If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC)   Best Korea: It is ON. United Nations: No, no it's not "on." It's never been "on." It's off   (abcnews.go.com) divider line 243
    More: Obvious, Korean War, Rodong Sinmun, United Nations General Assembly, U.N. Security Council, North Korea  
•       •       •

23290 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Mar 2013 at 4:28 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



243 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-03-11 04:05:33 PM
The U.N. can say it's still valid, but that doesn't mean anything if Best Korea decides to ignore it.
 
2013-03-11 04:10:09 PM
Put up or shut up, tubby
 
2013-03-11 04:11:32 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby


You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.
 
2013-03-11 04:15:33 PM

EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.


They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet
 
2013-03-11 04:16:47 PM
"The terms of the armistice agreement do not allow either side unilaterally to free themselves from it," said Nesirky, the spokesman for U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

Well, that's a nice sentiment and all.  But if Best Korea starts taking military actions against Lesser Korea, I think it's a rather moot point.
 
2013-03-11 04:24:28 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet


I agree; the south would tear through the Norks like chilli through an old folks home.
 
2013-03-11 04:25:15 PM
i2.cdn.turner.com

Seoul brothers
 
2013-03-11 04:28:00 PM

mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers


I like the one where the girl in back is looking at Rodman like "the hell is THAT?"
 
2013-03-11 04:32:33 PM

mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers


I didn't realize Best Korea allowed bulls as service animals.
 
2013-03-11 04:33:28 PM

EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.


Some people say cucumbers taste better pickled.
 
2013-03-11 04:33:29 PM

Diogenes: "The terms of the armistice agreement do not allow either side unilaterally to free themselves from it," said Nesirky, the spokesman for U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

Well, that's a nice sentiment and all.  But if Best Korea starts taking military actions against Lesser Korea, I think it's a rather moot point.


timujin: The U.N. can say it's still valid, but that doesn't mean anything if Best Korea decides to ignore it.



I think it means something on legal grounds. As in, if one side unilaterally decides to walk away from the agreement, there are more international law ramifications. This most likely isn't going to end up with war, but it could definitely end up with NK having more sanctions and other bad shiat happen to them because they've decided to walk away from a peace agreement that has been in place for 60 years.

In other words, even if NK doesn't start a war, they've still made things even worse for themselves with this stunt.
 
2013-03-11 04:33:52 PM
It's smart to have the UN respond like this, not the US.  North Korea contends they are at war with the US alone, when in fact they are at war with the United Nations as represented by the UN Command.
 
2013-03-11 04:34:12 PM
Be nice if we could just say, "Fair enough" and have the B-2s pay their nuclear facilities a visit.  China would probably thank us at this rate.
 
2013-03-11 04:35:32 PM
Honestly, North Korea doesn't have the electricity to tell if it's on or off.
 
2013-03-11 04:35:55 PM

mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers


What the fark IS that?
A beer with  a pacifier nipple on it?
 
2013-03-11 04:36:10 PM

iheartscotch: MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet

I agree; the south would tear through the Norks like chilli through an old folks home.


Thank you General MacArthur.
 
2013-03-11 04:36:19 PM
Stop trying to make ON happen!

data.whicdn.com
 
2013-03-11 04:36:42 PM
I still say that they're doing all of this posturing to secure Kim Jong Un's legitmacy so maybe he can initiate the reconciliation process without being overthrown.

Or, maybe that's more what I hope, because I question his tactics at the moment.
 
2013-03-11 04:37:14 PM
Is this the note-writing, ineffectual UN or the black-helicopter, gun-taking-away strong arm UN?
 
2013-03-11 04:37:23 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Be nice if we could just say, "Fair enough" and have the B-2s pay their nuclear facilities a visit.  China would probably thank us at this rate.


China might beat us to the punch.  They could certainly assert themselves as a world power that can "fix" something America hasn't been able too.
 
2013-03-11 04:38:29 PM

vudukungfu: mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers

What the fark IS that?
A beer with  a pacifier nipple on it?


Looks like the lid of a candy dish to me, only smaller. So it's a beer lid, I guess.
 
2013-03-11 04:38:54 PM

kumanoki: Stop trying to make ON happen!

[data.whicdn.com image 240x200]


I read that as "felch" at first glance
 
2013-03-11 04:39:52 PM

meat0918: Shrugging Atlas: Be nice if we could just say, "Fair enough" and have the B-2s pay their nuclear facilities a visit.  China would probably thank us at this rate.

China might beat us to the punch.  They could certainly assert themselves as a world power that can "fix" something America hasn't been able too.


Turn off their fuel pipeline.  It's a literal pipeline.  And it's had "technical problems" in the past when the Chinese were sufficiently teed off.
 
2013-03-11 04:39:52 PM

vudukungfu: mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers

What the fark IS that?
A beer with  a pacifier nipple on it?


It's a glass of tea, with a cover on it to keep it warm. Either that, or Li'l Kim is pulling a Howard Hughes and saving all of his urine.
 
2013-03-11 04:40:20 PM

shower_in_my_socks: In other words, even if NK doesn't start a war, they've still made things even worse for themselves with this stunt.



So what now, they are no longer allowed to cook their dirt?
 
2013-03-11 04:40:22 PM
Is it just my imagination, or is Kim Jong-un looking more and more like Trff Bmzklfrpz with every passing day?
 
2013-03-11 04:40:58 PM
grapplersplanet.com
 
2013-03-11 04:41:11 PM

Shrugging Atlas: China would probably thank us at this rate.


Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border. I think they'd be pretty pissed if we whistled up the B-2s. But of course, sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.
 
2013-03-11 04:41:17 PM
I know it was foolish of me, but I was really hopeful kim jong un would do more than the constant retarded sabre rattling his father was known for.
 
2013-03-11 04:42:37 PM

meat0918: Shrugging Atlas: Be nice if we could just say, "Fair enough" and have the B-2s pay their nuclear facilities a visit.  China would probably thank us at this rate.

China might beat us to the punch.  They could certainly assert themselves as a world power that can "fix" something America hasn't been able too.


I have always wondered why China tolerates DPRK foolishness on it's landmass.
 
2013-03-11 04:42:39 PM
cutting that there phone line should be a red flag

haha
 
2013-03-11 04:42:53 PM

WhoopAssWayne: sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.


QFT.
 
2013-03-11 04:43:56 PM

kumanoki: I have always wondered why China tolerates DPRK foolishness on it's landmass.


Buffer against South Korean cultural imperialism.
 
2013-03-11 04:44:36 PM
You know you're low when even the UN can pull an "Oh, Snap!" moment on you.
 
2013-03-11 04:44:38 PM

WhoopAssWayne: Shrugging Atlas: China would probably thank us at this rate.

Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border. I think they'd be pretty pissed if we whistled up the B-2s. But of course, sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.


That's why the three countries (the US, China and SKorea) need to come up with a post-fall plan NOW.  We should explain that we will give them all needed aid for such a thing.

Japan could be required to give billions of aid as well to help.  Call it war reparations or something.

I know it's unrealistic.  But leaving the NKorean citizens with what they have now is cruel.
 
2013-03-11 04:44:39 PM

kumanoki: meat0918: Shrugging Atlas: Be nice if we could just say, "Fair enough" and have the B-2s pay their nuclear facilities a visit.  China would probably thank us at this rate.

China might beat us to the punch.  They could certainly assert themselves as a world power that can "fix" something America hasn't been able too.

I have always wondered why China tolerates DPRK foolishness on it's landmass.


Well, there's the potential for a pretty severe refugee problem.
 
2013-03-11 04:45:13 PM

Glancing Blow: iheartscotch: MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet

I agree; the south would tear through the Norks like chilli through an old folks home.

Thank you General MacArthur.


Hey; they did! Until the Chinese got involved, that is.

This time; it looks like they might step aside this time.

/ still think Truman was an idiot to relieve him. I also think that Patton was right to think that we'd fight the Russians next.
 
2013-03-11 04:46:53 PM

Dr. Goldshnoz: I know it was foolish of me, but I was really hopeful kim jong un would do more than the constant retarded sabre rattling his father was known for.


Think of 26 year old you and how you would likely answer the following question:

Would you like to carefully push through a period of graduated liberal reforms with careful negotiation with the various security services, generals and other power bases within your government......or would you like to be a god king.

At a minimum you're going to try the god king thing to see if it works out to give yourself the option of going back to the graduated liberal reforms later.
 
2013-03-11 04:47:42 PM
Dennis Rodman that peace lasted 60 farking years til your dunbass showed up. What the hell is wrong with you?

I say shoot Rodman first.before he travels and farks things up in Teheran too.
 
2013-03-11 04:48:07 PM

MyKingdomForYourHorse: [grapplersplanet.com image 464x600]


*wipes away a patriotic tear*

it's quite possibly the most beautiful thing i've ever seen...
 
2013-03-11 04:48:12 PM
As the only fat person in North Korea he's not going to be hard to find.
 
2013-03-11 04:48:22 PM

mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers


who's the other black dude ? there can't be that many in best korea can there?
 
2013-03-11 04:49:22 PM

Dr. Goldshnoz: WhoopAssWayne: sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.

QFT.



You can always spot the pro-life Christians.
 
2013-03-11 04:49:25 PM
How many divisions does the UN have?
 
2013-03-11 04:50:07 PM

WhoopAssWayne: Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border. I think they'd be pretty pissed if we whistled up the B-2s. But of course, sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.


Not that any of this is that simple or that I was seriously advocating the idea or China actually thanking us for the deed, but I don't think a few strikes on out of the way facilities are going to start a refugee crisis.  Hell, Best Korea might not even release that information on state run media and if they did I strongly doubt they would allow their cannon fodder citizens to run away to China.
 
2013-03-11 04:50:29 PM

JohnAnnArbor: That's why the three countries (the US, China and SKorea) need to come up with a post-fall plan NOW.


Agreed. If one has already been drawn up, I'd love to know just what their thinking is on how to handle it. It just seems like an humanitarian crises would be unavoidable, though that really might be what it takes to break the cycle there. The major risk, of course, is that the situation could spiral into another world war which I believe explains the reluctance to get involved much at all.
 
2013-03-11 04:51:00 PM

inner ted: mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers

who's the other black dude ? there can't be that many in best korea can there?


He's a decoy.
 
2013-03-11 04:51:11 PM

Dr. Goldshnoz: I know it was foolish of me, but I was really hopeful kim jong un would do more than the constant retarded sabre rattling his father was known for.


Just shows he's even more insecure in his position than was his daddy.  That he has to show 'strength' so frequently suggests he's having trouble keeping the generals in line.

Could be that one of his generals has a Kim Jong-un look-a-like stowed away somewhere, waiting to disappear him in favor of a malleable figurehead. A siwtcheroo like that couldn't fly in most nations, but Best Korea isn't most nations.
 
2013-03-11 04:51:13 PM
Diogenes: "Well, that's a nice sentiment and all.  But if Best Korea starts taking military actions against Lesser Korea, I think it's a rather moot point."

Indeed. And it's not like they're going to be brought up on *those* charges if they're actually captured.
The whole leadership structure is on the hook for the massive, and far more horrible and serious, human rights abuses.
 
2013-03-11 04:51:25 PM
I say we send Obama and Dennis Rodman, Beyonce and Bill Maher over to settle this.
 
2013-03-11 04:51:35 PM

mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers


Pyongyang Train! The hippest trip in East Asia. 60 nonstop years across the tracks of your mind, into the exciting world of ... uh ... Pyongyang.
 
2013-03-11 04:51:46 PM
"You only have to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down."
 
2013-03-11 04:51:54 PM

mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers


And I thought Rodman would be the only black person in north korea.  hell, there's another one two rows back.
 
2013-03-11 04:52:04 PM

kumanoki: meat0918: Shrugging Atlas: Be nice if we could just say, "Fair enough" and have the B-2s pay their nuclear facilities a visit.  China would probably thank us at this rate.

China might beat us to the punch.  They could certainly assert themselves as a world power that can "fix" something America hasn't been able too.

I have always wondered why China tolerates DPRK foolishness on it's landmass.


I think they're very close to not tolerating it any more.  They've been publicly distancing themselves from NK for some time now.
 
2013-03-11 04:52:42 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-11 04:53:25 PM

JohnAnnArbor: WhoopAssWayne: Shrugging Atlas: China would probably thank us at this rate.

Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border. I think they'd be pretty pissed if we whistled up the B-2s. But of course, sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.

That's why the three countries (the US, China and SKorea) need to come up with a post-fall plan NOW.  We should explain that we will give them all needed aid for such a thing.

Japan could be required to give billions of aid as well to help.  Call it war reparations or something.

I know it's unrealistic.  But leaving the NKorean citizens with what they have now is cruel.


Rifles and plane tickets are readily available. Go and free em or shut up.
 
