North Korean Military.

[swerve]

In today's media, South Korea are insisting that no attack on the North can take place without their permission.

Again the US is in a no win situation; dammed if they do and dammed if they don't.

What a shame that the Armistice Line was not agreed another 30 miles north making Seoul outside the range of the NK artillery. Of course it would still be within reach of missiles but at least it would have made some significant difference.

The armistice line was where the armies were. Trying to move it north would have been bloody, expensive, & not guaranteed to work.

Any time after 10-07-1951 it would also have meant fighting over the place where armistice talks were taking place.

 

[Tsavo Lion]

Raising the stakes: Why North Korea is talking up Guam
Americans Once Carpet-Bombed North Korea The USN also participated!
Modern war's dirty secret: The victims are civilians

Late in the war, Blair reported, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to pressure North Korean negotiators in truce talks, approved "another massive air assault on the North Korean civilian population. The problem was there were no cities or towns left anywhere in North Korea." So the Air Force began bombing irrigation dams to flood rice paddies and starve the population. As in a lot of the other bombardment of North Korea, many of the resulting civilian casualties in that operation were considered "collateral damage."

'Full Range of Military Options' Ready Against NK
We Can Stop NK From Attacking US – All We Have to Do Is Not Attack Them

We’re not worried that we can’t deter North Korea. We’re worried because a North Korea that can plausibly strike the U.S. with nuclear weapons will likely be able to deter us from doing whatever we want. For example, we might not be able to invade North Korea. .. Iraq and Libya both surrendered their unconventional military capacity, and we then invaded them. North Korea’s rulers definitely noticed that and have clearly explained why they have no intention of following Saddam Hussein and Moammar Gadhafi into oblivion.

US, China, Koreas Begin to Revisit Diplomacy
Japan to seek assurance of U.S. defense pledge, including nuclear deterrence
I wonder why the SK gov. didn't move the capital to a safer location once the NK artillery threat became known? The Myanmar gov. moved its capital inland a fewyears ago, & in the last century the Bolsheviks moved their seat from Petrograd to Moscow. BTW, the RF Navy could cover NK from the sea just like it recently covered Syria. There, noone risked & stayed 50km away from the Russian ships. The US will then be able to attack NK w/o interference only from SK or with LAC/BMs.
Edit: How North Korea Developed Missiles So Quickly
If there's a will, there's a way! Although Israel & NK have different political systems, their strategical situation was, & in some way still is, similar. BTW, SK is, like Israel, also backed by USA & surrounded by rivals. Israeli, Pakistani, Indian & Japanese missiles also didn't take very long to develop!

 

[Tsavo Lion]

Pl. see my edit in the last post.
S. Korea's Moon Says He Can Veto US War
North Korea 'Threat' to Guam Greatly Overblown
Korea Fight Is Latest Conflict for Indigenous People of Guam
Iran May Quit Deal if US Keeps Adding Sanctions- I'm sure NK is watching this saga with interest!
Iran and NK: Unfulfilled Promise of the Nuclear Agreement
Constitution Prohibits Pre-Emptive Strike Against North Korea

 

[STURM]

[US And North Korea Are In A 'Propaganda Spat']
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veq9FTgAbX0

A talk with a former U.S. ambassador to South Korea. His take is that North Korea is not trying to get an ICBM because it fears regime change but because it wants to force the U.S. out of the Korean peninsular so that South Korea can be dealt with.

['Western Press Has Been Exaggerating' North Korea Threat To U.S.]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X77snE0lsTw

A former Australian ambassador however has a different take on the situation. He talks about the North Korean leader not being crazy or stupid [something many automatically assume based on his actions] and of wanting nukes to strengthen his position in future talks with the U.S. According to him North Korea seeks talks with the U.S. but without any preconditions being placed.

