[Rayne]

I thought that Kim's son was even more insane than his dad, or at least much along the same lines. XP
Anyways, I'm not much for war either, but I totally think somebody needs to assassinate the guy or take out his entire regime. I mean, he's like a child throwing a tantrum, but with access to weapons. I'm sorry, but that just isn't something that should happen. Every time I read about this stuff I want to laugh because its so absolutely insane, except its scary too because since nobody wants to kill civilians this one tiny nation still has power to threaten and do whatever they'd like right now. At some point, Kim Jong Il is going to cross a line where we'll have to stop him and get him removed from power, one way or another. And that day's gonna suck when it comes.

[GeekFury]

So we might have a legitimate war this time, theres a novel first, last one was WW2 right?

[Zakharra]

The third big problem is China.  If the South and their allies could fight the North in a vacuum, they could bring their big guns to bear.  Heavy shelling of Seoul would be met with a nuclear counter attack or at the least heavy bombing.  However if things get too hot on the North, China will step in to prevent a flood of refugees coming across the Yalu. 

As much as I’d like to see the North taken out, a military conflict is a net loss for everyone.  It sucks, but committing millions of Koreans (on both sides) to death to avenge the lives of less than 50 sailors isn’t logical. 

I think at this point the best shot is to exert as much pressure as possible on the North and China.  If Beijing is embarrassed enough by their crazy neighbor they may either pull back on their aid, or possibly eliminate him themselves.  Hopefully Kim’s son will be a little more pragmatic.  If he plays his cards right, he could transition from the isolated crazy person his father was to the forward thinking leader that pulled his people closer to China’s system.

That. It all revolves around China, but even China is under some restrants. If NK actually started something that the South couldn't ignore, it would be very hard for China to step in and say 'Don't attack NK or we will get involved.'  NK is pissing off everyone by their tactics.  Past a certain point, China would probably help 'stop' NK and just absorb what they could of the country.

[Callie Del Noire]

It would require strategic redeployment. We spend 10 times more on our military than the next closest nation. North Korea is a tiny country and we've learned a lot tactically since Vietnam. I'm an extreme pacifist, but frankly I'm also completely against repressive regimes.

With what? In the time I was in service I saw something like four or five carriers go out of service, three whole aircraft platforms go out (That was something like 30 squadrons of aircraft). The other platforms I worked on were downsized and the overall size of the navy has dropped something like 20 to 30%.

We are only holding on in the gulf because the two locations were fighting in are fairly close. Afganistan and Iraq wouldn't be doable otherwise.

The reduction of the Navy is a key reason we can't handle the problem with Somalian Pirates.

Where are we going to get the several hundred thousand men it would require to put the fight to the ground if North Korea went south in a big way? I can't think of anyway we could commit to our treaty promises.

China will be the one who has to step in..and they'll only do that in return for MASSIVE concessions.

[Phaia]

I do not know if everyone realizes this but the view of North Korea is that they are STILL at war with the US and the 'traitors of the South' ROK.

Thier goal is to reunitified all of Korea and they are prepared to wage TOTAL WAR!

http://www.rense.com/general37/nkorr.htm

It is also believed that North Korea has several Nuclear weapons.

Yes! I belive we will see a war with North Korea again....to them its about timing..if they ever feel they can force the US to back completely down after destoring our force in the south. Then expect them to launch!!

Phaia

[Brandon]

Any kind of military action by the US just isnt possible at this point in time. Our military just isnt ready, they need time to prepare, physically, mentally, and logistically before they can fight in any conflict again, even short term ones and Im sorry but any invasion/warfare in North Korea will be a long term conflict lasting years. Probably even a decade or longer unless we get extremely lucky or have a lot of allies. If we took a purely supportive role I think we would be alright but that wont happen. The US is far to arrogant for that and I fear that a lot of soldiers will needlessly loose their lives because of that arrogance

I'll agree that from how the media reports the actions of North Korea and its leader I think the entire regime are a bunch of nut jobs but then I have to keep in mind that I dont know the people. Its far to easy to demonize people that are made out to be monsters without questioning the source.

[Muninn]

Hopefully Kim’s son will be a little more pragmatic.  If he plays his cards right, he could transition from the isolated crazy person his father was to the forward thinking leader that pulled his people closer to China’s system.

One can hope, but apparently he is "just like his father."  At least he questions the lavish lifestyle they live while the common people suffer.  That's a start, at least.

I'll agree that from how the media reports the actions of North Korea and its leader I think the entire regime are a bunch of nut jobs but then I have to keep in mind that I dont know the people. Its far to easy to demonize people that are made out to be monsters without questioning the source.

Sadly they have had decades and multiple generations brainwashed to believe their Dear Leader is not only right and wonderful but a god amongst men and that the US and other outside countries are evil.  Here's a good article on someone who visited Pyongyang:

Welcome to North Korea - a backward and brainwashed nation

So if we or the world were to try and invade we'd be in for one hell of a fight. Their people are ingrained to believe the "US Imperialist Aggressors" will do terrible and atrocious things - kill babies, burn the countryside, rape women, etc.  They may be poor and starved but if they're faced against an enemy they consider the devil himself... it won't be pretty.

[Brandon]

While that article could be spot on the title "North Korea - a backwards and brainwashed nation" makes me wonder about its authenticity. Another thing that calls it into suspect is the author mentions no good points in the entire article. A place may be the worst place imaginable to live in but youre always going to find good things somewhere.

Once again, the media could be 100% accurate, but how do we know it is without going there ourselves? Its possible that we (or even both us and the North Korean's) are being fed propaganda. 

[Rayne]

While that article could be spot on the title "North Korea - a backwards and brainwashed nation" makes me wonder about its authenticity. Another thing that calls it into suspect is the author mentions no good points in the entire article. A place may be the worst place imaginable to live in but youre always going to find good things somewhere.

Once again, the media could be 100% accurate, but how do we know it is without going there ourselves? Its possible that we (or even both us and the North Korean's) are being fed propaganda. 

Still, there's some truth in every biased opinion, no matter how small. Even if its not totally true, just partially means that they'll still fight for Kim Jong Il and not us, and when the people there don't want help, that'll make things difficult.