2013-03-11 04:53:39 PM
www.techtradeoutlet.com
 
2013-03-11 04:54:39 PM

Shrugging Atlas: but I don't think a few strikes on out of the way facilities are going to start a refugee crisis.


Right - I was thinking more in terms of it escalating into that situation. Definitely a lot of things could short-circuit a refugee crisis or another war, but I think the risk is there given how unstable they are.
 
2013-03-11 04:54:42 PM

God's Hubris: Dr. Goldshnoz: WhoopAssWayne: sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.

QFT.


You can always spot the pro-life Christians.


actually im for abortions and do not subscribe to organized cult.

it's not too late for your mother to abort you, you know.
 
2013-03-11 04:54:57 PM
I just want to know who is beating this war drum?
 
2013-03-11 04:55:33 PM

timujin: The U.N. can say it's still valid, but that doesn't mean anything if Best Korea decides to ignore it.


No the UN made it perfectly OK to blow them to hell for firing the first shot and violating the agreement
 
2013-03-11 04:55:39 PM

Shrugging Atlas: WhoopAssWayne: Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border. I think they'd be pretty pissed if we whistled up the B-2s. But of course, sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.

Not that any of this is that simple or that I was seriously advocating the idea or China actually thanking us for the deed, but I don't think a few strikes on out of the way facilities are going to start a refugee crisis.  Hell, Best Korea might not even release that information on state run media and if they did I strongly doubt they would allow their cannon fodder citizens to run away to China.


No, but it'd give them enough of a moral ground for going bugfark and blowing shiat up that half the countries in the world that would stomp on them if they started it would stand back and argue for awhile first. Nobody wants to see that avalanche of shiat fall again, so he stomps his little feet and the rest of the grownups ignore his pudgy little ass. If he does fark with SK then everybody except China doesn't care who shoots him in the face. China might even join in just to get their hands on natural resources in the area.

I speak on the subject backed by ironclad speculations and personal conjecture.
 
2013-03-11 04:55:58 PM

timujin: The U.N. can say it's still valid, but that doesn't mean anything if Best Korea decides to ignore it.


It means the international media are going to blame South Korea for any attacks North Korea launches.

/in short, Worst Korea is going to be treated like Israel
//we should just let them all nuke each other, that'd teach them (that both the UN and US can't be trusted to keep any promises at all)
 
2013-03-11 04:57:20 PM
You have to wonder if China is saying to itself "We really should kill this guy and put our own guy in there".

The Chinese are evil, but they aren't stupid, and they don't like being associated with stupid.
 
2013-03-11 04:57:21 PM
Hmmm... that's not what the UN said in 1967 when Egypt unilaterally kicked their blocking force out of Sinai.
 
2013-03-11 04:57:33 PM

Evil Mackerel: inner ted: mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers

who's the other black dude ? there can't be that many in best korea can there?

He's a decoy.


A decoy? But they don't even loo...

...

i47.tinypic.com
 
2013-03-11 04:58:00 PM

JusticeandIndependence: I just want to know who is beating this war drum?


North Korea. Haven't you been paying attention?
 
2013-03-11 04:58:06 PM

meat0918: Shrugging Atlas: Be nice if we could just say, "Fair enough" and have the B-2s pay their nuclear facilities a visit.  China would probably thank us at this rate.

China might beat us to the punch.  They could certainly assert themselves as a world power that can "fix" something America hasn't been able too.


I'd be fine with it, let them deal with Best Korea.
 
2013-03-11 04:58:54 PM

iheartscotch: MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet

I agree; the south would tear through the Norks like chilli through an old folks home.


Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.
 
2013-03-11 04:59:06 PM

Tatterdemalian: timujin: The U.N. can say it's still valid, but that doesn't mean anything if Best Korea decides to ignore it.

It means the international media are going to blame South Korea for any attacks North Korea launches.

/in short, Worst Korea is going to be treated like Israel
//we should just let them all nuke each other, that'd teach them (that both the UN and US can't be trusted to keep any promises at all)


I'm not sure at all how you came to that conclusion.
 
2013-03-11 04:59:07 PM
I don't really think the UN saying that the Armistice is still valid is going to really stop North Korea from doing a damn thing.  Though, honestly, unless North Korea can build a nuclear missile powered by rocks, they aren't a big threat to the U.S.
 
2013-03-11 04:59:53 PM

realmolo: You have to wonder if China is saying to itself "We really should kill this guy and put our own guy in there".

The Chinese are evil, but they aren't stupid, and they don't like being associated with stupid.


Dunno - they can be slooooow to learn. I mean, seriously, no joke, in 1980, they decided that runners weren't cutting it in their war against Vietnam, and that they should probably look into this "radio" thing everyone keeps talking about.

/Even CHINA lost to Vietnam
 
2013-03-11 05:00:07 PM

vudukungfu: mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers

What the fark IS that?
A beer with  a pacifier nipple on it?


And what's up with the Mexican in the background??
 
2013-03-11 05:00:35 PM
too_amuzed

Allow me to introduce this concept called "Entourage"......
 
2013-03-11 05:01:00 PM

Dr. Goldshnoz: You can always spot the pro-life Christians.


Yeah, I think he was talking about me :-) The last bit of my Weeners was admittedly crass / poorly expressed.
 
2013-03-11 05:01:18 PM

vygramul: realmolo: You have to wonder if China is saying to itself "We really should kill this guy and put our own guy in there".

The Chinese are evil, but they aren't stupid, and they don't like being associated with stupid.

Dunno - they can be slooooow to learn. I mean, seriously, no joke, in 1980, they decided that runners weren't cutting it in their war against Vietnam, and that they should probably look into this "radio" thing everyone keeps talking about.

/Even CHINA lost to Vietnam


Vietnam - The war no one won.
 
2013-03-11 05:01:26 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet


I have a southern Korean friend in South Korea she didn't even know about it until recently.
 
2013-03-11 05:01:43 PM

vygramul: Hmmm... that's not what the UN said in 1967 when Egypt unilaterally kicked their blocking force out of Sinai.


Yeah, but Jews.  Changes everything.

/sarcasm
 
2013-03-11 05:01:55 PM

Why does China tolerate it?


NK is a buffer between itself and the US sphere of influence, and hundreds of thousands of Chinese died during the Korean War to push the UN/US troops back to the 38th parallel.

 
2013-03-11 05:01:59 PM
Weeners - LOL!
 
2013-03-11 05:02:50 PM

Dr. Goldshnoz: God's Hubris: Dr. Goldshnoz: WhoopAssWayne: sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.

QFT.


You can always spot the pro-life Christians.

actually im for abortions and do not subscribe to organized cult.

it's not too late for your mother to abort you, you know.



I think, if they're posting on FARK, then it probably is too late for that.

Life isn't like South Park, after all.
 
2013-03-11 05:03:46 PM

Yamaneko2: Why does China tolerate it?
NK is a buffer between itself and the US sphere of influence, and hundreds of thousands of Chinese died during the Korean War to push the UN/US troops back to the 38th parallel.


Because China doesn't want the million war refugees from a starved North Korea.
 
2013-03-11 05:03:53 PM

mithras_angel: probably


Then there's a chance?
 
2013-03-11 05:04:48 PM

JohnAnnArbor: WhoopAssWayne: Shrugging Atlas: China would probably thank us at this rate.

Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border. I think they'd be pretty pissed if we whistled up the B-2s. But of course, sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.

That's why the three countries (the US, China and SKorea) need to come up with a post-fall plan NOW.  We should explain that we will give them all needed aid for such a thing.

Japan could be required to give billions of aid as well to help.  Call it war reparations or something.

I know it's unrealistic.  But leaving the NKorean citizens with what they have now is cruel.


The US, China, South Korea, and Japan will plan for a regime change in NK, today's announcement just means they can do it all under the UN banner so none of those countries can be seen as empire building.
 
2013-03-11 05:04:56 PM
Can we just fly over the Royal Palace and drop a little gift wrapped box that contains a note which reads "This could have been a very large bomb"?
 
2013-03-11 05:06:33 PM

iheartscotch: MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet

I agree; the south would tear through the Norks like chilli through an old folks home.


Pretty much.  I was talking about this over Facebook with my brother the other day, and this was his take on it:

"Here's the thing with Best Korea: They do not know how to get their way in the international scene by any other means than saber rattling. They're like a small, petulant child who only throws tantrums, and the international community, like parents who are frustrated and tired, simply give in after a while because they don't want the screaming to keep happening in public.

"If they do go nutso and ACTUALLY try something, however, the result will probably be initially quite bad but over very fast. Seoul will get pounded, and there will be a lot of casualties there. Which is horrible. But after taking a bloody nose from the DPRK, the South Korea/US alliance will pound their military into a fine powder. Currently we have two aircraft carrier battle groups within strike range, plus two divisions of ground troops and two wings of land-based aircraft. The technology level of DPRK is ancient compared to this, I mean hell, they're still flying MiG-17s, which are Korean War-era aircraft. Grand total they have around 110 operational aircraft out of a claimed 1,500. A single squadron of F/A-18s and a couple Arliegh Burke-class cruisers would be enough to deal with that.

"And don't worry about China in all this. China knows if a war starts, they're going to be dealing with MILLIONS of Korean refugees, a humanitarian disaster on a scale they've never had. They are getting really frustrated with the little pipsqueak they said they'd defend, and just recently voted FOR the UN sanctions in the security council. If a war does happen, you'll see China make a wall of soldiers just behind the Yalu River, and that will be the anvil against which the US/South Korea hammer strikes."
 
2013-03-11 05:07:33 PM

KangTheMad: iheartscotch: MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet

I agree; the south would tear through the Norks like chilli through an old folks home.

Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.



Or you have Puff the Magic Dragon clear the way.
 
2013-03-11 05:08:25 PM
Martin Nesirky said the 60-year-old armistice agreement had been adopted by the U.N. General Assembly and neither North Korea nor South Korea could dissolve it unilaterally.

Bullsh*t.

It just takes one word: FIRE!
 
2013-03-11 05:08:56 PM
I'm willing to bet that there's a SSGN or two sitting off of the coast of Best Korea as we speak with everything already targeted at their radar and such just waiting for Best Korea to start pulling the strings on their artillery.

/to soon be followed up by a gaggle of conventional bombers headed towards the DMZ
 
2013-03-11 05:09:53 PM

kumanoki: I have always wondered why China tolerates DPRK foolishness on it's landmass.



Balance.  Because of the threat the DPRK poses the US maintains an enhanced military presence in the region.  China believes that the presence of American forces in the region helps to stabilize what would otherwise be a cauldron of intense and bitter rivalries with historical and ethnic overtones.  A large US presence reassures China's neighbors to some extent (that American forces would intervene if they are attacked).  What China doesn't want to see is a major rearmament of it's neighbors.  Replacing a distant and relatively disinterested political entity with heavily armed regional rivals isn't a desirable exchange.
 
2013-03-11 05:10:59 PM
We should set NK up with Twinkie making equipment. If that was their national product we could help them to help themselves. That could probably sustain their nation without their fatass in charge.
 
2013-03-11 05:11:43 PM

vygramul: JusticeandIndependence: I just want to know who is beating this war drum?

North Korea. Haven't you been paying attention?


False. This current spate of tensions was started by a new round of economic sanctions.
 
2013-03-11 05:14:33 PM

Eagles409: [www.techtradeoutlet.com image 376x480]


25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-03-11 05:15:02 PM

KangTheMad: iheartscotch: MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet

I agree; the south would tear through the Norks like chilli through an old folks home.

Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.


Does south not have a navy?

Either way; I know the south has a decent sized Air Force. I imagine taking out all the north's artillery wouldn't take too long for them. Plus, they have us. Once the artillery is gone, we could take out their nuclear facilities with limited effort.

/ The south wouldn't really need to go through the DMZ until then.
 
2013-03-11 05:17:28 PM

Ned Stark: False. This current spate of tensions was started by a new round of economic sanctions.


False. This current spate of tensions was started by Best Korea testing a nuclear weapon.

/we can ping pong this all day if we wanted to but eventually it will boil down to when North Korea invaded South Korea in 1950.
 
2013-03-11 05:18:53 PM

Lachwen: I mean hell, they're still flying MiG-17s, which are Korean War-era aircraft.


They've got a few dozen MiG 29's as well as some older MiGs. I'm not saying South Korea won't get their hair mussed but I do say no more than one to two thousand killed, tops, depending on the breaks.
 
2013-03-11 05:19:55 PM

Ned Stark: vygramul: JusticeandIndependence: I just want to know who is beating this war drum?

North Korea. Haven't you been paying attention?

False. This current spate of tensions was started by a new round of economic sanctions.


What's the other option, look the other way and let them have their nuclear program, knowing full well they want to take their tiny nuclear dick and attempt to fark the west with it?
 
