Korea Tensions Lead To Delay Of Minuteman III Test Flight

An anonymous reader writes "The U.S. plans on delaying 'the test of the Minuteman III intercontinental missile' that was scheduled for launching next week out of the Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. The reported reason is to prevent 'misperception or miscalculation' by North Korea. North Korea has warned foreign diplomats that 'they could not guarantee their safety from next Wednesday' onwards, but the warning has not caused any plans for evacuation of any embassies so far."

Comments

Are You Kidding Me?

[Trip6]

That pimple on the ass country is actually making us change our military test plans? Puhhhlllease.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

So all the lives that would be at risk in South Korea in case of a war mean less to you than a glorified firework?

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[rasmusbr]

I think that it's probably a move meant to give the North Koreans a chance to back down and declare 'victory' to their own people so that the crisis can end before things become unpredictable.

Even if the US wanted a war with North Korea this would not be the time. A war like that takes months of planning and logistics if it's going to go well. The US and South Korea could defeat North Korea over the next couple of weeks if necessary, but at what cost?

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Zedrick]

It's the responsible thing to do. This is not a video game or some retarded "never back down" action movie for teenagers. If a change of plans might help avoiding a war (or avoid adding to the fuel), good.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

I concur. Last thing we should do is act like we care how they feel. Well, until they are willing to play nice.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[hairyfish]

Fuck them. These monkeys need to be taught a lesson, and I'm not talking stupid Iraq/Afghanistan type lessons, more like Desert Storm. Go destroy every piece of infrastructure they have and then let them rot in their own fetid mess. Innocent people will die, but the alternative is for innocent people to die too, so better off on our terms and without the protracted occupation or losses on our side. Control the air and render their offensive capability useless and they cease to be a threat.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[CAIMLAS]

Yes, it would be much better to simply allow things to settle down and let the little tyrant continue the deathcamp conditions prevalent throughout NK.

Either that or we should let him have the first shot. Because that would be the responsible thing to do, right?

(Do we really want him firing off his dirty bombs into SK, Japan, or who knows where else? )

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

That pimple on the ass country is actually making us change our military test plans? Puhhhlllease.

25,000+ troops stationed in the other half of that country for the last few fucking decades.

Seems that "pimple on the ass" country has been creating military action for far longer than your ignorance or attention span can command.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah Fuck the Yanks. Go NK!

You do realise America is no longer an identity, it is a puppet regieme of Israel.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Kjella]

Even if the US wanted a war with North Korea this would not be the time. A war like that takes months of planning and logistics if it's going to go well. The US and South Korea could defeat North Korea over the next couple of weeks if necessary, but at what cost?

If the US wanted a war with North Korea, the pretext would be far more important than the planning and logistics. North Korea would be able to do terrible damage to South Korea regardless of timing, so it'd look a lot better if the US came charging to the rescue against a North Korea that has gone bat shit insane than if the US was building up an invasion force that would be seen as another act of US aggression and backing Kim Jong-Il into a corner where he might as well strike first with all he's got.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Registered Coward v2]

That pimple on the ass country is actually making us change our military test plans? Puhhhlllease.

No, it the normal thing sane countries do when tensions are high. They want to avoid a miscalculation that results in an outcome that neither side wants. It's part of the rules. For example, Bears regularly conducted surveillance overflights on carrier battle groups. They knew not to open bomb bay doors, and we simply trailed them. Sometimes, a country breaks the rules; such as Libya when several MIGs kept turning towards 2 F-14s every time the Tomcats turned away to indicate they were not intending to engage; so we splashed the two MIGs.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to be under the impression that North Korea has any infrastructure that's worth destroying.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[SuricouRaven]

There are political concerns. The impact on the world perception of the US, which is already getting a nasty reputation for unprovoked invasions of dubious justification following Afganistan and Iraq. Then there is the impact on the careers of politicians too - even though defeating NK's military would be a piece of cake, you'd still be left with a decade-long insurgency requiring expensive peacekeeping operations costing many billions of dollars in a time of financial crisis. Now is not a time anyone in the US government wants to be seen starting another war, but a defensive action is much easier to endure. So politically, it'd be far better if NK were to launch the first missile. The US can wait for it, can try to play the diplomatic game to secure allies, and can position forces in the area ready to leap into action at short notice... but they won't fire the first shot.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[SuricouRaven]

There was a time that would have been a good plan. That time was before the invention of radio. Try that today and every TV channel outside the US, and a few of those in, will be carrying endless footage of the hell-on-earth that results. Starvation, disease, warlords recruiting children as forced soldiers in their fight for control, and the US getting the blame for it all.

Destroying all military infrasturcture would almost work, but you only end up postponing the problem: Eventually they will rebuild, unless you're willing to re-bomb the country every couple of years, and even then they could continue their nuclear work in disguised locations* and set up an unconventional delivery mechanism like a nuke in a shipping container addressed to New York.

* Extra evil-points if they build a refinary underneath Glorious Leader's Orphanage, School and Homeless Kitten Shelter. Go on, bomb that...