[Brandon]

Still, there's some truth in every biased opinion, no matter how small. Even if its not totally true, just partially means that they'll still fight for Kim Jong Il and not us, and when the people there don't want help, that'll make things difficult.

Youre right about that if war did break out, and I hope it never does, the militaries involved would probably have to fight civilians as well as the military. It would be the same if the US was invaded, except we would be way better armed thanks to the "right to carry arms"

[Noelle]

While that article could be spot on the title "North Korea - a backwards and brainwashed nation" makes me wonder about its authenticity. Another thing that calls it into suspect is the author mentions no good points in the entire article. A place may be the worst place imaginable to live in but youre always going to find good things somewhere.

Once again, the media could be 100% accurate, but how do we know it is without going there ourselves? Its possible that we (or even both us and the North Korean's) are being fed propaganda.

You might find these videos to be of some use.

And let's be real here -- the article isn't about tourism. They're not aiming to attract people to visit North Korea.
Let's say I'm writing a piece about Sudan. For example:

Sudan is a very tumultuous, dangerous country. The degree of risk for catching a multitude of diseases is very high due to very poor water quality and living standards, and has a history of ongoing violence and genocide, as well as a significant human trafficking network. UN peacekeeping troops have had severe difficulties in maintaining control, and thus makes the country very dangerous for travelers. Many Sudanese civilians do not have proper access to clean resources or an adequate amount of food, and thus, many starve or succumb to disease...
BUT HEY, look on the bright side, I hear there's a really nice lake in the south!

[TheGlyphstone]

Wasn't there some rumors/talk a while back that KJI might actually be dead or crippled of a stroke, with a body double making his public appearances for him? Did that ever get fully disproved, or was it ever anything more than a fringe conspiracy theory to begin with?

[Callie Del Noire]

Wasn't there some rumors/talk a while back that KJI might actually be dead or crippled of a stroke, with a body double making his public appearances for him? Did that ever get fully disproved, or was it ever anything more than a fringe conspiracy theory to begin with?

The word was he was down from a stroke or another illness.  It is hard to tell if he was being doubled or not.

KJI is a bit of flake. I had seen some stuff a long while back that he and his father snatched folks from South Korea and Japan for training the spies and such.  A while back a couple was released after something like 20 years of training spies for North Korea.

[RubySlippers]

Wait a minute here the North and Soth Korean nations are still technically at war they just have a very long cease-fire. If they want to resume war the South can escalate this and go back to war invading the North then ask for our help under our treaty but we can hardly fight another war and this would be a real enemy that would be more than capable of doing massive damage.

[Oniya]

Yeah, the problem is that fighting (or even competing) against a total nut-job is something most people try to avoid.  You never know if he's crazy enough to bomb the entire peninsula to glass.

[Inkidu]

Yeah, the problem is that fighting (or even competing) against a total nut-job is something most people try to avoid.  You never know if he's crazy enough to bomb the entire peninsula to glass.

Well the U.S. could do some really black ops stuff and blow up N.K. nuclear facilities and blame it on the nation's own incompetence. It would not be hard. We just don't want to deal with it because of course, America would send them disaster relief in this horrible tragedy.

[Asuras]

Yeah, the problem is that fighting (or even competing) against a total nut-job is something most people try to avoid.  You never know if he's crazy enough to bomb the entire peninsula to glass.

The question is whether or not you want to let a total nut-job acquire enough nuclear weapons with sophisticated enough delivery systems to turn an entire continent to glass.

[Oniya]

I'm pretty sure he's already got them, so that's a moot point.

[Asuras]

He can hardly throw things at  Japan, so the delivery systems are questionable.

The warheads...only a few. So not moot.

[Brandon]

If you're going to war against a nut job with Nuclear weapons you have to assume that the delivery system is advanced enough to do heavy damage to all the surronding areas. That way, if a launch happens you're prepared for it.

Since the last test firing of North Korea's missle system, Im sure the Japanese have already put several anti missile defenses in place. If thats the case, and I hope it is, they would need to worry more about evacuating civilians from irradiated areas more then loosing more valuable infrastructure and lives.

[Callie Del Noire]

He can hardly throw things at  Japan, so the delivery systems are questionable.

The warheads...only a few. So not moot.

Point of fact.. his INTERCONTINENTAL ones are iffy.. the ones he used back in the 90s were able to throw themselves over the central islands with no problem. He can pretty much hit anything in the main islands of Japan and South Korea. Has been able to for over a decade.

[Asuras]

If you're going to war against a nut job with Nuclear weapons you have to assume that the delivery system is advanced enough to do heavy damage to all the surronding areas. That way, if a launch happens you're prepared for it.

No, when I want to go to war with a nut-job with nuclear weapons I want to attack him long before their delivery systems are capable of doing heavy damage to surrounding areas. When that is the case it is far, far too late. Millions of people will be dead if you wait for that fact.

When the North Koreans have test fired missiles at Japan, they have missed. They lack the delivery systems, their warheads are unreliable and millions of lives are at stake. But they will get better the longer we wait.

Since the last test firing of North Korea's missle system, Im sure the Japanese have already put several anti missile defenses in place. If thats the case, and I hope it is, they would need to worry more about evacuating civilians from irradiated areas more then loosing more valuable infrastructure and lives.

The funny thing is that in the US liberals refuse funding to missile defense systems because of how ineffective they are. And I don't disagree with this fact personally.

Point of fact.. his INTERCONTINENTAL ones are iffy.. the ones he used back in the 90s were able to throw themselves over the central islands with no problem. He can pretty much hit anything in the main islands of Japan and South Korea. Has been able to for over a decade.

"Point of fact" means something but never mind.

Has the DPRK ever actually hit anything in mainland Japan?

And then with the answer to that question answer your question that they can throw things over the central islands of Japan with "no problem."

[Vekseid]

No, when I want to go to war with a nut-job with nuclear weapons I want to attack him long before their delivery systems are capable of doing heavy damage to surrounding areas. When that is the case it is far, far too late. Millions of people will be dead if you wait for that fact.

Millions of lives would be put at immediate risk just from conventional bombardment by engaging hostilities, and the ABM systems currently deployed to South Korea and Japan are not currently capable of bringing down every conventional missile the Norks could launch.

