North Korea
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests Registered Users: None |
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
Post subject: | |
|
Why don't the US do to North Korea what it did to Iraq under Sudam? _________________ I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Only trouble is that with Trump in power in the US, "shit getting real" could mean a lot more of the world – including our part of it – being destroyed than was strictly necessary. What happened to the American guy is disgusting, but it doesn't change the basic North Korea situation, which is that we are in a mini-Cold War. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
It changes the american public perception of the situation which gives Trump public support to take action.
that's an important shift in the dynamic that seriously changes the situation. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: |
Only trouble is that with Trump in power in the US, "shit getting real" could mean a lot more of the world – including our part of it – being destroyed than was strictly necessary. What happened to the American guy is disgusting, but it doesn't change the basic North Korea situation, which is that we are in a mini-Cold War. |
So you are 1 that Believe that Trump could = End of the Human Race? _________________ I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
/\ Jesus. Why would you go there? And more than once, nuts .
And Dave, Trump cant push the button, it doesn't work that way, it's multiple people with passwords, so don't worry about it. I also don't believe for a minute that that's what he wants. He is playing it like an action movie on Twitter to show the ludicrous world of politics for what it is. Hopefully, the real power makers will learn a lesson for the good of the country. And hopefully the greedy knobs that run this country will learn something too. _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 Location: The 18
|
Post subject: | |
|
Trump loves money to much to risk losing it all when the stock market crashes if a war breaks out with Nth Korea. _________________ He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
think positive wrote: | /\ Jesus. Why would you go there? And more than once, nuts .
And Dave, Trump cant push the button, it doesn't work that way, it's multiple people with passwords, so don't worry about it. I also don't believe for a minute that that's what he wants. He is playing it like an action movie on Twitter to show the ludicrous world of politics for what it is. Hopefully, the real power makers will learn a lesson for the good of the country. And hopefully the greedy knobs that run this country will learn something too. |
I'm pretty sure he actually has ultimate authority. His advisers can try to talk him out of it, but if he decides to call in a strike he doesn't need anyone else's approval. An unthinkable amount of power to invest in one human being. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | think positive wrote: | /\ Jesus. Why would you go there? And more than once, nuts .
And Dave, Trump cant push the button, it doesn't work that way, it's multiple people with passwords, so don't worry about it. I also don't believe for a minute that that's what he wants. He is playing it like an action movie on Twitter to show the ludicrous world of politics for what it is. Hopefully, the real power makers will learn a lesson for the good of the country. And hopefully the greedy knobs that run this country will learn something too. |
I'm pretty sure he actually has ultimate authority. His advisers can try to talk him out of it, but if he decides to call in a strike he doesn't need anyone else's approval. An unthinkable amount of power to invest in one human being. | i think you will find that's incorrect. It's a joint decision. And his is not the most meaningful vote apparently. (I can't believe I'm saying this but you've been watching too many US action movies!!!) _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
You're not entirely wrong – there's a chain of command and a theoretical process of ratification – but I think it's true that the president gets the last word.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Command_Authority
Quote: | Only the President can direct the use of nuclear weapons by U.S. armed forces, including the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP). While the President does have unilateral authority as commander-in-chief to order that nuclear weapons be used for any reason at any time, the actual procedures and technical systems in place for authorizing the execution of a launch order requires a secondary confirmation under a two-man rule, as the President's order is subject to secondary confirmation by the Secretary of Defense. If the Secretary of Defense does not concur, then the President may in his sole discretion fire the Secretary. The Secretary of Defense has legal authority to approve the order, but cannot veto it. |
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2016/03/01/going-it-alone-the-president-and-the-risks-of-a-hair-trigger-nuclear-button/
Quote: | The president of the United States can, in theory, launch nuclear war by personal decision—without any checks or balances. Whether we really think any of the candidates for president in 2016 would cavalierly start a nuclear war, the bombastic and bizarre character of much of this year’s electoral debate should make us take this question seriously. Someday, the United States really could have a mentally ill president who chose to do the unthinkable. The odds are low, but we should seek to make them even lower, given the stakes at hand. Because it looks like humankind will be stuck with the nuclear bomb for many decades (if not centuries) to come, moreover, the solution to this problem cannot be simply to get rid of all existing nuclear arsenals. We need a more immediate answer.
To be sure, a president is required by the War Powers Act of 1973 to seek congressional approval for any military action within 60 days of its inception. But most presidents consider that act unconstitutional. In any event, a nuclear war could easily devastate the planet within just days or hours—long before the 60-day stipulation would be binding. Even if a president had obtained congressional approval for a war that began using only conventional weapons, no provisions of the War Powers Act would require subsequent congressional action prior to nuclear escalation.