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

American genocide, best day of my life.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Intrepid imaginaut]

No this isn't like Iraq, I seriously doubt there'd be any insurgency since North and South Korea are culturally very similar, speak the same language, and are the same people basically. Once the usual postwar troublespots quiet down, it would be "free TVs for everyone", there aren't any major religious schisms or historical reasons for North and South to hate one another beyond the recent unpleasantness.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if the US wanted a war with North Korea this would not be the time. A war like that takes months of planning and logistics if it's going to go well. The US and South Korea could defeat North Korea over the next couple of weeks if necessary, but at what cost?

Poppy cock! The US could easily blast North Korea's entire missile systems bases into the next life while limiting the death toll to only those on these bases and launch sites. But North Korea has no oil so the US corporatists are not beating the war drums. The US reminds me of the Big Bad Wolf, always huffing and puffing but never blowing down the door. Meanwhile, the Three Pigs laugh gleefully as they eat at the trough whilst the other barnyard animals starve.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[r1348]

You seem to underestimate 60+ years of uninterrupted regime propaganda.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

A pimple? The DPRK is the culmination of the works of the great generalissimos, whose legacy is continued by the great commander and military strategist Kim Jong-un. Although he has never openly participated in any kind of military action, his performance in our most advanced military simulation exercises obviously has Obama shaken.

http://www.atarihq.com/reviews/2600/combat.html

While we work for peace, the brigandish United States and her cronies viciously hurl themselves headlong in to a worker fashioned cauldron of glorious nuclear justice, like stray cats in to a righteous furnace of repudiation.*

* This Is What North Koreans Actually Believe

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[sociocapitalist]

I think that it's probably a move meant to give the North Koreans a chance to back down and declare 'victory' to their own people so that the crisis can end before things become unpredictable.

Even if the US wanted a war with North Korea this would not be the time. A war like that takes months of planning and logistics if it's going to go well. The US and South Korea could defeat North Korea over the next couple of weeks if necessary, but at what cost?

You need to look at the cost of not going to war as well.

Would you like to wait, perhaps, until North Korea is testing their Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile equivalents?

NK is a bully child in the playground. Fists can be ignored but when he pulls out a knife you have to do something about him...before he pulls out a gun the next time and starts shooting.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Poppy cock! The US could easily blast North Korea's entire missile systems bases into the next life while limiting the death toll to only those on these bases and launch sites.

Bullshit - even if you could destroy all the missile systems - it's irrelevant. South Korea is actually very close to North Korea (imagine hat), so missiles
are unnecessary. Do you have any idea how many artillery batteries are located within easy reach of Seoul? There are over 10 million people packed into
that city and it would get days of constant shelling before we could bomb them all. If actual war were to come, we would eventually "win" (and it probably won't
even be long and drawn out), but during that time an enormous number of innocent people would be killed - people that are our allies, you know who we are
supposed to be protecting?

Think past your knee-jerk dick waving we could smash the world nonsense and actually think about the ethics of the situation.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

If the US wanted a war with North Korea, the pretext would be far more important than the planning and logistics. North Korea would be able to do terrible damage to South Korea regardless of timing, so it'd look a lot better if the US came charging to the rescue against a North Korea that has gone bat shit insane than if the US was building up an invasion force that would be seen as another act of US aggression and backing Kim Jong-Il into a corner where he might as well strike first with all he's got.

Wrong! The US need not build-up a military ground invasion force in South Korea. A twenty-four hour sustained bombing campaign with the biggest bomber force since World War II dropping nuclear warheads on Dear Leader's home and dropping conventional bombs on every military installation and all transportation routes leading to South Korea as well as communication and power-generation infrastructure. Place bounties on the heads of the North Korean Government and let the country purge itself of the shackles of Dear Leader. Declare North Korea, as a country, to be reunified with South Korea. If China gets uppity, bring all outsourced manufacturing back to Europe and the Americas under penalty of imprisonment and execution of any executive attempting to thwart the effort.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to think that this would be another "nation building" war. That president has left office. NK is a Nuclear power, live by the bomb die by the bomb.

We probably have a nuclear sub or 2 off the cost. We could empty all tubes on NK and level the country. Think of it as a new DMZ from 68th parallel to China.

Then we could turn to the other little turd, Iran, and ask if they have something they want to say...

The world loves to call the USA a tyrant, I would show the world what I tyrant is.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

We did destroy the infrastructure of Afghanistan. It was a goat path and water well. It took all of like 5 minutes. That is part of why Bush went into Iraq, he need a bigger show like his daddy had with Desert Storm.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[rasmusbr]

Well, I don't think Kim wants to die. The guy is barely 30.

If you really want to invade North Korea you first have to immobilize and disable their 1M+ strong army so you don't have to fight a tower defense-like battle against a virtually never ending onslaught of semi-fast moving troops. You don't want to give the North Koreans a chance to take the initiative and go on the offensive, because if they do the cost in lives and destruction on the southern side would increase by orders of magnitude. What you do want is for the North Koreans to get pinned down and carpet bombed to oblivion on the Northern side of the DMZ.