When the North Koreans have test fired missiles at Japan, they have missed. They lack the delivery systems, their warheads are unreliable and millions of lives are at stake. But they will get better the longer we wait.

By the time North Korea manages to miniaturize its nukes enough to place them on a reliable missile, Japan and South Korea are going to have a lot more and significantly better missile defense systems.

The funny thing is that in the US liberals refuse funding to missile defense systems because of how ineffective they are. And I don't disagree with this fact personally.

The 'US liberals' have not been able to stop us from providing five AEGIS ballistic defense systems to Japan. They certainly weren't able to stop the PAC-3's 100% success rate.

North Korea's nukes escalate things, yes, but ballistic missiles are not the threat of the future.

[CountessJess]

I think the question is less about how accurate the North Korean missiles and nukes are, but rather whether they launch them in the first place. Nukes, and large quantities of missiles exploding on foreign soil is a statement enough, even if they do little damage to the opposing military. The impact, and even their launch, would be extremely damaging to the North's opponents domestically. Besides, a nuke does not need to be accurate to do what they do. If a nuke was shot down almost anywhere over the Straits of Japan, the radiation and blast would affect the Japanese and the South Koreans as well. Observe the effects of Chernobyl.

It also does not require a high level of technology to toss missiles over their Straits of Japan or over the 38th parallel. As Vekseid said, the sheer quantity of missiles would overload a missile shield.

However, I sincerely doubt that North Korea will really go ballistic. The use of the nuclear bargaining chip is a useful method to obtain aid and money from the international community, and the North is now posturing and saber rattling in a bid to regain attention. Even Kim and his generals, addled as they are, know that they cannot defeat an international response, and it is far more profitable for them to use their nukes as a way of dragging out more carrots from the international community.

[Vekseid]

A shot down nuke isn't going to detonate - warheads are rather delicate constructions. There would be a desire to perform a recovery operation, but that would be about it. At that point it becomes a radiological bomb and those are merely weapons of terror - all they do is scare people. In order to generate fallout, you need the intense neutron bombardment performed by an actual nuclear detonation.

Chernobyl involved 180 metric tons of Uranium. North Korea isn't going to be able to get that amount of radioactive material airborne. With all due respect to the hundreds who suffered acute illness and the thirty-one who died, as disasters go, Chernobyl's political impact far outweighed its casualties.

[CountessJess]

Well, I'm no expert in how nukes work, but wouldn't the less-than-stable construction of the North Korean missile likely result in the release of radioactive material into the environment, whether it is shot down or actually detonates normally? Please correct me if I'm wrong, as I said, I'm no expert in this.

Also, I'm not sure, but I believe that the effects of Chernobyl were felt in Sweden, enough to generate a scare throughout Europe. And neighbouring districts in Russia as well, if I'm not wrong. Though the West overreacted in their responsive measures, the point is that the scare of radiation in the Korean region would be enough to precipitate something far more serious than the situation might warrant, in the short run.

[Vekseid]

Radioactive material is not some substance magically drawn the pit of Hell. We dig it out of the ground and refine it until it is concentrated enough to be reactor or weapons grade.

If it's concentrated enough to be a threat, it's concentrated enough to be easy to recover. If it's too dispersed to easily recover, it's not a threat.

And as I already mentioned, even a Chernobyl-magnitude incident (which wouldn't happen) would pale in comparison to the plight of millions of Koreans facing concentrated conventional bombardment from a fraction of a million artillery emplacements.

[WhiteyChan]

Well, I'm no expert in how nukes work, but wouldn't the less-than-stable construction of the North Korean missile likely result in the release of radioactive material into the environment, whether it is shot down or actually detonates normally? Please correct me if I'm wrong, as I said, I'm no expert in this.

A nuclear bomb is detonated by an explosion - the force and pressure from an explosive substance surrounding the uranium compresses the uranium and triggers a critical reaction. The reaction then causes the gigantic explosion - its the same with a hydrogen bomb, except that the initial explosion is a standard uranium-based explosion. In theory then, if a nuclear missile is hit by say, another missile or an explosive shell, the impact and resulting explosion could have the same effect as the starting explosion would anyway, and the nuke would go off anyway. But, this is a small probability, given that its tricky enough to get it to detonate in a perfectly controlled scenario. And as Veks said, the nuclear radiation fallout only happens when a detonation occurs.

Also, NK has proven that they have the ability to fire conventional ballistics into the Pacific ocean on the far side of Japan - by implication, that means they can hit any target they like in Japan or South Korea with a hell storm of artillery.

[Callie Del Noire]

NK has repeatedly made threats towards Japan, and like both myself and some others have pointed out there is a MASSIVE amount of cultural hatred towards Japan (and vice versa). The Japanese have gone as far as requiring 2nd or 3rd generation native born people of Korean descent to have 'internal passports'. There is a LOT of issues between these cultures.

The launch of missiles over Japan (both in the 90s and more recently) is a reminder that KJI can put a missile in Tokyo. I wouldn't bet against him doing just that if he thought he was going down or if he felt pushed into a corner by a massive international force moving against him.

That being said, I think the only people who have any leverage with him of any real scale are the Chinese. I know he listens to them. Crazy and delusional he might be, but he knows that he can't counter them. They are the ONLY military force involved that can really hurt him at this time (with outright nuking him)

[WhiteyChan]

That being said, I think the only people who have any leverage with him of any real scale are the Chinese. I know he listens to them. Crazy and delusional he might be, but he knows that he can't counter them. They are the ONLY military force involved that can really hurt him at this time (with outright nuking him)

Very true. The Chinese are NK's biggest allies, if there is such a thing (more remaining neutral, I guess, than being allied, but that's about as good as it gets for NK). Not only that but, even without nukes, China is the only country with a big enough and dedicated enough military to wipe the floor with the DPRK military. The US doesn't have enough manpower, what with the dual wars being fought in Iraq and Afghanistan still (although if all hell breaks loose in Korea, I'd be willing to bet that the US gives up on one or both of them), and even combined with say, the UK, there would still be heavy, heavy casualties.

I think the best way to put pressure on North Korea is to put pressure on China.