In short: A president could push the button all by himself or herself, legally- and constitutionally-speaking. Physically, military personnel would need to carry out the strike of course. They could choose not to, perhaps at the instruction of the secretary of defense or the four-star officer leading Strategic Command—who together constitute the chain of command between the president and the trigger-pullers. But any military officer ignoring a presidential order would be in open insubordination, subject to dismissal and court martial. |
_________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 Location: The 18
|
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
A very strange article, seemingly very pro-NK after making a few gestures at the start about their problems. To argue that the NKoreans want "engagement, negotiation and respect" seems counter to the fact that they have a history of failing to fulfill agreements they have made at successive negotiations, and their idea of engagement seems very close indeed to extortion. I don't think the world has yet seen an inveterate extortionist with live nukes, but we are very close. It'll be interesting to see how extortion works under those conditions.
I think it is certainly true that KJU and his generals must consider the fates of Saddam, Gaddafi and others, and reflect that nukes are really a tyrant's best friend. To that extent, this is another baleful legacy of the stupid wars of regime change entered into by Americans and the British in recent years.
Ultimately, there is only one sensible question of policy here - can the US persuade China to close its border with NK ? NK seemingly cannot survive without Chinese aid and trade, and by supporting NK, China is effectively threatening the US by proxy. People are very quick, as usual, to reflexively blame the US, but it it's China that is behaving irresponsibly here. Consider the reverse case. Imagine that US-backed SK were extorting aid from China's child, NK, while issuing bellicose threats against China and NK, and testing nuclear devices and missiles able to strike China. How would China deal with such a situation ?
That leaves aside, of course, the question of parity : in NK, China supports one of the most horrible and immiserating regimes on earth, while the US's ally SK has become a beacon of industrial development, knowledge and prosperity. It is so strange that the US attracts such obloquy (a word which the writer regrettably misuses in the article) and China such quiescence from most Western "intellectuals". _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
As usual on this topic, two rudimentary points to help cut through the periodic hot air.
1. The North Korean standoff has no known solution that doesn't involve risking millions of lives in South Korea, China and Japan (and well beyond, both directly and through world conflict). Hence status quo and juvenile tit-for-tat management, with all its charades and uncomfortable risks, is all anyone can do.
2. North Korean nationalism has no more time for China than it does for the US. From the confines of the North Korean cult, all concerned are "unclean", racially-inferior enemies. This is then reinforced by a more clear-minded assessment of existential threat at the hands of all parties alike. (Although South Korea might be seen as even worse than China, the US, Japan and Russia, being "traitors" who have bastardised the purity of the cult).
It's a freakish, unfathomable scenario that would be impossible to engineer if you tried (though if we examined the world locally in many places we might find similar standoffs at much lesser scale).
The unique danger Trump brings to the equation is his reckless priming of primitive emotion over disciplined thought. Ironically, the Kims have made a living by priming primitive emotion in their own population; however, despite bluster, NK is clearly at risk of immediate oblivion if it goes too far, with this acting as a natural check thus far.
Mercifully, the US has other sanity checks instead, such as mutual economic interests and positive relations with Japan, South Korea and others including Australia. These checks are weakest when it comes to perceived distant lands, where folks can more easily be cast as disposable. But the assumption is that Asia "feels" close enough, important enough and powerful enough to keep the temptation of outgroup cleansing, or even just carelessness, at bay.
Despite the bizarre nature of the risks involved, we are left to assume that self-interest, sans accidents, will prevail. Not because it's a good option, but because it's still, at this point, the only option. Pretty much every article I have come across on the topic is an effort to say something more satisfying than that, meanwhile conceding it. _________________ In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
Culprit
Joined: 06 Feb 2003 Location: Port Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
One nutter v another nutter = a lot of people are going to die. |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 Location: The 18
|
Post subject: | |
|
Two very good responses above by Mugwump and PTID.
I agree the article I posted was a little simplistic but it did raise a different view point and I think it's always important to realise other countries around the world view the actions of the US differently than it's traditional allies.
No doubt the US and it's significant military presence and nuclear capability in the Asian region has more to do with China and Russia than North Korea and those countries not unexpectedly feel somewhat bullied if not threatened by it and look to push back militarily like we are currently seeing via the South China sea man made islands or cyber terrorism and the Russian interference in the US election.
Of course the most famous incident is the Cuban missile crisis where Russia attempted to achieve exactly what the US has and it took us awfully close to a nuclear holocaust.
In recent days I've seen some experts express an opinion that the situation with North Korea is the most serious we've faced since that time with one quoting some think tank in the US believing there is an 84% chance of military intervention within the next month.
While that feels overly alarmist I still have this awful feeling that the US isn't bluffing and if the time comes they determine Korth Korea has a missile capable of reaching the U.S (not Alaska) then things could escalate quickly and seriously. _________________ He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|