2013-03-11 05:20:45 PM

Radioactive Ass: Ned Stark: False. This current spate of tensions was started by a new round of economic sanctions.

False. This current spate of tensions was started by Best Korea testing a nuclear weapon.

/we can ping pong this all day if we wanted to but eventually it will boil down to when North Korea invaded South Korea in 1950.


Nope that's the end. North Korea is not party to the NNPT. Attempts to forcibly dismantle its nuclear program are unlawful.
 
2013-03-11 05:21:09 PM

iheartscotch: The south wouldn't really need to go through the DMZ until then.


The problem with a Maginot Line is that it tends to point in only one direction and that if the other guy knows it then it's easy to overcome with a little bit of ingenuity.
 
2013-03-11 05:21:48 PM

Dr. Goldshnoz: God's Hubris: Dr. Goldshnoz: WhoopAssWayne: sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.

QFT.


You can always spot the pro-life Christians.

actually im for abortions and do not subscribe to organized cult.

it's not too late for your mother to abort you, you know.


Lighten up, Francis. You think anyone does any actual research on whether you're a Christian before making snarky comments?
 
2013-03-11 05:21:57 PM
It's on like Donkey Kong.
It's on like Charles Bronson.
It's on like the movie Tron.
It's on like Michelle Kwan.
 
2013-03-11 05:22:28 PM
It's not just a refugee crisis that South Korea is really worried about, it's the NK's 5000 hardened artillery positions within firing range of Seoul.  If NK gets hit bombed by the west, even a little, even just the nuke sites, the north will probably start firing shells at Seoul.

How long would it take us to disable Five Thousand long-range artillery pieces, each embedded in its own hardened concrete bunker?  Not hours, days would be the best case, a week would be most accurate.  Getting through hardened concrete takes a direct hit from a large, directed munition.  Drones might help, repeated counter-battery might work, eventually, but one suspects most of the heavy lifting would be done by manned aircraft and laser guided 2,000 lb bombs.  5,000 is a lot of sorties.

Here's the big deal.  How many shots would the NK howitzers get off before being destroyed?  Modern artillery can fire a few rounds a minute, but lets say that each of the 5000 fire just 1 round per minute and are - on average, destroyed after just one hour of firing.

Using that artificially low rate of fire and terribly optimistic rate of destroying their guns, it would still result in 300,000 high explosive and incendiary shells hitting Seoul in the first hour of fighting.   After the first hour of fighting, Seoul would look like Dresden.  If the war came on fast, in response to say, a surprise attack by the west, a good proportion of Seoul's 25 million population would see their last day on earth.

It's not Best Korea's nukes that have everyone in the South worried, it's their half-century old gun tech.  Which unless we have some new technology hidden away that is able to instantly disable 5000 howitzers, the chances of a preemptive strike against the north's nukes is about as close to 0% as it gets.
 
2013-03-11 05:23:49 PM

Eagles409:


OK. Threads over. Everyone go home.
 
2013-03-11 05:24:34 PM

SploogeTime: I say we send Obama and Dennis Rodman, Beyonce and Bill Maher over to settle this.


Why not send our master negotiators? Like John Boehner and Mitch McConnel?
 
2013-03-11 05:24:52 PM
4.bp.blogspot.com

Looks like it's on to me.  You can even see their lightbulb from space.
 
2013-03-11 05:25:17 PM

Ned Stark: Nope that's the end. North Korea is not party to the NNPT. Attempts to forcibly dismantle its nuclear program are unlawful.


Nobody is making them dismantle anything. They are simply deciding to not do trade with them while they do have a program. It's not unlawful to not sell someone something. Here look. I'm not going to sell you this beer, sue me.

Best Korea made itself an international pariah and has to deal with the consequences of doing so.
 
2013-03-11 05:27:54 PM

Ned Stark: vygramul: JusticeandIndependence: I just want to know who is beating this war drum?

North Korea. Haven't you been paying attention?

False. This current spate of tensions was started by a new round of economic sanctions.


And the economic sanctions just came out of the blue, did they?
 
2013-03-11 05:28:47 PM

KangTheMad: iheartscotch: MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet

I agree; the south would tear through the Norks like chilli through an old folks home.

Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.


That's assuming NK does any sort of ground offensive. They've been much more excited about their nuclear capabilities so it's entirely possible they'd lob missiles all over the place and dare UN forces to stomp all their poor widdle civilians conveniently living next to launch sites a la Hamas.
 
2013-03-11 05:29:45 PM

JK47: China believes that the presence of American forces in the region helps to stabilize what would otherwise be a cauldron of intense and bitter rivalries with historical and ethnic overtones.


I would think China would want us out of there, no?  It would be like inviting a bunch of Soviet troops to hang around in Mexico to keep the cartels under control.

Seems like it would be easy for the US to negotiate an exit from the Korean peninsula with China, as part of an overall plan to reunify the Koreas after deposing Kim.  If it weren't for the requirement to enforce the 1952 ceasefire agreement, we wouldn't need to be there.
 
2013-03-11 05:30:58 PM

Radioactive Ass: iheartscotch: The south wouldn't really need to go through the DMZ until then.

The problem with a Maginot Line is that it tends to point in only one direction and that if the other guy knows it then it's easy to overcome with a little bit of ingenuity.


Agreed; but, the Norks have been trying to get over, under, around or through the DMZ for 50 years. They've gotten close before; but, they don't count on the superior not-starvingness of the south's soldiers.

/ my old boss was stationed in the south during the late 70's. he had plenty of stories about the north's soldiers trying to sneak south.
 
2013-03-11 05:31:38 PM

RandomRandom: It's not just a refugee crisis that South Korea is really worried about, it's the NK's 5000 hardened artillery positions within firing range of Seoul.  If NK gets hit bombed by the west, even a little, even just the nuke sites, the north will probably start firing shells at Seoul.

How long would it take us to disable Five Thousand long-range artillery pieces, each embedded in its own hardened concrete bunker?  Not hours, days would be the best case, a week would be most accurate.  Getting through hardened concrete takes a direct hit from a large, directed munition.  Drones might help, repeated counter-battery might work, eventually, but one suspects most of the heavy lifting would be done by manned aircraft and laser guided 2,000 lb bombs.  5,000 is a lot of sorties.

Here's the big deal.  How many shots would the NK howitzers get off before being destroyed?  Modern artillery can fire a few rounds a minute, but lets say that each of the 5000 fire just 1 round per minute and are - on average, destroyed after just one hour of firing.

Using that artificially low rate of fire and terribly optimistic rate of destroying their guns, it would still result in 300,000 high explosive and incendiary shells hitting Seoul in the first hour of fighting.   After the first hour of fighting, Seoul would look like Dresden.  If the war came on fast, in response to say, a surprise attack by the west, a good proportion of Seoul's 25 million population would see their last day on earth.

It's not Best Korea's nukes that have everyone in the South worried, it's their half-century old gun tech.  Which unless we have some new technology hidden away that is able to instantly disable 5000 howitzers, the chances of a preemptive strike against the north's nukes is about as close to 0% as it gets.


Might be a good reason to use ground-penetrating nuclear weapons.  One assumes they're in clusters, not totally isolated from one another, because of range considerations.

In a few years, we might be well on our way to a system to shoot the shells down with lasers.  (Really.)  That would change things quite a bit--if it could be proven to work reliably.
 
2013-03-11 05:31:45 PM

Ned Stark: Nope that's the end. North Korea is not party to the NNPT. Attempts to forcibly dismantle its nuclear program are unlawful.


That matters only so long as China is interested in propping up Best Korea.

The minute they get pissed off enough to not care anymore, we can bomb the fark out of unilaterally act in the planet's best interest.
 
2013-03-11 05:32:07 PM

Radioactive Ass: Ned Stark: Nope that's the end. North Korea is not party to the NNPT. Attempts to forcibly dismantle its nuclear program are unlawful.

Nobody is making them dismantle anything. They are simply deciding to not do trade with them while they do have a program. It's not unlawful to not sell someone something. Here look. I'm not going to sell you this beer, sue me.

Best Korea made itself an international pariah and has to deal with the consequences of doing so.


This is all going to fall apart once the Best Koreans ally with the Gungans and Kim Jong Un blows up the battle groups with a single well placed shot from his fighter craft.
 
2013-03-11 05:32:12 PM

EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.


Or are a US service man. As much as I despise North Korea can we not go to war for at least 10-20 years? Please? I'm tired of attending funerals of friends in the military.
 
2013-03-11 05:34:21 PM
The artillery of Best Korea will be completely nullified when the US purchases and installs 10-15 batteries of these around Seoul.
 
2013-03-11 05:34:49 PM

StaleCoffee: This is all going to fall apart once the Best Koreans ally with the Gungans and Kim Jong Un blows up the battle groups with a single well placed shot from his fighter craft.


Mesa no speksa Korea.
 
2013-03-11 05:36:37 PM

El_Frijole_Blanco: timujin: The U.N. can say it's still valid, but that doesn't mean anything if Best Korea decides to ignore it.

No the UN made it perfectly OK to blow them to hell for firing the first shot and violating the agreement


I'm fairly sure that at this point if they fired the first shot no one would say "boo" if they got blown to hell.
 
2013-03-11 05:39:46 PM

Dr. Goldshnoz: I know it was foolish of me, but I was really hopeful kim jong un would do more than the constant retarded sabre rattling his father was known for.


I am actually beginning to wonder whether that kid is "running" anything at all. We may be looking at the Asian equivalent of a typical Latin American junta, where the "leader" is a puppet, and the military is actually running the whole show.
When your first act in power is to arrange a visit from Dennis Rodman, it kind of tarnishes your supervillian cred, in my eyes.
 
2013-03-11 05:40:30 PM

nickerj1: The artillery of Best Korea will be completely nullified when the US purchases and installs 10-15 batteries of these around Seoul.


One can hope.

Probably would be more than that number, though.
 
2013-03-11 05:41:08 PM

timujin: El_Frijole_Blanco: timujin: The U.N. can say it's still valid, but that doesn't mean anything if Best Korea decides to ignore it.

No the UN made it perfectly OK to blow them to hell for firing the first shot and violating the agreement

I'm fairly sure that at this point if they fired the first shot no one would say "boo" if they got blown to hell.


The Chinese will be annoyed if any of it actually gets splattered on them.
 
2013-03-11 05:42:01 PM
North Korea is like the stupid drunk guys who yells and screams about how he's going to kick everyone's ass, and everyone else is too smart to take him up on it, but they still worry a little because they think he might keep a gun in his car, but there's a pretty good chance he can't even remember where he parked his car.
 
2013-03-11 05:43:51 PM

iheartscotch: KangTheMad: iheartscotch: MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet

I agree; the south would tear through the Norks like chilli through an old folks home.

Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.

Does south not have a navy?

Either way; I know the south has a decent sized Air Force. I imagine taking out all the north's artillery wouldn't take too long for them. Plus, they have us. Once the artillery is gone, we could take out their nuclear facilities with limited effort.

/ The south wouldn't really need to go through the DMZ until then.


They do, the South Korean Navy has roughly 18 amphibious assault craft, allowing for a deployment of roughly 5,000 men, 50 tanks, and some APCs. Per run.

So assuming the South Koreans manage to find a beachhead, they have to hold it long enough for the assault craft to go back out to sea, go back to port, load up another round of troops and tanks, go back, and deploy more forces. But that isn't the hard part. The hard part is taking the beachhead and deploying the troops. All the NK's need is a lucky hit with an anti-tank round and the South Koreans need to deploy engineering vehicles to clear the way for more armor to exit the craft. Looking at a topographical map, the best place to deploy an amphibious assault is a 300km round trip from the border.

South Korea does have aerial assault capabilities, which could add another 200ish troops to the battle. Or, more likely, dropping supplies.
 
2013-03-11 05:44:14 PM

nickerj1: these


notsureifserious.jpg
 
2013-03-11 05:45:12 PM

Tyrano Soros: Is this the note-writing, ineffectual UN or the black-helicopter, gun-taking-away strong arm UN?


Yes
 
2013-03-11 05:46:04 PM

KangTheMad: iheartscotch: KangTheMad: iheartscotch: MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet

I agree; the south would tear through the Norks like chilli through an old folks home.

Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.

Does south not have a navy?

Either way; I know the south has a decent sized Air Force. I imagine taking out all the north's artillery wouldn't take too long for them. Plus, they have us. Once the artillery is gone, we could take out their nuclear facilities with limited effort.

/ The south wouldn't really need to go through the DMZ until then.

They do, the South Korean Navy has roughly 18 amphibious assault craft, allowing for a deployment of roughly 5,000 men, 50 tanks, and some APCs. Per run.

