Korea

[Humodour]

That is brilliant Calax.

 

On darker note, has anybody mentioned North Korea's slave labour camps in this thread? Probably worth mentioning if we are discussing the threat North Korea poses to humanity. Over 100,000 people are estimated to be held in this manner, with many of them being killed and replaced each year.

 

Here is one of North Korea's slave camps: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yodok_concentration_camp

[Hildegard]

With Wikileaks comes a new dimension to North Korea's threat: it supplies Iran with nuclear fuel, technology, and missiles designed to have enough range to hit Europe.

 

-- Iran has obtained sophisticated missiles from North Korea capable of hitting western Europe, and the United States is concerned Iran is using those rockets as "building blocks" to build longer-range missiles. The advanced missiles are much more powerful than anything U.S. officials have publicly acknowledged Iran has in its arsenal.

 

cronicler: Interesting read. Might respond if I have time when I get home.

 

NK sold missiles to Syria, Iraq, Iran in the past, that fact is known. Also when Pakistan developed their own A-bomb they didn't have the appropriate nuclear delivery system. NK had missile technology but didn't have the nuclear know how. Of course there was a mutual convergence and they traded. And Iran isn't so much in the need of nuclear fuel as their facilities now make the necessary quantities.

[Humodour]

Well, on the issues of the China-NK relationship... what relationship?

 

The leaked North Korea dispatches detail how:

 

• South Korea's vice-foreign minister said he was told by two named senior Chinese officials that they believed Korea should be reunified under Seoul's control, and that this view was gaining ground with the leadership in Beijing.

 

• China's vice-foreign minister told US officials that Pyongyang was behaving like a "spoiled child" to get Washington's attention in April 2009 by carrying out missile tests.

 

• A Chinese ambassador warned that North Korean nuclear activity was "a threat to the whole world's security".

 

• Chinese officials assessed that it could cope with an influx of 300,000 North Koreans in the event of serious instability, according to a representative of an international agency, but might need to use the military to seal the border.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/2...reunified-korea

 

Kevin Rudd has also confirmed that in the event of a Korean war, Australia's mutual defence treaty with America (and America's with South Korea) would mean Australia would defend South Korea by the transitive property. It would be amusing if this meant New Zealand would also be involved as they have a mutual defence treaty with Australia.

Edited November 30, 2010 by Krezack

[~Di]

If true, this is quite sobering and disconcerting: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/as...ar-2145018.html

 

Expats recalled as North Korea prepares for war

 

By Shaun Walker in Moscow

 

 

Saturday, 27 November 2010

 

A mass exodus of North Korean workers from the Far East of Russia is under way, according to reports coming out of the region. As the two Koreas edged towards the brink of war this week, it appears that the workers in Russia have been called back to aid potential military operations.

 

 

Vladnews agency, based in Vladivostok, reported that North Korean workers had left the town of Nakhodka en masse shortly after the escalation of tension on the Korean peninsula earlier this week. "Traders have left the kiosks and markets, workers have abandoned building sites, and North Korean secret service employees working in the region have joined them and left," the agency reported.

[Humodour]

Oh ****, I thought my mate was joking when he said that Di!

 

I'm genuinely worried.

Edited November 30, 2010 by Krezack

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

So... what are the odds of this being a short war?

 

Because I don't think the odds are really high.

[Humodour]

I think the odds of a quick war are extremely high.

 

China won't support North Korea. It may even support South Korea (south Korea is a huge trade partner for China). Certainly China would not support NK militarily and may even cut off all financial and food aid to North Korea.

 

Then you've got sheer numbers stacked against North Korea in terms of Western allies, technological disparity, and South Korea's own army itself.

 

I think that if NK does start a war, it will be quick and very bloody (for both North and South).

[Oblarg]

If NK starts a war, a lot of people will die, and NK will very soon cease to exist as a country.

[Calax]

If the Koreas go to war, the only way the NK's win is if they hit hard and fast enough to basically take control of the entire peninsula before anyone can react (which in this day and age is going to be a matter of hours). Otherwise it'll either be a quick invasion, reversal, victory for the south, or a long bogged down conflict as everyone and their pet goat in NK gets a rifle and starts shooting at anything approaching (said the experianceless armchair general)

[Nepenthe]

If the Koreas go to war, the only way the NK's win is if they hit hard and fast enough to basically take control of the entire peninsula before anyone can react (which in this day and age is going to be a matter of hours). Otherwise it'll either be a quick invasion, reversal, victory for the south, or a long bogged down conflict as everyone and their pet goat in NK gets a rifle and starts shooting at anything approaching (said the experianceless armchair general)

 

Unless it goes nuclear, even a couple of "dirty" missiles could do lots of unpleasant things in the area, no matter who the eventual victor is.