[Callie Del Noire]

Very true. The Chinese are NK's biggest allies, if there is such a thing (more remaining neutral, I guess, than being allied, but that's about as good as it gets for NK). Not only that but, even without nukes, China is the only country with a big enough and dedicated enough military to wipe the floor with the DPRK military. The US doesn't have enough manpower, what with the dual wars being fought in Iraq and Afghanistan still (although if all hell breaks loose in Korea, I'd be willing to bet that the US gives up on one or both of them), and even combined with say, the UK, there would still be heavy, heavy casualties.

I think the best way to put pressure on North Korea is to put pressure on China.

I think they have. The president (both President Obama and Bush) have sent people to China and then they came back to the table. Definitely not a coincidence. And I know that a while back some of the considerations they wanted from the US over trade issues were definitely offered.

[Phaia]

If ya want something sobering and done for the military
read this

This study was done in 2007 before the second nuclear test by North Korea

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubid=771

the full study link : http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB771.pdf

A few things that caught me early on from this study

.."North Korea possesses at least enough plutonium to make a handful of nuclear bombs. Still, it is entirely possible that Pyongyang does not have a weapon."
   "The evidence from the October 9, 2006, underground explosion remains inconclusive, and the authors estimate that the DPRK has anywhere from zero to 13 nuclear weapons. North Korea has good reasons to play a game of “nuclear ambiguity.” Nevertheless, prudence demands that the United States and its allies proceed on the assumption that the DPRK has a nuclear weapon."

What is more concerning then Nuclear capabilty, which we in the US consider the main WMD< North korea has a large stock pile of chemical weapons.

"The DPRK perceives chemical agents more as an operational force multiplier, rather than as a strategic asset. Chemical weapons likely will be used at the outset of any conflict against frontline forces via artillery, against rear area targets on the peninsula via long-range artillery, short-range ballistic missiles, and via unconventional means with the assistance of SOF."

As for missles please realize that North Korea has been building and designing missles since the 1960s and sells them to many countries.

Remember this was from 2007 before the north fired off 7 cruise missiles:

"Currently, North Korea is thought to possess between 600 and 800 short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. This number is only likely to increase with steady output by the military industrial complex. And if testing continues, the DPRK eventually will produce and deploy long-range missiles capable of reaching Alaska, Hawaii, and some day, the continental United States."

So even with the patriot systems depolyed, which by the way has not proven that effective in Iraq. The shear numbers of missles could swamp South Korea and even cause major damage in Japan, even assuming poor accuraticy.

Do not think the way we took out Iraq would work on North Korea. Reading into the study I found this.

"After analyzing the 1991 Gulf War, North Korea increased its construction of underground facilities (command and control sites, logistics to include POL storage, military housing, and equipment such as artillery) to protect against the precision of U.S. weaponry allowing for the assembly of KPA military equipment and personnel in protected, underground facilities. Today, North Korea possesses as many as 10,000 such facilities."

"While ROK and U.S. analysts describe the KPA’s offensive strategy for a war of reunification as “blitzkrieg (lightning war), the KPA represents its “two-front war” and “combined operations” strategies somewhat differently. North Korea will use a massive attack across the DMZ, utilizing overwhelming firepower and violence known as a “One Blow Non-stop Attack.” Concurrent with this will be limited use of chemical weapons against targets within the forward area; ballistic missile strikes (some armed with chemical warheads) against ROK and U.S. airbases, ports, and C3I assets throughout the ROK; operations by hundreds of SOF units; offensive naval mine employment and intelligence agents throughout the ROK creating a “second front;” and special operations forces and intelligence agent attacks against U.S. bases in Japan and Okinawa."

I hope others, here, read this study.

Phaia

[Phaia]

One of the conclusions of the study concerns me greatly!

"Reunification of the peninsula on North Korean terms remains the foremost strategic goal of the regime. North Korea’s severe and probably irreversible economic decline places the regime’s survival in question. Therefore, Kim Jong Il must see reunification on their terms not only as their historic purpose, but also as essential to regime survival (another stated strategic goal). Continued investment in a powerful military organized and deployed to execute an offensive military strategy, despite its drain on a failing economy, strongly suggests that North Korean leaders perceive the military as probably the only remaining instrument for realization of that goal."

I would bet that if Kim came to believe the only way he could stay in power was to attack then he would!!

Phaia

[Asuras]

Millions of lives would be put at immediate risk just from conventional bombardment by engaging hostilities, and the ABM systems currently deployed to South Korea and Japan are not currently capable of bringing down every conventional missile the Norks could launch.

Indeed. And in ten years the North will have ten or a hundred times as many warheads with far more accurate delivery systems with far longer ranges. So instead of tens of millions they will threaten billions of people.

By the time North Korea manages to miniaturize its nukes enough to place them on a reliable missile, Japan and South Korea are going to have a lot more and significantly better missile defense systems.

And again the track record of even the most advanced ABM systems is decidedly mixed. In fact "mixed" is perhaps too highly a way of describing it.

The 'US liberals' have not been able to stop us from providing five AEGIS ballistic defense systems to Japan.

Riiight...they also weren't able to stop Bush's tax cuts, that doesn't mean they were for it.

They certainly weren't able to stop the PAC-3's 100% success rate.

Define success rate.

The launch of missiles over Japan (both in the 90s and more recently) is a reminder that KJI can put a missile in Tokyo.

Yet he never actually bothered to land one there, though he has no problem torpedoing ROK naval vessels...

[Vekseid]

Indeed. And in ten years the North will have ten or a hundred times as many warheads with far more accurate delivery systems with far longer ranges. So instead of tens of millions they will threaten billions of people.

No they won't. If you are talking about nuclear arms, they don't even have a working warhead yet. If you are talking about missiles, they're breaking their economy to support their currently ridiculous level of militarization.

And again the track record of even the most advanced ABM systems is decidedly mixed. In fact "mixed" is perhaps too highly a way of describing it.