[CrossTalk: What Does N. Korea Want?]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6X-_NU_prM

One of the speakers mentions that the argument that China is not doing enough is false given that total imports are already down 13 percent and that coal imports are down 75 percent. He also points out that demands that China ceases all trade [something that benefits the U.S. but not China] is silly given that the Chinese would lose whatever leverage they have with North Korea [a vital fact given that its almost impossible for the U.S. to achieve anything without Chinese involvement and that the Chinese have a much better understanding of how to deal with the North Koreans].

[Inside Story - US, North Korea War Of Words: Where Is This Heading?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5qmKGfmrxc

One of the speakers mentions that during the talks held in the 2000's several countries agreed to fund a nuclear reactor in North Korea for non military purposes with North Korean in return abandoning its nuclear programme. A series of sanctions later placed on North Korea apparently killed the talks.

 

[Waylander]

It's not as if the NKs didn't get alot of sweet deals in the past. They got food and other economic help as well as the joint industrial complex with SK.

But that didn't stop them from continuing to build nukes and missiles.

And why would it? What kind of deal would be worthy enough for the regime to forego their nuclear program for it? I can't think of one. Defenitely not a civilian reactor. These nukes and their delivery systems are so essential to the future of the regime that no sweet deal could ever persuade them to abandon their programs.


They will take what they can get and move on.

 

[colay1]

If NK was offered all sorts of sweeteners to cap their nuke program backed up by a formal treaty backed by China guaranteeing their sovereignty, would that be workable? They would still retain their ability to lay waste to much of Seoul with conventional weaponry. Would they trust a Chinese guarantee?

 

[alexsa]

Pl. see my edit in the last post.
S. Korea's Moon Says He Can Veto US War
North Korea 'Threat' to Guam Greatly Overblown
Korea Fight Is Latest Conflict for Indigenous People of Guam
Iran May Quit Deal if US Keeps Adding Sanctions- I'm sure NK is watching this saga with interest!
Iran and NK: Unfulfilled Promise of the Nuclear Agreement
Constitution Prohibits Pre-Emptive Strike Against North Korea

I think you need to provide more than links to other peoples view as reasonable discourse. How about you provide a summary and a view backed up by links. This adds very little to the discussion

 

[Tsavo Lion]

F-35 Is Newest Thorn In North Korea’s Side
NK has a point of keeping nukes & BMs as their conventional weapons become obsolete; the KPA can now be safely downsized. as the Latin dictum says: Si vis pacem, para bellum- "if want peace, prepare for war". But in the NK-US dynamic, the US side should follow Si vis pacem, para pactum- "if you want peace, agree to keep the peace". The Chinese character for martial arts, 武, means "to stop the spear. ..stopping the violence before it happens."

“But as I’ve told my counterparts, both friend and foe,” he added, “it is not unimaginable to have military options to respond to North Korean nuclear capability. What’s unimaginable to me is allowing a capability that would allow a nuclear weapon to land in Denver, Colorado. That’s unimaginable to me. So my job will be to develop military options to make sure that doesn’t happen.”

Having said that, he admits that our BMD isn't effective even against NK BMs. OTH, if by some miracle NK gave up its ICBMs, would US get rid of its BMD in AK & CA? Reading between the lines, it's clear to me that NK ICBMs are a big wrench in the US plan to be able to threaten & pressure NK at will; "the party is over"! Kim is overweight & may have health problems but he isn't irrational to attack USA 1st. Just him having that capability isn't "the end of the world" for the Western civilization. Some of our today's allies & friends + few "neutrals" with BMs may turn rivals later, or terrorists/rebels could capture them; does it mean we are justified to unleash "fire & fury" now so they won't be able to use their BMs against us in the future? If Iranians & Russians could be negotiated with, why not do it with N Koreans? They may be "mad dogs" when it comes to defending their turf, but so are the Israelis!

 

[Waylander]

If NK was offered all sorts of sweeteners to cap their nuke program backed up by a formal treaty backed by China guaranteeing their sovereignty, would that be workable? They would still retain their ability to lay waste to much of Seoul with conventional weaponry. Would they trust a Chinese guarantee?