[Gorgon]

Well, I think with the US' nuclear launch detection capabilities it would be over before it began. I also think whatever remains of N. Korean leadership must know that they will lose if things get out of hand. They 'win' by engaging in exactly the kind of brinkmanship and provocation they have been doing all along.

[mkreku]

Anyone want to take bets? North Korea starting a war with South Korea or "pre-emptive strikes" from all the lighthouses of democracy in the world starting a war.

 

Which side would you bet on?

[Nepenthe]

Well, I think with the US' nuclear launch detection capabilities it would be over before it began. I also think whatever remains of N. Korean leadership must know that they will lose if things get out of hand. They 'win' by engaging in exactly the kind of brinkmanship and provocation they have been doing all along.

Nuclear launch detection is all well and good when dealing with ICBMs targeted at you. With SCUDs and their evolution MRBMs the people within the range will have roughly one option:

 

 

Also never underestimate the capability for self-delusion of people held in a near-godlike status in their country.

[Walsingham]

Anyone want to take bets? North Korea starting a war with South Korea or "pre-emptive strikes" from all the lighthouses of democracy in the world starting a war.

 

Which side would you bet on?

 

Here's the rub, though. Pre-emptive strike, averting disaster - good. 'Pre-emptive' strike bad.

[cronicler]

Gorgon: Any nation with 3 sats can detect a launch. The problem is stopping the thing before it gets to halfway point where the separation occurs and the warhead does a free fall to the target.

 

Considering the (lack of) distance from the launch point and the target, it will be really dicey to even protect Japan. (I'm assuming NK does a 1-2 punch with arty, srm then mrm to hit any target it can reach to cripple allied positions)

[Volourn]

"Anyone want to take bets? North Korea starting a war with South Korea or "pre-emptive strikes" from all the lighthouses of democracy in the world starting a war.

 

Which side would you bet on?"

 

You do realzie that, technically, the war has been going on for decades right? Also, NK has been engaged in acts of war for a long time already including attacks on SK multiple times. The only thing there hasn't been fullout engagment yet is because of the restraint of the side youn seem to hate on in your post.

 

Anyways, if a full scale war starts, it'll be bloody for everyone, and it'll be 100% NK's fault.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

No offense, but I doubt NK has anything resembling an ICBM. You can't exactly shoot down the missile if it isn't meant to fly further than a few hundred kilometers.

[Humodour]

No offense, but I doubt NK has anything resembling an ICBM. You can't exactly shoot down the missile if it isn't meant to fly further than a few hundred kilometers.

 

They gave Iran long-range missile technology, though...?

Edited December 1, 2010 by Krezack

[Calax]

Long range doesn't necessairly mean ICBM. The biggest one the NK military has (From my understanding) is the Taepodong-2 which they tested in 06 and has an operational range that'll let it hit alaska at the very very edge.

[Nepenthe]

Long range doesn't necessairly mean ICBM. The biggest one the NK military has (From my understanding) is the Taepodong-2 which they tested in 06 and has an operational range that'll let it hit alaska at the very very edge.

 

Yeah, but as wonderful as that is, NK doesn't have to hit even Alaska to **** up the world, Hollywood plots notwithstanding, there's a lot of major targets closer than that.

[Calax]

Well, more standard missiles can be eliminated before they hit fairly easily as their trajectory keeps them in atmosphere and thus targetable. ICBM's are only really hittable right near launch and almost on top of their target, nowhere in between.

[mkreku]

Where's Ronald 'Ray-gun' Reagan when you need him?

[Humodour]

Where's Ronald 'Ray-gun' Reagan when you need him?

 

He's dead, and thank the IPU that!

[Monte Carlo]

^

 

Poor taste. You should know better.

 

Reagan is the most consistently underrated American President, mainly by Libtards.

[Walsingham]

Oh lord, let's not start flinging liberalism about like a fur rug.