Nine out of nine shot down in Operation Iraqi LiberationFreedom. Their track record for 1:1 kills against tests on more modern systems is poorer, yes, but
1) Expecting a 1:1 kill ratio is ludicrously stupid. Not just in terms of practicality, but when dealing with a nuclear or chemical warhead, it is economical to have 10:1 ratios.
2) North Korea does not have access to the latest, or best, missile technology. Its tech is a lot more like Iraq's in this regard.
3) ABM technology is demonstrably progressive faster than BM tech.
4) A single ballistic missile costs multiple orders of magnitude more than an ABM, after R&D is out of the way. It's easy to dismiss the amount of R&D we put into ballistic missiles in the first place when looking at this.

Define success rate.

Every missile Iraq fired in OIF was shot down. The ratio was around 2:1.

[Callie Del Noire]

Indeed. And in ten years the North will have ten or a hundred times as many warheads with far more accurate delivery systems with far longer ranges. So instead of tens of millions they will threaten billions of people.

And again the track record of even the most advanced ABM systems is decidedly mixed. In fact "mixed" is perhaps too highly a way of describing it.

Riiight...they also weren't able to stop Bush's tax cuts, that doesn't mean they were for it.

Define success rate.

Yet he never actually bothered to land one there, though he has no problem torpedoing ROK naval vessels...

What do you suggest we do?

We don't have the ground forces in place to counter any offensive. Even if we did we don't have the MOPP gear to protect our forces (much less South Korea and Japan).

Reinstate the Draft, increase the size of our standing army by a factor of four or more? OH yeah, that will will go over like a ton of bricks.

And so long as he THREATENS but doesn't do.. he's walking that thing line that says he can be bought. Toss a missile over the Japan main islands.. he's hinting that he can be bought.. drop one in downtown Tokyo.. you've just pulled a 9/11 and the US/Japan won't come to the table till he's out of power.

He's a bandit king with modern weapons. He wants to get something from us, concessions, trade options and some form of empowerment. You show you CAN do something..the bigger power will negotiate. You DO IT.. they won't stop till you personally are dead, locked up but most assuredly out of power.

[Vekseid]

If North Korea attacks the South would turn them into a fine paste and Kim knows it. America's role in such a scenario is primarily encouraging China not to escalate the situation.

[Callie Del Noire]

If North Korea attacks the South would turn them into a fine paste and Kim knows it. America's role in such a scenario is primarily encouraging China not to escalate the situation.

That would be the final outcome yes. He can't support a rush like that without us hammering his infrastructure. But what would the civilian casualties be like? Not to mention our initial losses?  It would be nothing like we have seen since the Korean offensives of the fifties.

[Vekseid]

If I were to guess, it would turn out a lot like Iraq (the war itself, not the occupation). Kim is even more of a dick than Saddam was, and he will be perfectly happy to dump chemicals all over the place, wreaking as much environmental havoc as he could. His military would fold like a paper tiger, and it's very probable that propaganda would make the fight itself a short battle, but he and his highest ranking officers will make South Korea, Japan and the US pay however they can.

[Callie Del Noire]

Korean has the 4th largest standing army in the world @ 1.2 million with something like 3 million reserve units and the ability to call up something like an additional 4 million citizens (where they start to lose against the south who could THEORETICALLY call up four times that). It is noted as being one of the most militarized nations in the world (if not THE most militarized).

To assume they would simply dry up and blow away as a paper tiger is a mistake. Would he win in the end? No. 

Do I see Seoul being habitable after his forces are crushed at a terrible cost? Oh no, not in our lifetimes. He would take pages from Stalin and with the knowledge he has on how to sour the enviroment it would be truly terrifying what he'd do to his lands, the South and Japan. I expect toxic events at the least if not something like North Korea joining the so far exclusive club of nuking another country. (Which is just us right now)

And here is a scary picture of how developed the others around them are compared to them. 

[mystictiger]

I suspect that the torpedo attack was either a desperate move by an aging KJI in order to reassert control over his government, or a move by his military that thinks he's gotten too soft. And of course the line that they'll feed their people is that this is Western Imperialist Aggression and Lies.

ANd just a quick note about size of forces:

North Korea is number 4.

[mystictiger]

The surface-to-surface missiles shot down during Operation Iraqi Freedom were mostly Al-Samoud 2s (basically a baby-Scud) that's half a surface-to-air missile.

What the PAC3 batteries was particularly good at was shooting down RAF fighters!

Any land war in Korea will be a horribly horribly bloody affair. Thousands of Americans will die, not to mention South Koreans and various allied countries. How long will American public opinion support a loss rate 10 or 100 times higher than what is currently going on in Vietnam?

[Vekseid]

Korean has the 4th largest standing army in the world @ 1.2 million with something like 3 million reserve units and the ability to call up something like an additional 4 million citizens (where they start to lose against the south who could THEORETICALLY call up four times that). It is noted as being one of the most militarized nations in the world (if not THE most militarized).

To assume they would simply dry up and blow away as a paper tiger is a mistake. Would he win in the end? No.

Who had the fourth largest army in the world before the Norks did? We were outnumbered 4:1 in that war, too.

Do I see Seoul being habitable after his forces are crushed at a terrible cost? Oh no, not in our lifetimes. He would take pages from Stalin and with the knowledge he has on how to sour the enviroment it would be truly terrifying what he'd do to his lands, the South and Japan. I expect toxic events at the least if not something like North Korea joining the so far exclusive club of nuking another country. (Which is just us right now)

Seoul is comparatively safe. As you can clearly see, the area north of it would be easy to secure. It's the rest of the border that's a problem.

The most important thing to remember, in all of this, is that this is not America's fight. We have no need to solve South Korea's problem for them. America has promised aid, and would no doubt give a great deal of air and sea support, but any war would be conducted according to South Korea's desires. They are not where they were sixty years ago.

[Brandon]

Who had the fourth largest army in the world before the Norks did? We were outnumbered 4:1 in that war, too.

Seoul is comparatively safe. As you can clearly see, the area north of it would be easy to secure. It's the rest of the border that's a problem.

The most important thing to remember, in all of this, is that this is not America's fight. We have no need to solve South Korea's problem for them. America has promised aid, and would no doubt give a great deal of air and sea support, but any war would be conducted according to South Korea's desires. They are not where they were sixty years ago.