So assuming the South Koreans manage to find a beachhead, they have to hold it long enough for the assault craft to go back out to sea, go back to port, load up another round of troops and tanks, go back, and deploy more forces. But that isn't the hard part. The hard part is taking the beachhead and deploying the troops. All the NK's need is a lucky hit with an anti-tank round and the South Koreans need to deploy engineering vehicles to clear the way for more armor to exit the craft. Looking at a topographical map, the best place to deploy an amphibious assault is a 300km round trip from the border.

South Korea does have aerial assault capabilities, which could add another 200ish troops to the battle. Or, more likely, dropping supplies.


North Korea has sea mines.

And it doesn't take much to ruin an amphibious assault craft's day. A 120mm mortar would do the trick.
 
2013-03-11 05:48:08 PM

ph0rk: Ned Stark: Nope that's the end. North Korea is not party to the NNPT. Attempts to forcibly dismantle its nuclear program are unlawful.

That matters only so long as China is interested in propping up Best Korea.

The minute they get pissed off enough to not care anymore, we can bomb the fark out of unilaterally act in the planet's best interest.


Yes I agree it would be very easy for the US to overthrow North Korea. The North Korean army would provide no meaningful resistance. The only limiting factor would be how fast a sufficient number Koreans could be killed for terror to overcome national pride and compel compliance. Also perhaps, roads in severe disrepair simply failing under the strain of armored vehicle traffic.

But we were talking about responsibility for instigation not practical military matters.
 
2013-03-11 05:48:57 PM
Dunno which paper tiger to disagree with.
 
2013-03-11 05:51:04 PM

mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers


Many moons ago I was in a bookstore in Seoul and saw a book titled "How to Cook Seoul Food."  I still kick myself to this day for not buying it.
 
2013-03-11 05:52:09 PM
But has it been *broughten*?
 
2013-03-11 05:52:53 PM

Tyrano Soros: Is this the note-writing, ineffectual UN or the black-helicopter, gun-taking-away strong arm UN?


That depends on how much tinfoil you're wearing.
 
2013-03-11 05:53:07 PM

KangTheMad: iheartscotch: KangTheMad: iheartscotch: MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet

I agree; the south would tear through the Norks like chilli through an old folks home.

Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.

Does south not have a navy?

Either way; I know the south has a decent sized Air Force. I imagine taking out all the north's artillery wouldn't take too long for them. Plus, they have us. Once the artillery is gone, we could take out their nuclear facilities with limited effort.

/ The south wouldn't really need to go through the DMZ until then.

They do, the South Korean Navy has roughly 18 amphibious assault craft, allowing for a deployment of roughly 5,000 men, 50 tanks, and some APCs. Per run.

So assuming the South Koreans manage to find a beachhead, they have to hold it long enough for the assault craft to go back out to sea, go back to port, load up another round of troops and tanks, go back, and deploy more forces. But that isn't the hard part. The hard part is taking the beachhead and deploying the troops. All the NK's need is a lucky hit with an anti-tank round and the South Koreans need to deploy engineering vehicles to clear the way for more armor to exit the craft. Looking at a topographical map, the best place to deploy an amphibious assault is a 300km round trip from the border.

South Korea does have aerial assault capabilities, which could add another 200ish troops to the battle. Or, more likely, dropping supplies.


Yeah; that might be dicey. I imagine we'd give them whatever assistance was required however. I still don't see a reason why they'd have to go north until after taking out the artillery and nuclear facilities.

By then; I imagine most of the north's air force would be gone and I imagine the north would have everything they had on the DMZ. If the south did a landing then; they might be able to take Pyongyang without any bloodshed. Without their dear leader; I imagine the north would fold fast, along factional lines.
 
2013-03-11 05:53:58 PM

JohnAnnArbor: Might be a good reason to use ground-penetrating nuclear weapons. One assumes they're in clusters, not totally isolated from one another, because of range considerations.

In a few years, we might be well on our way to a system to shoot the shells down with lasers. (Really.) That would change things quite a bit--if it could be proven to work reliably.


And that's probably why NK is working so hard on nukes.  They figure that one of these days the west will find a way counter their artillery.  They're probably right.  I can think of a few ways right now, expensive, but potentially workable methods to counter their artillery threat.

The south could build an MLRS type rocket system consisting of (very expensive) inertially guided (not GPS) rockets with thermobaric warheads. The NK is sure to jam the hell out of GPS, so there's no point in going that route.  Inertial guidance is a lot more expensive, it's the sort used in cruise missiles.  It uses an internal map of roads and landmarks and follows those.  Given that the north can't exactly move their gun emplacements around, the routes for each rocket could be pre-programmed.  A small theromobaric rocket might not destroy the gun emplacements, but it would very likely scramble anyone inside.  You'd need enough of them to hit ever emplacement multiple times, and be able to fire them all within minutes of the initiation of hostilities.

Then there's the anti artillary tech you mentioned.  Lasers are in testing, but the Israeli's have missile based system currently in use.  The problem once again is expense.  Each shot of the Israeli systems costs something upwards of $100k and each battery has a very expensive tracking system.  Even if the laser based system were ready today, one imagines that its firing rate would be little higher than the artillery against which it's defending.  Meaning you'd need 5000 individual anti artillery laser systems to counter the NK threat, more if you wanted a backstop for any leaks.

How much would the military industrial complex charge for each copy of that laser system?  If we're lucky, $10 million a copy.  Multiply by 5000 and you have a half-decade of NASA's budget.  No one wants to pay 50 billion dollars to counter a threat that could dissipate into insolvency or a people's revolution next week, but if I lived in Seoul, I'd damn sure want my government investing in something to counter the artillery threat.
 
2013-03-11 05:54:42 PM

RandomRandom: How long would it take us to disable Five Thousand long-range artillery pieces, each embedded in its own hardened concrete bunker?  Not hours, days would be the best case, a week would be most accurate.  Getting through hardened concrete takes a direct hit from a large, directed munition.  Drones might help, repeated counter-battery might work, eventually, but one suspects most of the heavy lifting would be done by manned aircraft and laser guided 2,000 lb bombs.  5,000 is a lot of sorties.


In 91 the Iraqis felt the same way about their static defenses
 
2013-03-11 05:56:23 PM

jso2897: Dr. Goldshnoz: I know it was foolish of me, but I was really hopeful kim jong un would do more than the constant retarded sabre rattling his father was known for.

I am actually beginning to wonder whether that kid is "running" anything at all. We may be looking at the Asian equivalent of a typical Latin American junta, where the "leader" is a puppet, and the military is actually running the whole show.
When your first act in power is to arrange a visit from Dennis Rodman, it kind of tarnishes your supervillian cred, in my eyes.


meh, I'm sure Lex Luther had to start somewhere, too. Or maybe he had Rodman smuggle a message back to Obama like "help. the generals will kill me if i do anything smart."
 
2013-03-11 05:57:44 PM

RandomRandom: JohnAnnArbor: Might be a good reason to use ground-penetrating nuclear weapons. One assumes they're in clusters, not totally isolated from one another, because of range considerations.

In a few years, we might be well on our way to a system to shoot the shells down with lasers. (Really.) That would change things quite a bit--if it could be proven to work reliably.

And that's probably why NK is working so hard on nukes.  They figure that one of these days the west will find a way counter their artillery.  They're probably right.  I can think of a few ways right now, expensive, but potentially workable methods to counter their artillery threat.

The south could build an MLRS type rocket system consisting of (very expensive) inertially guided (not GPS) rockets with thermobaric warheads. The NK is sure to jam the hell out of GPS, so there's no point in going that route.  Inertial guidance is a lot more expensive, it's the sort used in cruise missiles.  It uses an internal map of roads and landmarks and follows those.  Given that the north can't exactly move their gun emplacements around, the routes for each rocket could be pre-programmed.  A small theromobaric rocket might not destroy the gun emplacements, but it would very likely scramble anyone inside.  You'd need enough of them to hit ever emplacement multiple times, and be able to fire them all within minutes of the initiation of hostilities.

Then there's the anti artillary tech you mentioned.  Lasers are in testing, but the Israeli's have missile based system currently in use.  The problem once again is expense.  Each shot of the Israeli systems costs something upwards of $100k and each battery has a very expensive tracking system.  Even if the laser based system were ready today, one imagines that its firing rate would be little higher than the artillery against which it's defending.  Meaning you'd need 5000 individual anti artillery laser systems to counter the NK threat, more if you wanted a backstop for any ...


And we haven't even started talking about all the tunnels, known and unknown, the NKoreans have bored under the DMZ.

*sigh*

What a mess.
 
2013-03-11 05:59:22 PM

SploogeTime: I say we send Obama and Dennis Rodman, Beyonce and Bill Maher over to settle this.


And we can hold Hillary Clinton in reserve.  But only as a last resort, not to be deployed preemptively.
 
2013-03-11 06:00:07 PM
I'm sure its been said 1,000,000 times so far, but I'm pretty sure they can end it without the UN's approval.

/pew! pew! pew!
 
2013-03-11 06:00:20 PM

kumanoki: meat0918: Shrugging Atlas: Be nice if we could just say, "Fair enough" and have the B-2s pay their nuclear facilities a visit.  China would probably thank us at this rate.

China might beat us to the punch.  They could certainly assert themselves as a world power that can "fix" something America hasn't been able too.

I have always wondered why China tolerates DPRK foolishness on it's landmass.


same reason we put up with Mexico's government not being able to deal with the Drug Lords

Cheap Labor
 
2013-03-11 06:03:33 PM

realmolo: You have to wonder if China is saying to itself "We really should kill this guy and put our own guy in there".

The Chinese are evil, but they aren't stupid, and they don't like being associated with stupid.


I also have to wonder if the US has ever suggested it to them behind closed doors.
 
2013-03-11 06:04:33 PM
RandomRandom:
Then there's the anti artillary tech you mentioned.  Lasers are in testing, but the Israeli's have missile based system currently in use.  The problem once again is expense.  Each shot of the Israeli systems costs something upwards of $100k and each battery has a very expensive tracking system.  Even if the laser based system were ready today, one imagines that its firing rate would be little higher than the artillery against which it's defending.  Meaning you'd need 5000 individual anti artillery laser systems to counter the NK threat, more if you wanted a backstop for any ...

I know nothing but I wonder about a synchronized cruise missile attack on the artillery positions. They can be exceedingly accurate, of course, and that might be enough to circumvent any hardening of the emplacements; fly it right in the window. At the first sign of trouble, launch them all to strike simultaneously, and hit their exposed missile launch sites too. I guess that I don't know enough about what kinds/sizes of warheads are available.
 
2013-03-11 06:05:37 PM

timujin: Tatterdemalian: timujin: The U.N. can say it's still valid, but that doesn't mean anything if Best Korea decides to ignore it.

It means the international media are going to blame South Korea for any attacks North Korea launches.

/in short, Worst Korea is going to be treated like Israel
//we should just let them all nuke each other, that'd teach them (that both the UN and US can't be trusted to keep any promises at all)

I'm not sure at all how you came to that conclusion.


Occam's Razor: He's stupid on an epic scale
 
2013-03-11 06:07:04 PM

RandomRandom: It uses an internal map of roads and landmarks and follows those.


That's not inertial guidance.  That's image-based terrain recognition.  Old stuff, and cheap to implement.
 
2013-03-11 06:07:11 PM

Fuggin Bizzy: mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers

Pyongyang Train! The hippest trip in East Asia. 60 nonstop years across the tracks of your mind, into the exciting world of ... uh ... Pyongyang.


I prefer the Bangkok Train, personally.
 
2013-03-11 06:13:25 PM

LaraAmber: mysticcat: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Seoul brothers

I didn't realize Best Korea allowed bulls as service animals.


You mean old impotent ones? Yeah neither of those are going to fetch much at auction.
 
2013-03-11 06:14:31 PM

StaleCoffee: Radioactive Ass: Ned Stark: Nope that's the end. North Korea is not party to the NNPT. Attempts to forcibly dismantle its nuclear program are unlawful.

Nobody is making them dismantle anything. They are simply deciding to not do trade with them while they do have a program. It's not unlawful to not sell someone something. Here look. I'm not going to sell you this beer, sue me.

Best Korea made itself an international pariah and has to deal with the consequences of doing so.

This is all going to fall apart once the Best Koreans ally with the Gungans and Kim Jong Un blows up the battle groups with a single well placed shot from his fighter craft.



Yousa think people gonna die?
 
2013-03-11 06:15:02 PM

iheartscotch: KangTheMad: iheartscotch: KangTheMad: iheartscotch: MaudlinMutantMollusk: EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.

They don't seem to be real worried about it, either, from what I've seen

/I don't believe for a minute this situation is any different from the dozen other times Best Korea has screamed and squealed and stomped it's little feet

I agree; the south would tear through the Norks like chilli through an old folks home.

Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.

Does south not have a navy?

