North Korea aims to become World's first "suicide country."

[VMA131Marine]

A pre-emptive strike implies that it will prevent a response in kind. But if NK actually decided to nuke South Korea or anywhere else they might inflict some damage, but they would not have a whole lot of time to celebrate victory before Pyongyang and the other major population centres ceased to exist.

Pyongyang ready for pre-emptive nuclear strike: North's dop diplomat
2016/03/28 23:21

TweetFacebook ShareGoogle +1
ReduceEnlargePrint
MOSCOW, Mach 28 (Yonhap) -- North Korea is ready to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike in response to what it claims is provocation by South Korea and the U.S., Pyongyang's top diplomat said Monday.

"In response to the US frenzied hysteria for unleashing a nuclear war, we have fully transferred our army from the form of military response to the form of delivering a pre-emptive strike and we state resolutely about the readiness to deliver a pre-emptive nuclear strike," North Korea's Foreign Minister Lee Su-yong said.

"In a word, the Korean peninsula faces the dilemma: a thermonuclear war or peace," he said.

North Korea has recently stepped up its military ante apparently to show off the progress it has made in upgrading its nuclear and missile capabilities as well as in advancing the striking power of its multiple rocket launchers and other long-range artillery systems.

[e-mail]

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2016/03/28/0301000000AEN20160328011100320.html

[Jackie Wilson Said]

1. If we ever needed a level headed leader like Trump or Cruz, it is now...

That is fucking SARCASM for you folks who might sit out the general election

[qwlauren35]

3. But, but but...

Hillary is "hawkish"...

[Baobab]

5. she is

more so than the others

[Baobab]

4. I'm sure they love it

North Korea is God's gift to the arms industry.

[Igel]

2. If the PRNK launched a pre-emptive strike that reached its target,

do you really think we'd level Pyongyang?

We'd likely miss the leader. We'd create fall out for either China, Japan, or S. Korea. We'd kill hundreds of thousands of N. Koreans. We'd run the risk of triggering a response from China or Russia. There'd be a massive influx of refugees if the N. Korean government fell and massive instability that neither China nor S. Korea want, and which might well undo S. Korea entirely.

The damage done in the US (or wherever Pyongyang struck) wouldn't be undone.

Show me the upside.

And while I think that's the case, I have no doubt that my reasoning--right or wrong--isn't considered by N. Korea to be a novel or unexpected prediction. Many seem to assume that in response to a provocation the US will just sit, blink, and burble, "There's no military solution."

Now, what we would do is a mystery to me. Launch a ground attack? Probably not. Although if N. Korea launched such an attack and it worked, I suspect there'd be a quick follow up while we were distracted. It would be a mistake, I think, but to suggest N. Korea might make a mistake is like suggesting there might air outside my house in the morning.

Non-nuclear (or perhaps "tactical" nuclear) cruise missile strikes on narrowly intelligenced target(s)? Non-nuclear, sure. Efficacious, probably not unless we have really good intelligence.

[Adrahil]

6. Level Pyongyang? No. But it would mean war...

... And destruction of the PRNK.

I'm not sure we'd use nukes at all. In fact, I doubt we would.

[Baobab]

8. if North Korea used nuclear weapons we would have to retaliate definitively

against their leadership with bunker buster nukes. Maybe we could only hope to entomb them. Many buildings would likely collapse. That has been a problem there even without any additional 'encouragement'.

[Adrahil]

11. The problem is that...

in such a densely populated area of the world, the fallout (both literal and figurative) would be very messy. I think we would probably refrain from using nukes unless we absolutely had too. The prevailing wind would push fallout into the Sea of Japan and possibly even into China. Very bad idea.

[Baobab]

17. What if they shipped a nuke by parcel post to their NYC office

and blew it up there?


(BTW I actually would agree with you about it being impossible except - hmmmmm---

except that thats the risk other countries take by turning a blind eye on this kind of neighbor.)

Kim likes to play the Nixon Madman Theory game.. But we invented that game.

He does not deserve any sense of security over anything at all. People like him don't get to sleep well at night.

We will protect our interests.

Mutual ASSURED destruction.

I hope he is EATEN by his own people, he deserves to be.

[VMA131Marine]

7. We absolutely would level Pyongyang and we would wipe out NK's military capabilities

The only question is how we would do it. If we were sure that NK did not have any more nukes then it is likely that we would use conventional weapons: bombers with smart bombs, cruise missiles, artillery, etc. but either way, the government of NK would cease to be a going concern.

[Baobab]

9. too big of a risk to take

we would not want to risk not annihilating the leadership like we did in Iraq.

Since KJI lives a good part of the time in Wonsan we should annihilate Wonsan too. Especially if he nukes Austin Texas, Wonsan has to go. Mutual destruction and all.

I am a pacifist but - that would cross the line.

May Our Good Lord in Heaven have mercy on his soul.

I'm kind of joking but nukes are not a joke. He would learn very quickly what its like to become ones constituent elements

[Baobab]

10. "DPRK" is what you mean.

Not PRNK

Pyongyang is more like Washington than Berkeley

[Adrahil]

12. Correct. :)

[stevenleser]

14. We would have to and the Russians and Chinese would want us to as well, regardless of their

public statements.

It would be a very bad precedent for fledgling nuclear states to be able to think they would potentially be able to get away with a first strike against a larger nuclear state.

It would need to be made clear that the consequences for that is annihilation. To not do so would actually encourage more nuclear attacks.

[Baobab]

19. we have dial a megatonnage mini bombs too

I think we also know where the escape tunnels go and exit.

he might have enough supplies down there to go for a long time but I would not want to be in that situation. his tunnel mates would no doubt realize that by serving him up on a silver platter they would get to live.

how lucky does he think he is?

[Takket]

13. it would be a lot easier to take NK seriously if they didn't make the same threat every week

[stevenleser]

15. That's the other thing. This is not a serious threat. nt

[FLPanhandle]

16. North Korea does this all the time

Every time they want more aid or money they start with the sabre rattling.

Eventually, countries give them something and they shut up for a bit.

[Baobab]

20. people in NK are FED UP with Kim III

SEE JUST HOW MUCH HERE: http://www.asiapress.org/rimjin-gang/

[politicaljunkie41910]

22. You are absolutely correct. Fat Lil Kim is the utmost in attention seeking.

He is all bluster and no action. He is head of a broke ass country with no prospects of becoming anything else other than a broke ass country as long as they maintain the status quo. However, he was educated outside of North Korea having spent his youthful years in Switzerland as a playboy with a lot of money, so he knows that there is another world outside of his broke ass country. So I don't think Fat Kim is ready to meet his maker anytime soon. He knows the score in spite of the fact that the rest of his fellow citizens have spent their entire lives in La La Land. He's not going to do anything stupid because he knows that it would all be over if he tried to launch a real nuclear warhead, and the Fat Lil Kim is stupid, but he's not crazy.

[closeupready]

18. It is absolutely imperative that they remain as isolated as possible.

With world events becoming more unpredictable and unstable, they need to be monitored 24/7.

[Baobab]

21. they have to be kept scared with endless talk about terrorism

and economic privations