I doubt it. Lil Kim didn't purge his regime of Chinese afficionados for nothing. If anything nuclear tipped BMs are as much a threat for China and an insurance against regime change from that direction as they are directed against the South or the US. And the Norks have alot more missiles with the reach to hit the vital Chinese coastal areas than they have for hitting the CONUS west coast.

It's the same reason why he won't accept Chinese troops on his soil. It's not only about the regime loosing face fir having to rely on China for protection. It is also about it being too dangerous for fear of a Chinese intervention into internal Nork politics.

 

[John Fedup]

IMO it wasn't only the US that let the military option be delayed until after the "best before date"! As you say, NK has way more Chinese targets in range than American ones.

 

[colay1]

If KJU really mistrusts China so much then how useful will China be in influencing him to moderate his behavior? The China Card premises every diplomatic effort to arrive at a solution AFAIK.

 

[Tsavo Lion]

Now he can afford to be moderate, & already did by not sending BMs toward Guam, even w/o the PRC telling him to:

“North Korea will conduct a sixth nuclear test in order to bring the United States to negotiations,” said Yoo Ho-yeol, professor of unification and diplomacy at Seoul’s Korea University. “I don’t know exactly when (it will happen), but a sixth nuclear test is a less dangerous option for North Korea than firing missiles towards Guam.
”North Korea’s nuclear strategy is premised on initiating a first-use against U.S. military targets within the Northeast Asian and Pacific theaters should it detect even a whiff of a pre-emptive attack or decapitation strike against the regime underway to defeat such an attempt, and to use its ICBM arsenal to deter subsequent American nuclear retaliation. ..As with the stages of grief, the first stage of a superpower accepting deterrence may be denial.

They learned valuable lessons taught them by NATO & US in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, & during the Korean War itself. Perhaps it's time for the US to show some moderation of its own on the international scene & particularly in E/SE Asia.

 

[Waylander]

If KJU really mistrusts China so much then how useful will China be in influencing him to moderate his behavior? The China Card premises every diplomatic effort to arrive at a solution AFAIK.

They can strangle im economically if they want. Most of NKs imports and exports are with or via China. But it is also dangerous for them. Strangle him too much and his regime may become unstable with many undesired or downright ugly consequences.

They may have lost lots of their inner circle regime contacts but their sticks and carrots outside of direct human influence are as powerfull as ever.

But it is quite difficult for them to find the right pressure in order to keep him in check without destabilising the situation even further and loosing some of the favourable consequences of having NK on it's border as a burden to SK, Japan and the US.

 

[Tsavo Lion]

As I was saying: N. Korea Standoff, Like Cuban Missile Crisis, Exposes Reckless US Worldview:

The “crisis” then and now was created by the refusal of the U.S. to live under the same threat to which we subject others. ..The U.S. of course has possessed the ability to instantly destroy North Korea with nuclear weapons for 60 years. Moreover, we already leveled the country once with conventional weapons during the 1950s, killing perhaps one-fifth of its population. The equivalent number of deaths for the U.S. today would be over 60 million people. That, however, has never been a “crisis,” just as it was not a crisis when the Kennedy administration put nuclear missiles in Italy and Turkey. It has become a crisis because it appears North Korea may be close to being able to put nuclear weapons on ICBMs that can reach the continental U.S. ..Now, in an echo of Kennedy’s September 1962 remarks, Trump has declared that that “won’t happen!” Just as during the Cuban missile crisis, we start from the position that we must have the power to kill others, but it is illegitimate for them to have the power to kill us.

Kim is obese & won't live very long. It's better to let the nature take its course & wait for his natural demize &/ internal Romanian/Egyptian style revolt or military coup.
Pakistan has nukes & had coups, so it's not unprecedented.