I would agree that this isnt our war but unfortunately as arrogant as our society is I have no doubts in my mind that it will become our war when (not if, when) we get involved. You see America can never just be involved in something, in our society we have to frame the narrative of history and do enough so that it seems like were the only country that can save the day or the only reason it needs saving.

[Callie Del Noire]

I would agree that this isnt our war but unfortunately as arrogant as our society is I have no doubts in my mind that it will become our war when (not if, when) we get involved. You see America can never just be involved in something, in our society we have to frame the narrative of history and do enough so that it seems like were the only country that can save the day or the only reason it needs saving.

Don't forget if they launch on Japan, we're required by treaty to render aid to the Japanese.  Of course I'm sure some folks think we should forego that since it was only a promise made at the end of a massive war and all that. Thing is there is a dozen ways we can be pulled into the conflict.

(The one that scares me is that his missiles CAN reach the US, he'll take a shot at the West Coast as well)

[Archivist]

To interject a somewhat more hopeful note into this: http://www.newsweek.com/id/238457

By all appearances, the Korean peninsula is a tinderbox: since South Korea blamed its northern neighbor for sinking the warship Cheonan  in March, the countries have ratcheted up the rhetoric, threatened to blast propaganda across the border, cut off trade, and tried to draw allies like Washington and Beijing to their side. North Korea has put on a show of denial and intransigence. Its National Defense Commission claimed the investigation was a "farce" and threatened an "all-out war" if Seoul and the international community slap sanctions on the North; in fact, four North Korean submarines have been missing from a naval base since Monday, putting the Southern navy on high alert.

But this isn't quite the meltdown it appears to be. While Kim is publicly holding firm, behind the scenes his government seems to be trying to find a way out of the fracas. Its language has become more moderate, it may be contemplating an apology, and it may already have punished a naval commander in connection with the torpedo attack. That means the crisis is likely to fall far short of the "all-out war" the North initially promised. The softer side of Kim Jong-il's regime, it seems, wants out of this crisis, stat.

I won't lie... I have a vested interest in this given that someone close to me might soon be going to Seoul, and I have to hope with all my heart that this is true.

[Callie Del Noire]

Also keep in mind that South Korea makes up like 38% of their export business with only China being more (@ 42%)

That's courtesy of the World Fact Book

[Vekseid]

News outlets can spin it however they want. One of them sued for and won the right to lie to its audience, about a major company poisoning their audience's groundwater.

Their legal right to lie, however, does not change reality. Fundamentally speaking: America can want to call the shots in Korea. That does not make it capable of doing so.

Sure, we will get involved, and provide a great deal of aid. But it will be the South Korean army that wins the war, on South Korean schedules according to South Korean goals, at best backed up by American naval, air, and space superiority, with American political clout keeping China from getting too testy.



And yeah. The North knows a military conflict would be quick, brutal, not the slightest in its favor. That is assuming that everything functions as well for the North as it hopes it does.

[Daimon de Broken Hearted]

For the right price, North Korea could be taken care of certainly. Why put up with the bullshit of war any longer? Diplomacy has worn out long ago with many countries. Forget nukes, just take them out a good old fashion hunt.

[mystictiger]

News outlets can spin it however they want. One of them sued for and won the right to lie to its audience, about a major company poisoning their audience's groundwater.

Their legal right to lie, however, does not change reality. Fundamentally speaking: America can want to call the shots in Korea. That does not make it capable of doing so.

Sure, we will get involved, and provide a great deal of aid. But it will be the South Korean army that wins the war, on South Korean schedules according to South Korean goals, at best backed up by American naval, air, and space superiority, with American political clout keeping China from getting too testy.



And yeah. The North knows a military conflict would be quick, brutal, not the slightest in its favor. That is assuming that everything functions as well for the North as it hopes it does.

Look at what happened in the US-led Kosovo intervention - the much vaunted US superiority led to a grand total of  14 tanks being destroyed (as opposed to the US estimate of 120). When a county has been preparing for generations to fight a numerically and technologically superior foe, it will find ways to blunt advantages.

Look at what happened in the invasions of Iraq - more British troops have died since than during. And they were people who -hated- their leader.

As for the first Korean War: peak unit strengths on both sides were approximately equal. Granted, those 44 Luxembourgers probably didn't do all that much of any use, but the UN force had 1.2m while the Communists had about the same.

The final comment is probably more accurately referred to as:

And yeah. The North is gambling on the fact that any military conflict will result in horrific casualties, and that an over-stretched America is going to be unwilling to fight it, and therefore be able to extort more concessions from the South. In the end, a war on the Korean peninsula could well plunge the world back into recession as a fairly decent supply of manufactured and tech goods gets turned into rubble.

Armed conflicts are never short unless you're fighting in the middle of nowhere and outnumber the enemy at least 10 to one.

[Asuras]

No they won't. I you are talking about nuclear arms, they don't even have a working warhead yet.

Actually, that's a good point. Maybe they don't have warheads. But that's a point for me I think.

They've tested nuclear weapons - no one disputes that. If they haven't been able to make warheads out of them, then that only means that it's a few years out before they do have them. That doesn't affect my point; in fact it supports it since if they don't have warheads they still don't have the capability to throw nukes at Japan. They can still be stopped before that's possible.

If you are talking about missiles, they're breaking their economy to support their currently ridiculous level of militarization.

Ridiculous as it is, they've been doing that for more than a half-century so I don't why they'll be stalled now.

Nine out of nine shot down in Operation Iraqi LiberationFreedom. Their track record for 1:1 kills against tests on more modern systems is poorer, yes, but
1) Expecting a 1:1 kill ratio is ludicrously stupid. Not just in terms of practicality, but when dealing with a nuclear or chemical warhead, it is economical to have 10:1 ratios.
2) North Korea does not have access to the latest, or best, missile technology. Its tech is a lot more like Iraq's in this regard.
3) ABM technology is demonstrably progressive faster than BM tech.
4) A single ballistic missile costs multiple orders of magnitude more than an ABM, after R&D is out of the way. It's easy to dismiss the amount of R&D we put into ballistic missiles in the first place when looking at this.

Every missile Iraq fired in OIF was shot down. The ratio was around 2:1.