Either way; I know the south has a decent sized Air Force. I imagine taking out all the north's artillery wouldn't take too long for them. Plus, they have us. Once the artillery is gone, we could take out their nuclear facilities with limited effort.

/ The south wouldn't really need to go through the DMZ until then.

They do, the South Korean Navy has roughly 18 amphibious assault craft, allowing for a deployment of roughly 5,000 men, 50 tanks, and some APCs. Per run.

So assuming the South Koreans manage to find a beachhead, they have to hold it long enough for the assault craft to go back out to sea, go back to port, load up another round of troops and tanks, go back, and deploy more forces. But that isn't the hard part. The hard part is taking the beachhead and deploying the troops. All the NK's need is a lucky hit with an anti-tank round and the South Koreans need to deploy engineering vehicles to clear the way for more armor to exit the craft. Looking at a topographical map, the best place to deploy an amphibious assault is a 300km round trip from the border.

South Korea does have aerial assault capabilities, which could add another 200ish troops to the battle. Or, more likely, dropping supplies.

Yeah; that might be dicey. I imagine we'd give them what ...


Keep in mind that while the NK's have a small airforce and air defence, it's all soviet stuff. Upgraded MiG 29s. And soviet anti-air missile systems. Which means tracked, self propelled, mobile, and cheap to build. Which also means they're in the mountains.

If I was a NK military defense planner, which fortunately I am not, I would have the air defenses set up in tiers. Anti-air cannons near beachheads and main flightpaths to Pyongyang. It doesn't take much to conceal the guns, and although they are useless against airplanes of today, they can really ruin a helicopter's day if it's flying low under the radar, or deploying troops/supplies.

Have the longer range fixed emplacement missile systems set back further in the country, and use decoy radar emplacements, which can be used for targeting. If they go offline, fire up the main radar array. It doesn't take much to fool smart weapons like anti-radiation missiles.

The shorter range missiles can be placed on the north sides of mountains/cliff faces, with the medium range systems south-facing. You take out the medium range system, and get in pursuit of a jet, then you get lit up from behind as you pass the mountain.
 
2013-03-11 06:16:37 PM
That is a funny headline but I'm pretty sure it was on, then off for a while, and now it's back on.
 
2013-03-11 06:18:45 PM

Man On Pink Corner: RandomRandom: It uses an internal map of roads and landmarks and follows those.

That's not inertial guidance.  That's image-based terrain recognition.  Old stuff, and cheap to implement.


Terrcon guidance was a component of the first guidance method used in the original land attack Tomahawk. It was really only used to get "Close" though and was more of a backup system for a more conventional gimbaled gyro type guidance system. It's the addition of GPS that gets it spot on nowadays.
 
2013-03-11 06:20:08 PM

KarmicDisaster: RandomRandom:
Then there's the anti artillary tech you mentioned.  Lasers are in testing, but the Israeli's have missile based system currently in use.  The problem once again is expense.  Each shot of the Israeli systems costs something upwards of $100k and each battery has a very expensive tracking system.  Even if the laser based system were ready today, one imagines that its firing rate would be little higher than the artillery against which it's defending.  Meaning you'd need 5000 individual anti artillery laser systems to counter the NK threat, more if you wanted a backstop for any ...

I know nothing but I wonder about a synchronized cruise missile attack on the artillery positions. They can be exceedingly accurate, of course, and that might be enough to circumvent any hardening of the emplacements; fly it right in the window. At the first sign of trouble, launch them all to strike simultaneously, and hit their exposed missile launch sites too. I guess that I don't know enough about what kinds/sizes of warheads are available.


Sounds feasible to this armchair general. I think it might be cost prohibitive though. Can't we just sail a plague ship into their harbor?
 
2013-03-11 06:27:07 PM

vygramul: realmolo: You have to wonder if China is saying to itself "We really should kill this guy and put our own guy in there".

The Chinese are evil, but they aren't stupid, and they don't like being associated with stupid.

Dunno - they can be slooooow to learn. I mean, seriously, no joke, in 1980, they decided that runners weren't cutting it in their war against Vietnam, and that they should probably look into this "radio" thing everyone keeps talking about.

/Even CHINA lost to Vietnam


Everyone loses to Vietnam. The Mongols lost to Vietnam for gods sake. Vietnam has this book. Whenever they get attacked they open the book and it tells them what to do to defend themselves. Mostly it involves digging lots of holes and putting down pointy sticks.
 
2013-03-11 06:27:58 PM

Hot Carl To Go: KarmicDisaster: RandomRandom:
Then there's the anti artillary tech you mentioned.  Lasers are in testing, but the Israeli's have missile based system currently in use.  The problem once again is expense.  Each shot of the Israeli systems costs something upwards of $100k and each battery has a very expensive tracking system.  Even if the laser based system were ready today, one imagines that its firing rate would be little higher than the artillery against which it's defending.  Meaning you'd need 5000 individual anti artillery laser systems to counter the NK threat, more if you wanted a backstop for any ...

I know nothing but I wonder about a synchronized cruise missile attack on the artillery positions. They can be exceedingly accurate, of course, and that might be enough to circumvent any hardening of the emplacements; fly it right in the window. At the first sign of trouble, launch them all to strike simultaneously, and hit their exposed missile launch sites too. I guess that I don't know enough about what kinds/sizes of warheads are available.

Sounds feasible to this armchair general. I think it might be cost prohibitive though. Can't we just sail a plague ship into their harbor?


Feasible, yes. Depending what platform you launch it from. Even if you catch the NKs sleeping, they'd still have time to launch from their missile base in the north, which means they can still hit Japan, Alaska, South Korea. You'd still be having a drawn-out artillery duel until you obtain air supremacy. And given my ideal placement of SAMs, and depending on how clever the North Korean pilots are, that might be longer than we would think. (Still really short, since their airforce would be horribly outnumbered. They might not even deploy their airforce until they -had- to.
 
2013-03-11 06:28:39 PM

Hot Carl To Go: KarmicDisaster: RandomRandom:
Then there's the anti artillary tech you mentioned.  Lasers are in testing, but the Israeli's have missile based system currently in use.  The problem once again is expense.  Each shot of the Israeli systems costs something upwards of $100k and each battery has a very expensive tracking system.  Even if the laser based system were ready today, one imagines that its firing rate would be little higher than the artillery against which it's defending.  Meaning you'd need 5000 individual anti artillery laser systems to counter the NK threat, more if you wanted a backstop for any ...

I know nothing but I wonder about a synchronized cruise missile attack on the artillery positions. They can be exceedingly accurate, of course, and that might be enough to circumvent any hardening of the emplacements; fly it right in the window. At the first sign of trouble, launch them all to strike simultaneously, and hit their exposed missile launch sites too. I guess that I don't know enough about what kinds/sizes of warheads are available.

Sounds feasible to this armchair general. I think it might be cost prohibitive though. Can't we just sail a plague ship into their harbor?


Well, that or a fire ship. I do hope that our planners actually have a plan to take out the artillery positions rapidly. Supposedly there aren't actually that many that can hit Seoul, and they have had 60 years to map them out and identify the fake ones.
 
2013-03-11 06:36:09 PM
Technically, with an armistice, its never been "off".
More accurately, its a pause to reload.
 
2013-03-11 06:37:47 PM

Dr. Goldshnoz: I know it was foolish of me, but I was really hopeful kim jong un would do more than the constant retarded sabre rattling his father was known for.


Same here. Although so far, it's been hard to take Un seriously as any kind of threat.

I almost hope he does try something, just to see that little troll squashed like a bug, but I don't want harm to come to NK civilians.
 
2013-03-11 06:42:50 PM

StaleCoffee: I speak on the subject backed by ironclad speculations and personal conjecture.


Not to mention the mighty run on sentence...
 
2013-03-11 06:44:16 PM

KangTheMad: Hot Carl To Go: KarmicDisaster: RandomRandom:
Then there's the anti artillary tech you mentioned.  Lasers are in testing, but the Israeli's have missile based system currently in use.  The problem once again is expense.  Each shot of the Israeli systems costs something upwards of $100k and each battery has a very expensive tracking system.  Even if the laser based system were ready today, one imagines that its firing rate would be little higher than the artillery against which it's defending.  Meaning you'd need 5000 individual anti artillery laser systems to counter the NK threat, more if you wanted a backstop for any ...

I know nothing but I wonder about a synchronized cruise missile attack on the artillery positions. They can be exceedingly accurate, of course, and that might be enough to circumvent any hardening of the emplacements; fly it right in the window. At the first sign of trouble, launch them all to strike simultaneously, and hit their exposed missile launch sites too. I guess that I don't know enough about what kinds/sizes of warheads are available.

Sounds feasible to this armchair general. I think it might be cost prohibitive though. Can't we just sail a plague ship into their harbor?

Feasible, yes. Depending what platform you launch it from. Even if you catch the NKs sleeping, they'd still have time to launch from their missile base in the north, which means they can still hit Japan, Alaska, South Korea. You'd still be having a drawn-out artillery duel until you obtain air supremacy. And given my ideal placement of SAMs, and depending on how clever the North Korean pilots are, that might be longer than we would think. (Still really short, since their airforce would be horribly outnumbered. They might not even deploy their airforce until they -had- to.


I would think China might step in with an invasion just to prevent the US from taking over a country and setting up shop directly on their border.
 
2013-03-11 06:45:44 PM

I should be in the kitchen: I almost hope he does try something, just to see that little troll squashed like a bug, but I don't want harm to come to NK civilians.


From everything I've read about how NK treats its citizens being killed by American bombing might not be the worst thing to happen to them today.
 
2013-03-11 06:48:04 PM

I should be in the kitchen: Dr. Goldshnoz: I know it was foolish of me, but I was really hopeful kim jong un would do more than the constant retarded sabre rattling his father was known for.

Same here. Although so far, it's been hard to take Un seriously as any kind of threat.

I almost hope he does try something, just to see that little troll squashed like a bug, but I don't want harm to come to NK civilians.


As horrible as a war in Korea would be, if it results in the end of the Kim dynasty, it'll be far better for the North Korean people in the long term.

Usually, "regime change" backfires in the end and the new leader turns out to be about as bad, if not worse, than the original leader that got overthrown.  I can't see, though, how anyone would be worse for North Korea than this family of sociopaths.
 
2013-03-11 06:49:55 PM

KangTheMad: If I was a NK military defense planner, which fortunately I am not


Why 'fortunately'? It sounds like it's a pretty easy job. A couple hours in the morning screaming at Worst Koreans across the DMZ, execute a few guys by mortar afterwards, and cook up some ludicrous provocations before lunch and you're done for the day.
 
2013-03-11 06:54:46 PM

jake_lex: Usually, "regime change" backfires in the end and the new leader turns out to be about as bad, if not worse, than the original leader that got overthrown. I can't see, though, how anyone would be worse for North Korea than this family of sociopaths.


Yea personally I find it hard to believe he is as cooky as the old man. He was educated in Switzerland; right? So he literally has first hand knowledge that the west isn't as bad as the picture that is painted.
 
2013-03-11 06:54:50 PM
Something tells me there's a 100% chance North Korea's missile would accidentally blow up in the lab killing everyone and leveling an entire city.
 
2013-03-11 06:56:50 PM
All this sabre rattling suggests the young-un must be getting some challenge from within.
 
2013-03-11 06:58:30 PM
Okay I wanna ask the arm chair generals: What do you do with the people of North Korea after the war to rebuild?
 
2013-03-11 06:59:21 PM

Clash City Farker: vygramul: realmolo: You have to wonder if China is saying to itself "We really should kill this guy and put our own guy in there".

The Chinese are evil, but they aren't stupid, and they don't like being associated with stupid.

Dunno - they can be slooooow to learn. I mean, seriously, no joke, in 1980, they decided that runners weren't cutting it in their war against Vietnam, and that they should probably look into this "radio" thing everyone keeps talking about.

/Even CHINA lost to Vietnam

Everyone loses to Vietnam. The Mongols lost to Vietnam for gods sake. Vietnam has this book. Whenever they get attacked they open the book and it tells them what to do to defend themselves. Mostly it involves digging lots of holes and putting down pointy sticks.



Damnit, I never learned how to defend myself against pointed sticks.  The teacher kept focusing on different kinds of fresh fruit, every single class.  I'm totally ready if anyone every attacks me with loganberries, though.
 
2013-03-11 07:00:04 PM

RandomRandom: It's not just a refugee crisis that South Korea is really worried about, it's the NK's 5000 hardened artillery positions within firing range of Seoul.  If NK gets hit bombed by the west, even a little, even just the nuke sites, the north will probably start firing shells at Seoul.

How long would it take us to disable Five Thousand long-range artillery pieces, each embedded in its own hardened concrete bunker?  Not hours, days would be the best case, a week would be most accurate.  Getting through hardened concrete takes a direct hit from a large, directed munition.  Drones might help, repeated counter-battery might work, eventually, but one suspects most of the heavy lifting would be done by manned aircraft and laser guided 2,000 lb bombs.  5,000 is a lot of sorties.