 

[colay1]

They can strangle im economically if they want. Most of NKs imports and exports are with or via China. But it is also dangerous for them. Strangle him too much and his regime may become unstable with many undesired or downright ugly consequences.

They may have lost lots of their inner circle regime contacts but their sticks and carrots outside of direct human influence are as powerfull as ever.

But it is quite difficult for them to find the right pressure in order to keep him in check without destabilising the situation even further and loosing some of the favourable consequences of having NK on it's border as a burden to SK, Japan and the US.

Yes, that's how the thinking goes. What will motivate China to go to that extreme? As I see it, only if it's economic and social stability are threatened via a trade war but how likely is that? Ultimately the US may just be willing to live with the NK threat rather than pay higher prices at Walmart.

 

[STURM]

What kind of deal would be worthy enough for the regime to forego their nuclear program for it?

What might possibly interest them is a scale down in U.S/ROK exercises which is what China and if I'm not mistaken also Russia, have proposed as part of future talks that benefit everyone. Whilst the exercises according to the U.S. and the ROK are aimed at peace and stability on the peninsular; they are viewed as provocative by North Korea and is a constant reminder of how far behind their military is. I read somewhere that there is scheduled exercise which will take place next week.

What kind of deal would be worthy enough for the regime to forego their nuclear program for it? I can't think of one. Defenitely not a civilian reactor.

A deal in which they would be absolutely convinced that the ''safety'' of their regime is assured and that a much stronger U.S. and South Korea will have no reason to contemplate changing the status quo.

If KJU really mistrusts China so much then how useful will China be in influencing him to moderate his behavior?

Lets just say that they distrust the U.S. much more and that the Chinese have more leverage over the North Koreans and a better understanding of how to deal with them and what makes them tick.

What will motivate China to go to that extreme?

Short of North Korea doing something that really annoys or alarms China; the Chinese will not go to the extreme : doing so benefits the u.S. but not China and China [as pointed out by a speaker in one of the videos I provided a link for] loses whatever leverage it has with its ''troublesome'' neighbor to the south.

 

[Waylander]

The question is, will there be other demands after scaling back the exercises? Or will NK just demand other stuff and/or hope for new aid deliveries in order to appease them.

The right decision may also be that the US just has to live with a nuclear ICBM armed NK and rely on their conventional and nuclear deterrence to keep him in check. Also has the added bemefit of just letting Kim bark without response as long as there are no direct hostile actions. But scaling back maneuvers would be wrong in such a situation.

IMHO there are two options. Rely on deterrence and isolation or actively remove the regime and it's nukes. Option two is ugly and unpredictable as hell and won't be well received by either SK or Japan.

But getting into barking contest with Kim is defenitely the least usefull way of dealing with the situation.

 

[Tsavo Lion]

I dare to say that if the US attacks NK 1st w/o SK's approval, SK may switch sides & attack/detain US forces at bases on its territory & its Navy & AF may help defend NK against the US & Japan, thus avoiding destruction of Seoul by NK "Damocles Sword" just 35 mi. away. Combined & coordinated, both Koreas (not to mention PRC & RF) can give a bloody nose to anyone! That sobering possibility shouldn't be overlooked by hawks in Japan & on this side of the Pacific.

 

[swerve]

Kim is obese & won't live very long.

His father wasn't as fat, but had a very unhealthy lifestyle (overindulged in rich food & booze, no exercise) & it took until he was 70 to kill him. Fat boy could be around for a few decades. He's only 33.

 

[the concerned]

Unfortunately the South Korean president is wrong. He only has authority if the North Korean's attack on their soil which is not what they are threatening. They are threatening a US base in Guam so the US would have the right to respond how they see fit. Not being rude but the last thing needs right now is a week president does he honestly think that if the North Koreans attack Guam that they are just going to sit there and wait for the US to retaliate. More likely they will attack South Korea as at least to start with they get to dictate the pace.