Shooting down a tactical ballistic missile is completely different from shooting down an ICBM which flies at a far higher altitude and a far higher speed. Compare the Taepodong-2 to what Iraq threw at us.

We don't have the ground forces in place to counter any offensive. Even if we did we don't have the MOPP gear to protect our forces (much less South Korea and Japan.

We invaded Iraq with 300,000 men; we only have 90,000 there now. I think that the notion that our resources are overstretched is...overstretched. But I'm also not saying that this is something we can do with just a flick of the wrist.

Additionally, the South Koreans - who are extremely well equipped - have some 3.6 million men including reservists against 5 or 6 million North Korean soldiers who are very poorly equipped. Our air force certainly isn't tied up so we can certainly provide massive air support. The whole reason that the North Koreans have built up artillery around Seoul is because they know the South could beat them alone.

And so long as he THREATENS but doesn't do.. he's walking that thing line that says he can be bought. Toss a missile over the Japan main islands.. he's hinting that he can be bought.. drop one in downtown Tokyo.. you've just pulled a 9/11 and the US/Japan won't come to the table till he's out of power.

He's a bandit king with modern weapons. He wants to get something from us, concessions, trade options and some form of empowerment. You show you CAN do something..the bigger power will negotiate. You DO IT.. they won't stop till you personally are dead, locked up but most assuredly out of power.

Right, well let's consider things ten years out. Say that he has a few dozen deliverable nuclear weapons and he is, like you say, a bandit king out for ransom.

In 2020, he throws a nuke at Nagoya to demonstrate he's capable of it, and announces that he has a second one to throw at Tokyo if anyone bothers to do anything about it. That is consistent with the "bandit king" logic, right?

Now it seems extremely important to avoid such a situation.

[Vekseid]

Actually, that's a good point. Maybe they don't have warheads. But that's a point for me I think.

I'm not sure what you're referring to, exactly. Until he tests a non-dud, he is capable of doing far more damage with his conventional and chemical stocks. That's why there has been no progression.

They've tested nuclear weapons - no one disputes that. If they haven't been able to make warheads out of them, then that only means that it's a few years out before they do have them. That doesn't affect my point; in fact it supports it since if they don't have warheads they still don't have the capability to throw nukes at Japan. They can still be stopped before that's possible.

They've tested a pair of duds, and there weren't any radioisotopes detected from the second - though that doesn't mean too much.

Ridiculous as it is, they've been doing that for more than a half-century so I don't why they'll be stalled now.

You seemed to be suggesting that they will somehow manage to develop a missile fleet of ten thousand or more.

Shooting down a tactical ballistic missile is completely different from shooting down an ICBM which flies at a far higher altitude and a far higher speed. Compare the Taepodong-2 to what Iraq threw at us.

And with yet more warning time. It is still a ballistic trajectory.

Right, well let's consider things ten years out. Say that he has a few dozen deliverable nuclear weapons and he is, like you say, a bandit king out for ransom.

In 2020, he throws a nuke at Nagoya to demonstrate he's capable of it, and announces that he has a second one to throw at Tokyo if anyone bothers to do anything about it. That is consistent with the "bandit king" logic, right?

Kim could detonate a nuke in Japanese territorial waters, killing no one, and it would not matter. Japan's treaty with the United States includes a guarantee that if Japan is struck with a nuclear weapon, America will respond in kind. The United States had to remind China of this sort of thing regarding its "Nuclear EMP" plan in one of its Taiwan reclamation strategies.

This, of course, is assuming that the missile defense systems in place are ineffective at that time, and that North Korea actually manages to get a working ballistics program and finish the development of a missile-deployable warhead. And even then, despite that, it is questionable whether or not your hypothetical situation puts more lives at risk than a war with South Korea now.

[Vekseid]

To add another point, North Korea couldn't build missiles as accurate as ours if we gave them the factories, the personnel and the raw materials to build them.

A non-prize for whoever guesses why, but it's really just an illustration - a lot goes into building a nuke, and a lot goes into building a long-range missile, and some of the things required are not immediately obvious.

[Phaia]

To add another point, North Korea couldn't build missiles as accurate as ours if we gave them the factories, the personnel and the raw materials to build them.

I really hate to disagree with you but this report is very telling!
Authored by http://www.securityaffairs.org/issues/2009/16/kueter.php
"The Journal of International Security Affairs"
Yes It would be considered a conservative think tank but then that term is badly used these days!

The following in red is quoted from their section on the growing threat of missiles world wide.
1]""The drawdown in missile arsenals by the U.S. and the Soviet Union/Russia may have reduced the total of ballistic missiles worldwide since the end of the Cold War, but the number of countries fielding some type of ballistic missile capability has increased substantially. Today, some 28 countries are estimated to be capable of fielding ballistic missiles of various varieties.[9] Part of this increase is attributable to the Soviet Union's fragmentation into many independent states, some of which (e.g., Belarus and Kazakhstan) maintained the arsenals stationed on their territories during Soviet times. Yet, many countries, particularly in the Middle East, are also acquiring longer-range and more powerful missiles through indigenous development or purchase from China, Russia, and North Korea.""
So even if you think that North Korea's missile technology is poor other countries do not and in fact a large amount of North Korea's cash inflow comes from selling missiles.

2]""North Korea not only poses a threat to U.S. interests and allies in East Asia, such as Japan and South Korea, but to the continental U.S. itself. Its role as a key cog in the international marketplace for missile technology lends it additional importance. On July 4, 2006, North Korea tested the Taepo Dong 2, with the capability of hitting the west coast of the U.S. (3,500-5,500-kilometer range).[19] Despite the missile's failure 40 seconds after launch, U.S. officials say, “North Korea’s engineers probably learned enough to make modifications, not only to its long-range ballistic missiles, but also to its shorter-range systems.” As of this writing, North Korea reportedly is preparing for another round of missile tests. ""
Even failure teaches you something so assuming they do not have the capability is honestly not very smart!

3]""North Korea possesses an increasingly capable arsenal of SRBMs and MRBMs in addition to its Taepo Dong 2 program. Its short-range ballistic missiles are variants on the basic SCUD design. It purchased approximately 100 Hwasong 5 (300-kilometer range) road-mobile SCUD-B missiles and indigenously produced around 100 Hwasong 6 and 7 (500- and 700-kilometer ranges, respectively) missiles.[21] The Hwasong 6 and 7s give Pyongyang the ability to “bombard all targets in South Korea critical to a Communist invasion.”"