Here's the big deal.  How many shots would the NK howitzers get off before being destroyed?  Modern artillery can fire a few rounds a minute, but lets say that each of the 5000 fire just 1 round per minute and are - on average, destroyed after just one hour of firing.

Using that artificially low rate of fire and terribly optimistic rate of destroying their guns, it would still result in 300,000 high explosive and incendiary shells hitting Seoul in the first hour of fighting.   After the first hour of fighting, Seoul would look like Dresden.  If the war came on fast, in response to say, a surprise attack by the west, a good proportion of Seoul's 25 million population would see their last day on earth.

It's not Best Korea's nukes that have everyone in the South worried, it's their half-century old gun tech.  Which unless we have some new technology hidden away that is able to instantly disable 5000 howitzers, the chances of a preemptive strike against the north's nukes is about as close to 0% as it gets.


you're assuming they could afford rounds for all the guns(assuming all those guns actually exist), that are in good shape and won't A: detonate in the barrel, or B: dud on impact, assuming the guns were maintained in anything other than a 'slap some paint on it so the inspection passes' way.

again assuming all the guns were real.

honestly best way is as discussed in thread: use thermobaric rounds targeted on the various gun-sites. those positions are well plotted. it only takes a few seconds to traverse a howitzer, and a well trained crew can crack off a round every 4-5 seconds at maximum fire rates. assuming a battalion worth of guns being what, about 40-50 howitzers, one round every ten seconds per gun amounts to 240-300 rounds in the air every MINUTE. 5000 gun sites would take a bare 20 minutes to cover. with a single battalion. throw in another and it starts looking pretty damn bleak.

and, as a follow-up act, have them do a second barrage, say three rounds per site, of cluster mine-layer munitions, a 70-30% mix of anti-personnel to anti-vehicle.

first you fry em, then you make em PAY to take the guns back.
 
2013-03-11 07:00:39 PM
i2.cdn.turner.com

I like how the Norks have Rodman practically sitting on the floor so it's not so evident he's a foot taller than Little Fat Man.
 
2013-03-11 07:01:26 PM

alice_600: Okay I wanna ask the arm chair generals: What do you do with the people of North Korea after the war to rebuild?


Teach them how to make garments, running shoes, and plastic toys.  They'll work for peanut shells.
Profit!!!
 
2013-03-11 07:02:33 PM

KangTheMad: Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.


zerg rush.
 
2013-03-11 07:03:37 PM

This text is now purple: KangTheMad: Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.

zerg rush.


Tunnels
 
2013-03-11 07:04:43 PM

JK47: Balance. Because of the threat the DPRK poses the US maintains an enhanced military presence in the region. China believes that the presence of American forces in the region helps to stabilize what would otherwise be a cauldron of intense and bitter rivalries with historical and ethnic overtones. A large US presence reassures China's neighbors to some extent (that American forces would intervene if they are attacked).


The concept that Americans just aren't that interested in a war, and whitey can't tell any of them apart anyhow, so they don't care about whose ancient ancestor took advantage of who?

Interesting concept.
 
2013-03-11 07:05:01 PM

toraque: KangTheMad: If I was a NK military defense planner, which fortunately I am not

Why 'fortunately'? It sounds like it's a pretty easy job. A couple hours in the morning screaming at Worst Koreans across the DMZ, execute a few guys by mortar afterwards, and cook up some ludicrous provocations before lunch and you're done for the day.


I'll be executed when, not if, I eat Kim Jong Un's cake.
 
2013-03-11 07:05:32 PM

Stone Meadow: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

I like how the Norks have Rodman practically sitting on the floor so it's not so evident he's a foot taller than Little Fat Man.


i.walmartimages.com
 
2013-03-11 07:09:36 PM

WhoopAssWayne: Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border.


Would there be that many refugees? I'm honestly asking, I'm a bit ignorant on the subject so I know I'm missing something. Let's say some infrastructure and the leadership was bombed. Outside of some of the folks used to living in the cities, aren't most of the people used to living without the infrastructure, and could get along without the leaders (until some new leaders were in place)? Or would they just be leaving for the sake of leaving, because now they can?
 
2013-03-11 07:13:13 PM

jake_lex: I should be in the kitchen: Dr. Goldshnoz: I know it was foolish of me, but I was really hopeful kim jong un would do more than the constant retarded sabre rattling his father was known for.

Same here. Although so far, it's been hard to take Un seriously as any kind of threat.

I almost hope he does try something, just to see that little troll squashed like a bug, but I don't want harm to come to NK civilians.

As horrible as a war in Korea would be, if it results in the end of the Kim dynasty, it'll be far better for the North Korean people in the long term.

Usually, "regime change" backfires in the end and the new leader turns out to be about as bad, if not worse, than the original leader that got overthrown.  I can't see, though, how anyone would be worse for North Korea than this family of sociopaths.


That is true. And I really hope something happens soon to end that dynasty, because I don't see things getting better for the people until it does. And even then, who knows, but I don't think we can even hope for things to improve over there til the Kims are gone.
 
2013-03-11 07:14:32 PM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: I should be in the kitchen: I almost hope he does try something, just to see that little troll squashed like a bug, but I don't want harm to come to NK civilians.

From everything I've read about how NK treats its citizens being killed by American bombing might not be the worst thing to happen to them today.


Sad but true.
 
2013-03-11 07:14:51 PM

meat0918: This text is now purple: KangTheMad: Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.

zerg rush.

Tunnels


Excuse me

Nydus Tunnels.
 
2013-03-11 07:15:18 PM

KangTheMad: toraque: KangTheMad: If I was a NK military defense planner, which fortunately I am not

Why 'fortunately'? It sounds like it's a pretty easy job. A couple hours in the morning screaming at Worst Koreans across the DMZ, execute a few guys by mortar afterwards, and cook up some ludicrous provocations before lunch and you're done for the day.

I'll be executed when, not if, I eat Kim Jong Un's cake.


Just remember one simple rule in Best Korea:

www.squidmobile.com
 
2013-03-11 07:16:50 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: WhoopAssWayne: Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border.

Would there be that many refugees? I'm honestly asking, I'm a bit ignorant on the subject so I know I'm missing something. Let's say some infrastructure and the leadership was bombed. Outside of some of the folks used to living in the cities, aren't most of the people used to living without the infrastructure, and could get along without the leaders (until some new leaders were in place)? Or would they just be leaving for the sake of leaving, because now they can?


FTFY.

Have you not seen the Best Korea at night picture. There's like one place with lights and that's probably only coming from the little Uns and his buddies houses.
 
2013-03-11 07:17:23 PM

KarmicDisaster: Hot Carl To Go: KarmicDisaster: RandomRandom:
Then there's the anti artillary tech you mentioned.  Lasers are in testing, but the Israeli's have missile based system currently in use.  The problem once again is expense.  Each shot of the Israeli systems costs something upwards of $100k and each battery has a very expensive tracking system.  Even if the laser based system were ready today, one imagines that its firing rate would be little higher than the artillery against which it's defending.  Meaning you'd need 5000 individual anti artillery laser systems to counter the NK threat, more if you wanted a backstop for any ...

I know nothing but I wonder about a synchronized cruise missile attack on the artillery positions. They can be exceedingly accurate, of course, and that might be enough to circumvent any hardening of the emplacements; fly it right in the window. At the first sign of trouble, launch them all to strike simultaneously, and hit their exposed missile launch sites too. I guess that I don't know enough about what kinds/sizes of warheads are available.

Sounds feasible to this armchair general. I think it might be cost prohibitive though. Can't we just sail a plague ship into their harbor?

Well, that or a fire ship. I do hope that our planners actually have a plan to take out the artillery positions rapidly. Supposedly there aren't actually that many that can hit Seoul, and they have had 60 years to map them out and identify the fake ones.


For the past decades, the conventional wisdom has been that the north has at least 5000 hardened emplacements within firing range of Seoul, even more outside that range.  Some may be dummies, but even if half were dummies and were identified as such, the problem would still be hugely troublesome, nearly as intractable.

Cruise missiles could certainly do the job, but 5000 would come close to wiping out the entire US arsenal of all cruise missile types.  Since they cost a million or more each, it would be a 5 billion dollar first strike.  Some percentage of them would fail to make it to target and some targets would survive the hit and need to be hit again.  Were only 10% to fail to take out their targets, the remaining artillery could still devastate Seoul.

Worst, it would be impossible to fire all those cruise missiles at once.  Many of our cruise types can only be fired from certain platforms, we don't have enough platforms to fire 5000 at once.  Even if we moved all our B52's to Japan or South Korea, it's unlikely we could fire more than 1000 at once.  Knocking out just 20% of their artillery in a surprise attack would allow the remaining 80% to completely destroy Seoul.

Were we to go after NK, we'd have to use a technology that could hit every emplacement withing minutes, and probably hit each multiple times.  This suggests a weapon system with over 10,000 individually guided warheads.  The technology most able to do that today would be a great many batteries of precision guided rockets featuring exotic warheads.  No GPS, all internally guided.  Since this is military tech, it would be ungodly expensive.
 
2013-03-11 07:29:22 PM

Radioactive Ass: Noticeably F.A.T.: WhoopAssWayne: Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border.

Would there be that many refugees? I'm honestly asking, I'm a bit ignorant on the subject so I know I'm missing something. Let's say some infrastructure and the leadership was bombed. Outside of some of the folks used to living in the cities, aren't most of the people used to living without the infrastructure, and could get along without the leaders (until some new leaders were in place)? Or would they just be leaving for the sake of leaving, because now they can?

FTFY.

Have you not seen the Best Korea at night picture. There's like one place with lights and that's probably only coming from the little Uns and his buddies houses.


Take a look at Pyongyang on Google Earth. They have streets, but very few cars. It looks like a ghost town.
 
2013-03-11 07:33:20 PM

This text is now purple: JK47: Balance. Because of the threat the DPRK poses the US maintains an enhanced military presence in the region. China believes that the presence of American forces in the region helps to stabilize what would otherwise be a cauldron of intense and bitter rivalries with historical and ethnic overtones. A large US presence reassures China's neighbors to some extent (that American forces would intervene if they are attacked).

The concept that Americans just aren't that interested in a war, and whitey can't tell any of them apart anyhow, so they don't care about whose ancient ancestor took advantage of who?

Interesting concept.



Compared to the rivalries between China and it's neighbors, the United States just isn't that antagonistic.
 
2013-03-11 07:40:50 PM
China would LOVE seeing north korea removed, because it would negate our reasons to keep a fleet outside their waters.
 
2013-03-11 07:50:04 PM

Yogimus: China would LOVE seeing north korea removed, because it would negate our reasons to keep a fleet outside their waters.


Taiwan.
 
2013-03-11 07:50:37 PM

mysticcat: i2.cdn.turner.com

Seoul brothers


One is a delusional nutbag who lives in his own warped little world surrounded by Yes Men and needs a great big "NO!" shoved up his ass.

And the other is Kim Jong Un.
 
2013-03-11 07:51:17 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: Would there be that many refugees?


It's a really interesting question. China and South Korea are booming economically, and given the industrious nature of Koreans in general, it's almost assured they would have a better life if they tried to immigrate. The question is, do they really understand the stark disparity in fortunes? If some bold North Koreans decide to go, would it kick off a larger movement? Would many feel inclinded to stay put out of Juche/patriotism they've been indoctrinated with their entire lives? Your premise is right on - there is huge uncertainty regarding the scale of any immigration. The risk of millions pouring over the border, both in China and Seoul, is very real and it's always taken into account when dealing with North Korea.
 
2013-03-11 07:55:24 PM

WhoopAssWayne: Shrugging Atlas: China would probably thank us at this rate.

Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border. I think they'd be pretty pissed if we whistled up the B-2s. But of course, sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.


And what really has China's scrotum tied in a knot is that they can't spill across the border like they did in the 50's to save their crazy Korean neighbor. If they did, all of their assets in the US could be seized, their bank accounts frozen,  and they can farking forget ever seeing one more penny in loan payments ever again. The Yuan would be Charmin overnight.

China has far more to lose this time if they meddle.
 
2013-03-11 07:57:45 PM

EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.


I'm way north of Seoul. As a matter of fact a have to visit the DMZ this evening. No worries here.

/pray for Omarion
 
2013-03-11 07:57:53 PM

vygramul: Yogimus: China would LOVE seeing north korea removed, because it would negate our reasons to keep a fleet outside their waters.

Taiwan.


Exactly, it would force us into a more concrete stance on the matter.
 
2013-03-11 07:58:10 PM

KiwDaWabbit: I still say that they're doing all of this posturing to secure Kim Jong Un's legitmacy so maybe he can initiate the reconciliation process without being overthrown.

Or, maybe that's more what I hope, because I question his tactics at the moment.


I'll buy that.  His people have been told for so long that "THE WEST IS EVIL!  EEEEEEVIL!" that the True Believers might take him out if he makes motions for peace.  It's a different situation than Japan had in 1945 (when Hirohito wanted to end the war but feared being overthrown by his cabinet/military commanders) but in both cases the only real way to deal with the drastic situation is a drastic move.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out.  Hopefully not interesting in the Chinese curse way.
 
2013-03-11 08:00:21 PM

MyKingdomForYourHorse: [grapplersplanet.com image 464x600]


Holy crap, wings and beefy arms.  Must be part-Trogdor.
 
2013-03-11 08:09:18 PM

TV's Vinnie: And what really has China's scrotum tied in a knot is that they can't spill across the border like they did in the 50's to save their crazy Korean neighbor.


Well put. The economic entanglements may just be too intertwined for them to give any substantive military response.
 
2013-03-11 08:12:38 PM
Damn it did South Korea dance back! I hope the UN told them not to dance back.
 
2013-03-11 08:13:42 PM
Way to make a pointless argument UN!
 
2013-03-11 08:14:44 PM

toraque: KangTheMad: toraque: KangTheMad: If I was a NK military defense planner, which fortunately I am not

Why 'fortunately'? It sounds like it's a pretty easy job. A couple hours in the morning screaming at Worst Koreans across the DMZ, execute a few guys by mortar afterwards, and cook up some ludicrous provocations before lunch and you're done for the day.

I'll be executed when, not if, I eat Kim Jong Un's cake.

Just remember one simple rule in Best Korea:

[www.squidmobile.com image 600x400]


Ummmmmmm yellow cake!
 
2013-03-11 08:14:50 PM

alice_600: Okay I wanna ask the arm chair generals: What do you do with the people of North Korea after the war to rebuild?


Send in the Germans. They handled their own reunification well enough.
 
2013-03-11 08:15:44 PM

sleeper2995: toraque: KangTheMad: toraque: KangTheMad: If I was a NK military defense planner, which fortunately I am not

Why 'fortunately'? It sounds like it's a pretty easy job. A couple hours in the morning screaming at Worst Koreans across the DMZ, execute a few guys by mortar afterwards, and cook up some ludicrous provocations before lunch and you're done for the day.

I'll be executed when, not if, I eat Kim Jong Un's cake.

Just remember one simple rule in Best Korea:

[www.squidmobile.com image 600x400]

Ummmmmmm yellow cake!


lucyactually.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-03-11 08:19:12 PM
I had a little home that junior would be a little more level headed, what with all that European education. That is now long gone.

Maybe China will give the big baby a time out. I don't know that anyone could make it worse over there.
 
2013-03-11 08:24:20 PM

JohnAnnArbor: Japan could be required to give billions of aid as well to help.  Call it war reparations or something.


Yeah, because that's never led to any genocidal people gaining absolute power in their country before.
 
2013-03-11 08:28:18 PM

efgeise: JohnAnnArbor: Japan could be required to give billions of aid as well to help.  Call it war reparations or something.

Yeah, because that's never led to any genocidal people gaining absolute power in their country before.


Oh, what's the worst that could happen?
 
2013-03-11 08:41:04 PM

jm105: alice_600: Okay I wanna ask the arm chair generals: What do you do with the people of North Korea after the war to rebuild?

Send in the Germans. They handled their own reunification well enough.


I have thought about that as a model. One pretty substantial difference is that West Germany had the world's fourth largest GDP in under three decades after World War II ended. I think also, and this is just conjecture on my part, that Germany was under a lot more scrutiny in the beginning phases of the reunification due to what Germany had done to the world less than fifty years before.

While there are a lot of similarities between Germany and Korea, there are also a lot of substantial differences, some of which are generational. Germany's split lasted roughly forty five years, which is a long time, but I'm sure there were some people who were around before the end of the war and potentially even before the war itself started. If you're in North Korea and under the age of 65, you haven't known a head of state who wasn't a Kim.

I want to think that North Korea doesn't want armed conflict. We all realize that they could go down in a "blaze of glory" and decimate Seoul, but to what end? What's left of North Korea will be commandeered and the whole God-King deal will be over.
 
2013-03-11 08:42:19 PM
It's all for the greater good.
 
2013-03-11 08:44:02 PM
I just had a completely random thought regarding the problem of the 5000 artillery emplacements. Given realistic rates of fire (someone mentioned it upthread), 3-4 rounds/gun/minute ... if they truly are in range of Seoul, then it becomes easy: they're targeted at a population center, therefore, they are a WMD. There's the justification for release of tactical nukes to take them out.

I didn't say it was a *good* idea, but I'd bet that someone else has already thought of it.
 
2013-03-11 08:49:39 PM
Rapmaster2000: For clarification - is it also on like Rae Dawn Chong, and/or the capital of Jordon, Amman?
 
2013-03-11 08:55:24 PM

CygnusDarius: It's all for the greater good.


THE GREATER GOOD.
 
2013-03-11 09:03:05 PM

KiwDaWabbit: jm105: alice_600: Okay I wanna ask the arm chair generals: What do you do with the people of North Korea after the war to rebuild?

Send in the Germans. They handled their own reunification well enough.

I have thought about that as a model. One pretty substantial difference is that West Germany had the world's fourth largest GDP in under three decades after World War II ended. I think also, and this is just conjecture on my part, that Germany was under a lot more scrutiny in the beginning phases of the reunification due to what Germany had done to the world less than fifty years before.

While there are a lot of similarities between Germany and Korea, there are also a lot of substantial differences, some of which are generational. Germany's split lasted roughly forty five years, which is a long time, but I'm sure there were some people who were around before the end of the war and potentially even before the war itself started. If you're in North Korea and under the age of 65, you haven't known a head of state who wasn't a Kim.

I want to think that North Korea doesn't want armed conflict. We all realize that they could go down in a "blaze of glory" and decimate Seoul, but to what end? What's left of North Korea will be commandeered and the whole God-King deal will be over.


Predictions: Samsung and other Chaebols will have a source of near slave labor. This will also bring the standard of living down the for south. The peninsula will still be divided to prevent waves of hungry and poorly educated norK's from inundating the south.

East and West Germany is the nearest example of such a reunification but there are other huge differences as was pointed out. Many younger South Koreans do not desire reunification at the expense of their lifestyles. The ones pushing it are the much older Koreans and the Korean equivalent of the Teapartiers.

/doctrinally "NORK" is written "norK" not "Nork". The letter "n" is always lowercase as well as the "or" and the "K" is always uppercase. - norK
//it's a Korean thing
 
2013-03-11 09:04:08 PM

timujin: The U.N. can say it's still valid, but that doesn't mean anything if Best Korea decides to ignore it.


I think the point is if they ignore it, then the UN can punish them for ignoring it, because as far as the UN is concerned it's still valid law.
 
2013-03-11 09:04:54 PM

Sgt.Zim: I just had a completely random thought regarding the problem of the 5000 artillery emplacements. Given realistic rates of fire (someone mentioned it upthread), 3-4 rounds/gun/minute ... if they truly are in range of Seoul, then it becomes easy: they're targeted at a population center, therefore, they are a WMD. There's the justification for release of tactical nukes to take them out.

I didn't say it was a *good* idea, but I'd bet that someone else has already thought of it.


Well there is a non-nuclear plan that has been done before.
Battle of Messines (1917)k
/Interesting movie about it on Netflix.
 
2013-03-11 09:05:20 PM

Sgt.Zim: I just had a completely random thought regarding the problem of the 5000 artillery emplacements. Given realistic rates of fire (someone mentioned it upthread), 3-4 rounds/gun/minute ... if they truly are in range of Seoul, then it becomes easy: they're targeted at a population center, therefore, they are a WMD. There's the justification for release of tactical nukes to take them out.

I didn't say it was a *good* idea, but I'd bet that someone else has already thought of it.


You don't even have to try hard.  We were always warned that a good many of those arty emplacements were equipped to fire chemical and biological rounds.
 
2013-03-11 09:16:16 PM

NIXON YOU DOLT!!!!!: Sgt.Zim: I just had a completely random thought regarding the problem of the 5000 artillery emplacements. Given realistic rates of fire (someone mentioned it upthread), 3-4 rounds/gun/minute ... if they truly are in range of Seoul, then it becomes easy: they're targeted at a population center, therefore, they are a WMD. There's the justification for release of tactical nukes to take them out.

I didn't say it was a *good* idea, but I'd bet that someone else has already thought of it.

You don't even have to try hard.  We were always warned that a good many of those arty emplacements were equipped to fire chemical and biological rounds.


NO-GO.

First of all it is more like 50,000 tubes aimed south. Second, the Koreans will not allow nukes to be used on their soil (they include the north in that definition) and their norK brothers and sisters. Not to mention the neighbors are a bit squeamish about anyone throwing around nukes, especially the Japanese, for some reason. You can also bet it would greatly upset China and Russia who are very close. Lest we also not forget the direction some of the fallout would be carried. The US has already received radiation from Fukishima, and that was far from a bomb. And of course the world outrage in general. Bad PR.

It's a non-starter. There are other ways to skin a cat...
 
2013-03-11 09:18:33 PM

phrawgh: NIXON YOU DOLT!!!!!: Sgt.Zim: I just had a completely random thought regarding the problem of the 5000 artillery emplacements. Given realistic rates of fire (someone mentioned it upthread), 3-4 rounds/gun/minute ... if they truly are in range of Seoul, then it becomes easy: they're targeted at a population center, therefore, they are a WMD. There's the justification for release of tactical nukes to take them out.

I didn't say it was a *good* idea, but I'd bet that someone else has already thought of it.

You don't even have to try hard.  We were always warned that a good many of those arty emplacements were equipped to fire chemical and biological rounds.

NO-GO.

First of all it is more like 50,000 tubes aimed south. Second, the Koreans will not allow nukes to be used on their soil (they include the north in that definition) and their norK brothers and sisters. Not to mention the neighbors are a bit squeamish about anyone throwing around nukes, especially the Japanese, for some reason. You can also bet it would greatly upset China and Russia who are very close. Lest we also not forget the direction some of the fallout would be carried. The US has already received radiation from Fukishima, and that was far from a bomb. And of course the world outrage in general. Bad PR.

It's a non-starter. There are other ways to skin a cat...


I wasn't saying nukes was a good idea, just that you didn't have to twist that hard to make an argument they have WMD's on the border.

I suspect our plan is something like "Launch every fighter and bomber located in south korea, and any carrier air groups in range and start bombing the ever loving fark out of the border while decimating their aircover, while every B-52 left in service heads over to carpet bomb whatever is left."
 
2013-03-11 09:19:42 PM

jm105: CygnusDarius: It's all for the greater good.

THE GREATER GOOD.


The needs of the many
 
2013-03-11 09:26:17 PM
"The terms of the armistice agreement do not allow either side unilaterally to free themselves from it," said Nesirky, the spokesman for U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

i172.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-11 09:27:33 PM

2xhelix: [i.imgur.com image 500x329]


i172.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-11 09:31:47 PM

phrawgh: First of all it is more like 50,000 tubes aimed south.


They have the withering artillery, Soviet Doctrine, to overwhelm the South. They have the massive but poorly trained, China Doctrine, infantry to inundate - mostly by attrition, and just drown them with soldiers. They are a product, doctrine-wise, of their military partners. Seoul is to close. The UN, the US, don't have a good answer, without going nuclear of course, which they will not.
 
2013-03-11 09:34:49 PM
So to sum it up, North Korea:
i.chzbgr.com

And the UN's like:
 
2013-03-11 09:38:47 PM
KiwDaWabbit:
I want to think that North Korea doesn't want armed conflict. We all realize that they could go down in a "blaze of glory" and decimate Seoul, but to what end? What's left of North Korea will be commandeered and the whole God-King deal will be over.

Sure, the last ten minutes will suck, but you can't have everything.

/<a href=http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0763.html>not obscure</a>
 
2013-03-11 09:39:23 PM
 
2013-03-11 09:47:33 PM

KiwDaWabbit: I want to think that North Korea doesn't want armed conflict. We all realize that they could go down in a "blaze of glory" and decimate Seoul, but to what end? What's left of North Korea will be commandeered and the whole God-King deal will be over.


North Korea doesn't want armed conflict, to be sure. But its leaders have never been models of mental stability, and Kim Jong-Un has, in a very short time, proven himself the worst of the lot by leaps and bounds on his score. It's only a matter of time before he snaps, and I don't think it's going to be a very long time. We can't count on his underlings to betray him when that happens, either by disobeying orders or by outright removing him; not when he rules by a personality cult stretching back three generations. Certainly there will not be a popular revolt.