""North Korea’s operational medium-range No Dong (1,300-kilometer range) missiles are single-stage, liquid-fueled missiles derived from SCUD technology. No Dong research and development in the 1980s produced the Taepo Dong programs. The Taepo Dong 1 is a medium-range missile (1,500-2,000-kilometer range) carrying a 1,000-1,500-kilogram warhead to target. Pyongyang tested the Taepo Dong 1 over the Sea of Japan on August 31, 1998, generating a political firestorm in Japan and the U.S.[23] In total, North Korea is estimated to have deployed at least 750 ballistic missiles, including between 600-800 SCUDs, 150-2,000 No Dongs, and 10-20 Taepo Dong 1s.[24]""

If you read closely the estimates range from at least 750 to close to 3000 missiles! To just with a wave of the hand dismiss North Korea's missile threat and blandly state they couldn't build them even if we gave them the factories actually flies in the face of the data!

A non-prize for whoever guesses why, but it's really just an illustration - a lot goes into building a nuke, and a lot goes into building a long-range missile, and some of the things required are not immediately obvious.

http://www.cdi.org/nuclear/nk-fact-sheet.cfm
This group is a bit more liberal leaning and the report is from 2003 and in there they have some very serious data.

quoting from their report!

''"On Oct. 16, 2002, the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush disclosed that North Korea had admitted to having a program to enrich uranium for use in nuclear weapons. ""
...
""North Korea began nuclear research in 1964, when Kim Il Sung, the father of the current leader, Kim Jong Il, ordered construction of an atomic energy research complex in Yongbyon, 60 miles north of Pyongyang. In the 1970s, North Korea modernized the facility and began work on a second reactor nearby""
...
""In 1989, North Korea shut down its working reactor for two months — probably to remove the nuclear fuel rods, from which plutonium is reprocessed. 10   U.S. intelligence reports generally estimate that North Korea extracted 12-14 kilograms of plutonium from the rods, enough for one or two nuclear weapons. Japanese and South Korean intelligence estimates claim North Korea may have extracted more plutonium during reactor slowdowns in 1990 and 1991, giving the country up to 24 kilograms of plutonium""
...
""In 1994, the administration of President Bill Clinton had begun preparations for military action against North Korea when former President Jimmy Carter traveled to North Korea in June and extracted a promise from Kim Jong Il to freeze nuclear production. 1   The Agreed Framework was signed on Oct. 21, 1994""
...
""The Yongbyon facility today houses 3,000 scientists and researchers, many of whom studied nuclear technology in the Soviet Union, China and Pakistan. The military runs the nuclear weapons program along with the intelligence service — under the direct supervision of President Kim Jong-Il."'
...

This sounds like a country intent on gaining nuclear weapons and to dismiss their ability is honestly like burying your head in the sand!\

Read the reports and also other data out there! even the 'lying' news agency have reported on North Korea's nuclear testing.


Phaia

[Vekseid]

No one is saying that their missiles aren't a threat. Rather the opposite, I am saying that their missiles are more of a threat now - especially to South Korea - than people like Asuras are giving them credit for, and those missiles, many of them loaded with chemicals, would make life miserable for millions of South Koreans in the event of an invasion.

However, it's far for feasible for the South to acquire several thousand ABM batteries over the next decade than it is for the North to be able to multiply its stock by a factor of ten to a hundred.

[mystictiger]

And what about artillery shells with NBC warheads?

Seoul is -already- in range. No patriot missile will be able to stop those.

[Vekseid]

Right now shooting down artillery is somewhat fanciful as an idea (especially the self-guided munitions I did work on in a former life) - but it's still a ballistics problem. Something goes up, intercepting it is a matter of spotting it and calculating the trajectory fast enough.

And as I mentioned - that stuff is exactly why the South does not just roll into North Korea. They have chemical weapons, and tens of thousands of artillery bunkers aimed at South Korean cities all along the border. It would take a lot of very obvious buildup to counter that.

[BCdan]

Not to mention the possibility of nuclear weapons.  North Korea knows that it would lose a war, so it compensates by making any war far too costly to declare and by introducing a lot of unstable elements into the equation. 

[Neroon]

According to what I could dredge up from various sources, I've found out the following.

North Korea has two possible nukes.  Possible in terms of them being untested but they do have the material and possibly the know-how to muster that much.  Even if the things don't detonate, the result of a conventional explosion scattering that much weapons grade uranium over a wide area is something I don't wish to contemplate.  And then that leaves out the possibility of chemical and biological weapons.

Their missiles are low-tech in comparison to the missiles the West can field, being similar in sophistication to the V1 missiles devised by von Braun in the forties.  Given the problems these caused in Britain, I would not cite their lack of sophistication as being cause for disregarding them.  Indeed, that lack of sophistication is an issue, as the things are not as predictable in their trajectories as more advanced missiles; their guidance systems are too prone to malfunction.  So the missile defence systems that were quietly installed in neighbouring countries last Winter may be hard pressed to deal with them.  Or they may find the North Korean missiles ridiculously easy to shoot out of the sky.  The trouble is, we won't know unless push comes to shove.

Lastly, it is debatable how much of this is actually down to Kim Jong-Il's policy anyway.  I'm not sure how potent a leader a 68 (or 69, if you trust the Russian records) year old suffering from diabetes, the effects of at least two strokes and pancreatic cancer can be.  My guess is that the situation in North Korea is that the various possible successors are all jockeying to gain an advantage over the others in the current power vacuum while they all wait for when Kim finally pops his clogs.  Consequently, North Korean foreign policy depends on which of the five possible successors (three sons, one son-in-law and a general) has the ascendancy. The result of this is that what the N Koreans will do is unpredictable and, given the testosterone fuelled nature of this power-struggle, the only thing we can be sure of is that whatever the response, it will be bellicose.  If any of them even looks to be weak (i.e. likely to back down to international pressure) they're out of the running and the personal consequences of that would probably be fatal.

All in all it's a damn nasty situation.