It bothers me to call for someone's death. It really does. But for crying out loud, someone put a bullet in this man's brain before he nukes somebody.
 
2013-03-11 09:54:04 PM

Mister Peejay: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0763.html

Because the new system sucks,


You can go back to the old one. Go to my fark comment preferences and click off enable modern rich text.
/Just sayin'
//Oh, and cool comic : )
 
2013-03-11 10:06:02 PM
So, I just had an unpleasant thought.  Say there is at some point a full-blown conflict (née war) on the Korean peninsula.  If I were a madman in Iran, I might see that as an opportunity.  In fact, if I were a collection of mad men - say a handful in Best Korea and a handful in Iran - I might consider that synchronized action the best strategy to divide the "West" and sue for peace... and/or just burn the world.
 
2013-03-11 10:07:52 PM

WhoopAssWayne: phrawgh: First of all it is more like 50,000 tubes aimed south.

They have the withering artillery, Soviet Doctrine, to overwhelm the South. They have the massive but poorly trained, China Doctrine, infantry to inundate - mostly by attrition, and just drown them with soldiers. They are a product, doctrine-wise, of their military partners. Seoul is to close. The UN, the US, don't have a good answer, without going nuclear of course, which they will not.


We've come a long way from that NK army. If our army is concerned about obesity, what do you think their army must be running on?
 
2013-03-11 10:09:42 PM

bubba_2ba: So, I just had an unpleasant thought.  Say there is at some point a full-blown conflict (née war) on the Korean peninsula.  If I were a madman in Iran, I might see that as an opportunity.  In fact, if I were a collection of mad men - say a handful in Best Korea and a handful in Iran - I might consider that synchronized action the best strategy to divide the "West" and sue for peace... and/or just burn the world.


The US Navy is still in a 2 Major Theater War capability and posture.
 
2013-03-11 10:20:15 PM

vygramul: We've come a long way from that NK army. If our army is concerned about obesity, what do you think their army must be running on?


I didn't know our Army was so concerned with PT. I've only read that in recent months/years they are getting more selective, especially at the recruiting posts. .
 
2013-03-11 10:23:20 PM

RandomRandom: It's not just a refugee crisis that South Korea is really worried about, it's the NK's 5000 hardened artillery positions within firing range of Seoul.  If NK gets hit bombed by the west, even a little, even just the nuke sites, the north will probably start firing shells at Seoul.

How long would it take us to disable Five Thousand long-range artillery pieces, each embedded in its own hardened concrete bunker?  Not hours, days would be the best case, a week would be most accurate.  Getting through hardened concrete takes a direct hit from a large, directed munition.  Drones might help, repeated counter-battery might work, eventually, but one suspects most of the heavy lifting would be done by manned aircraft and laser guided 2,000 lb bombs.  5,000 is a lot of sorties.

Here's the big deal.  How many shots would the NK howitzers get off before being destroyed?  Modern artillery can fire a few rounds a minute, but lets say that each of the 5000 fire just 1 round per minute and are - on average, destroyed after just one hour of firing.

Using that artificially low rate of fire and terribly optimistic rate of destroying their guns, it would still result in 300,000 high explosive and incendiary shells hitting Seoul in the first hour of fighting.   After the first hour of fighting, Seoul would look like Dresden.  If the war came on fast, in response to say, a surprise attack by the west, a good proportion of Seoul's 25 million population would see their last day on earth.

It's not Best Korea's nukes that have everyone in the South worried, it's their half-century old gun tech.  Which unless we have some new technology hidden away that is able to instantly disable 5000 howitzers, the chances of a preemptive strike against the north's nukes is about as close to 0% as it gets.


ROFLMAO you earna 8.90/10 from me, lil injun, that was amazing.
 
2013-03-11 10:33:57 PM

vygramul: We've come a long way from that NK army. If our army is concerned about obesity, what do you think their army must be running on?


About 1200 kcals per day.
 
2013-03-11 10:36:14 PM

phrawgh: /doctrinally "NORK" is written "norK" not "Nork". The letter "n" is always lowercase as well as the "or" and the "K" ...


It's our language.  We'll capitalize it however the hell we like.
 
2013-03-11 10:46:35 PM

KiwDaWabbit: jm105: alice_600: Okay I wanna ask the arm chair generals: What do you do with the people of North Korea after the war to rebuild?

Send in the Germans. They handled their own reunification well enough.

I have thought about that as a model. One pretty substantial difference is that West Germany had the world's fourth largest GDP in under three decades after World War II ended. I think also, and this is just conjecture on my part, that Germany was under a lot more scrutiny in the beginning phases of the reunification due to what Germany had done to the world less than fifty years before.

While there are a lot of similarities between Germany and Korea, there are also a lot of substantial differences, some of which are generational. Germany's split lasted roughly forty five years, which is a long time, but I'm sure there were some people who were around before the end of the war and potentially even before the war itself started. If you're in North Korea and under the age of 65, you haven't known a head of state who wasn't a Kim.

I want to think that North Korea doesn't want armed conflict. We all realize that they could go down in a "blaze of glory" and decimate Seoul, but to what end? What's left of North Korea will be commandeered and the whole God-King deal will be over.


It's the German unification model that S Korea desperately wants to avoid. It cost Germany billions of dollars worth of Deutsche Marks to integrate East Germany economically, and the difference between East and West Germany in 1990 was nothing compared to the difference between modern-day North and South Korea. Bear in mind that East German children were going to school, eating fairly well, and were still fairly similar, culturally speaking, to West German children. None of those things are true about North and South Korea anymore.

Imagine modern-day US waking up one day and having the South of the Great Depression - rampant pellagra, racism, economic stagnation and all - suddenly materialize off the coast of Florida. Now imagine we decided to let them rejoin the United States. How would we handle tens of millions of starving, near-illiterate people whose attitudes and perceptions about the world are decades out of date? For that matter, how would the air-dropped Southerners handle *us*?

Now you know why nobody is invading North Korea. It has nothing to do with their artillery or their nukes. Truth is, though they do have lots of artillery, there's no guarantee anyone would fire it. As former leaders of Iraq can attest, all the hardware and training in the world don't mean a thing if your soldiers just want to go home. Bear in mind that no North Korean soldier has seen action since the Angolan Civil War in the late '80s. For most of them, joining the military was something they did because they were drafted - and they stayed because the food was slightly better. There's absolutely no guarantee that any of them will bother to fire in anger if they get ordered to.
 
2013-03-11 10:53:50 PM
And here I was, thinking 'Can anyone say or do anything crazier and more stupid than the Norks at this point?' At least the UN is reliable for something.
 
2013-03-11 10:57:16 PM

vygramul: bubba_2ba: So, I just had an unpleasant thought.  Say there is at some point a full-blown conflict (née war) on the Korean peninsula.  If I were a madman in Iran, I might see that as an opportunity.  In fact, if I were a collection of mad men - say a handful in Best Korea and a handful in Iran - I might consider that synchronized action the best strategy to divide the "West" and sue for peace... and/or just burn the world.

The US Navy is still in a 2 Major Theater War capability and posture.


On paper, absolutely,... but if worst case Seoul is burned and Iran ignites a full-blown mid-east conflict, it's no longer a case of who wins in the long term.  The real question would be does the "West" have the political commitment to fight the long war on two fronts?  It's a nightmare scenario.
 
2013-03-11 11:19:28 PM
I never had any opinion on Rodman before but his trip to NK changed that.  Class I douche in my book.  He should be charged with giving aid and comfort to the enemy or some such shiat.
 
2013-03-11 11:31:24 PM

bubba_2ba: vygramul: bubba_2ba: So, I just had an unpleasant thought.  Say there is at some point a full-blown conflict (née war) on the Korean peninsula.  If I were a madman in Iran, I might see that as an opportunity.  In fact, if I were a collection of mad men - say a handful in Best Korea and a handful in Iran - I might consider that synchronized action the best strategy to divide the "West" and sue for peace... and/or just burn the world.

The US Navy is still in a 2 Major Theater War capability and posture.

On paper, absolutely,... but if worst case Seoul is burned and Iran ignites a full-blown mid-east conflict, it's no longer a case of who wins in the long term.  The real question would be does the "West" have the political commitment to fight the long war on two fronts?  It's a nightmare scenario.


If we withdraw from the middle east, turkey will take over as a regional power, NOT iran.
 
2013-03-11 11:32:11 PM

Ima4nic8or: I never had any opinion on Rodman before but his trip to NK changed that.  Class I douche in my book.  He should be charged with giving aid and comfort to the enemy or some such shiat.


I suppose that is technically possible since we are still at war.
 
2013-03-11 11:33:12 PM

vygramul: WhoopAssWayne: phrawgh: First of all it is more like 50,000 tubes aimed south.

They have the withering artillery, Soviet Doctrine, to overwhelm the South. They have the massive but poorly trained, China Doctrine, infantry to inundate - mostly by attrition, and just drown them with soldiers. They are a product, doctrine-wise, of their military partners. Seoul is to close. The UN, the US, don't have a good answer, without going nuclear of course, which they will not.

We've come a long way from that NK army. If our army is concerned about obesity, what do you think their army must be running on?


duncan
 
2013-03-11 11:37:31 PM
 
2013-03-11 11:43:09 PM
 
2013-03-11 11:57:47 PM

vygramul: WhoopAssWayne: phrawgh: First of all it is more like 50,000 tubes aimed south.

They have the withering artillery, Soviet Doctrine, to overwhelm the South. They have the massive but poorly trained, China Doctrine, infantry to inundate - mostly by attrition, and just drown them with soldiers. They are a product, doctrine-wise, of their military partners. Seoul is to close. The UN, the US, don't have a good answer, without going nuclear of course, which they will not.

We've come a long way from that NK army. If our army is concerned about obesity, what do you think their army must be running on?


Fumes. No weapons, no materiel, and soviet doctrine can be summed up as: do as little as possible and avoid getting shot by all means necessary. Preferably while remaining drunk the whole time.

Seriously, we don't need landmines. Just line the border with buckets of original recipe. They'll never make it an inch further into the south.
 
2013-03-11 11:58:11 PM

WhoopAssWayne: The risk of millions pouring over the border, both in China and Seoul, is very real and it's always taken into account when dealing with North Korea.


Oh, I figured there was some risk, I was just curious as to how much. Sounds like my guess is as good as anyone's at this point. Thanks.
 
2013-03-12 12:05:43 AM
War on 2 fronts question...commitment...

The next war isn't the video game drone war? Fought with drones, tomahawks, ICBM's, Cheetos and Mountain Dew?

I thought we were letting the gamers fight the next war(s) so they could respawn and live to fight another day.
 
2013-03-12 01:55:38 AM
I would think that almost all Best Koreans are practically mentally ill by now, having been locked away in a cellar by their despicable rulers all their lives.

Do those poor people ever enjoy any sort of release from their propaganda and pain?
 
2013-03-12 02:08:42 AM
Cant we just launch a cruise missile up his yang before this one gets to die of natural causes as well.  Just make the war head more burney than explodey, so that those people can get some benefit from his renderings, and I'd like for him to feel it.
 
2013-03-12 03:19:34 AM

Dr. Goldshnoz: jake_lex: Usually, "regime change" backfires in the end and the new leader turns out to be about as bad, if not worse, than the original leader that got overthrown. I can't see, though, how anyone would be worse for North Korea than this family of sociopaths.

Yea personally I find it hard to believe he is as cooky as the old man. He was educated in Switzerland; right? So he literally has first hand knowledge that the west isn't as bad as the picture that is painted.


he also had plastic surgery at a young age to look more like grandpa. his way of thinking is not remotely like yours or mine. he has been raised as a god king. he is insane.
 
Skr
2013-03-12 03:21:41 AM
Well if the UN is going to do something about Un, they'd be better off doing it before he becomes as deified as his father and grandfather were.
 
2013-03-12 06:50:37 AM

bubba_2ba: vygramul: bubba_2ba: So, I just had an unpleasant thought.  Say there is at some point a full-blown conflict (née war) on the Korean peninsula.  If I were a madman in Iran, I might see that as an opportunity.  In fact, if I were a collection of mad men - say a handful in Best Korea and a handful in Iran - I might consider that synchronized action the best strategy to divide the "West" and sue for peace... and/or just burn the world.

The US Navy is still in a 2 Major Theater War capability and posture.

On paper, absolutely,... but if worst case Seoul is burned and Iran ignites a full-blown mid-east conflict, it's no longer a case of who wins in the long term.  The real question would be does the "West" have the political commitment to fight the long war on two fronts?  It's a nightmare scenario.


Iran's ability to create that kind of problem is limited. And we still have a lot of force there.

/On the one hand, the US spends more than the next six countries combined, on the other, we can't handle two pissant conflicts?
 
Displayed 243 of 243 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report