You also don't want to fight a war from a starting point where you have a mere 28.000 US troops on the ground and, presumably, not nearly enough ammo and bombs in storage on the peninsula to fight a massive war. It's a lot safer and cheaper to ship in ammo and bombs months before the war than to try to airlift them in tomorrow.

The humanitarian side of it would be difficult regardless of when the war started. China might have to invade from the north and set up refugee camps inside North Korea to prevent millions of refugees from spilling over the border. Now you have to take care to not bomb the Chinese soldiers inside North Korea.

If you want to destroy an oppressive and unfriendly government it would probably be easier to invade Iran now, before they get nukes. If you tie up your forces in North Korea you'll give the Iranians free reign to work on their nuclear program while you try to end the war in Korea. You may be able to defeat North Korea in weeks, but ending the war and pulling out could take years.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Intrepid imaginaut]

The propaganda fell apart quickly enough in the Eastern European bloc and East Germany. I know it wasn't quite as severe as NK but I'd expect similar results.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Destroying all military infrasturcture would almost work, but you only end up postponing the problem: Eventually they will rebuild

You're kind of forgetting about the South. They'd like the other half of their country back, you know, and without a military up North to get in the way they'd be more than happy to make the whole thing just plain Korea again.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Rich0]

Well, I'm sure the planning is ready - there have always been plans for NK, and no doubt they get dusted off from time to time (especially at times like these).

Logistics - sure, but the US military is basically ready to go 24x7 more-or-less. Getting all the tanks sealifted (beyond those pre-positioned - which are probably considerable) will take days, but the air war could start with fairly little notice (things like B2s are usually based out of the US anyway - they don't have to go anywhere).

Bigger issues are:
1. Cost - nobody wants to pay for yet another war.
2. Overcommitment - we're still in Iraq and Afganistan, and the US really doesn't have much left in the way of reserves (they are all deployed, aside from those who are basically resting up).

The only way the US is going to do anything is if NK starts shooting. Right now the plan seems to be to let China just starve them out until they start talking sense (China hasn't made an oil delivery to them in a month or two now).

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Bearhouse]

Well, it's not very erudite, but flamebait? A little harsh, mods.
OP was not advocating 'testing' it on a NK target, for example.

(S)he's got a point; why should the USA, (I'm not from there), change its plans?
Pandering to NK has never worked. Ever.

A little quote. Stalin once said of international diplomacy

"Push the tip of the bayonet in. If you hit mush, push the bayonet through to the hilt. If you hit steel, withdraw the bayonet."

Time to show a little steel, methinks. Of course we don't want to provoke yet another senseless war, but showing that we're ready to respond in a very robust way to aggression is required IMHO. When I say "we", I mean all the democratic powers.

BTW, that would also send a useful message to China, who would doubtless piss and moan, but ultimately accept it.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[someones]

Its all about political image. Noone outside the US cares about the US anymore. Stocktrading is shifting to Euro or Yen and Yuan. With the random Military strikes and random laws in the last 10 years, the US image is going down the drain.

Noone sees the US as the land of endless possibilities. Now its the country of corporate government.
You might want to change your name to United states of Google,Apple,Oracle,...

So unless you want to even more ruin your image, you may not ever shoot at NK.
Unless of course you want to be seen as the country that is trollbait and fell for the big fat troll.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[rasmusbr]

Well, they don't have oil, but they have probably stored enough diesel for the drive down to the south. North Korea has more than a million troops. Tens of thousands of those are special forces. You do no want those to start moving and gain momentum and gain the initiative.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[MysteriousPreacher]

Fuck them. These monkeys need to be taught a lesson, and I'm not talking stupid Iraq/Afghanistan type lessons, more like Desert Storm. Go destroy every piece of infrastructure they have and then let them rot in their own fetid mess. Innocent people will die, but the alternative is for innocent people to die too, so better off on our terms and without the protracted occupation or losses on our side. Control the air and render their offensive capability useless and they cease to be a threat.

And if China were to abide by the terms of its defensive treaty with North Korea, by militarily aiding North Korea, America could use its Death Star to blow-up planet China. What could possibly go wrong?

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

You think they don't already have detailed invasion plans?

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[kurt555gs]

The "smart bombs" we would use to destroy their infrastructure cost 10 times that of their targets. There is no winning.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[ScentCone]

You seem to underestimate 60+ years of uninterrupted regime propaganda.

And you seem to underestimate the inertia of centuries of culture. And to really underestimate the power of getting some nutritious food and knowing that some of your family is no longer spending the rest of their miserable lives in one of NK's versions of a Stalinist death/labor camp.

SK would have to dig deep, just like West Germany did. But the long term benefits would be huge for them, financially, culturally, and morally. Just like it was for a re-unified Germany.

None of this will happen, of course. Because China doesn't want what amounts to a prosperous Germany right next door.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[turp182]

Quote: A war like that takes months of planning and logistics if it's going to go well.

Does any war go well? Some are certainly justified (the ends justify the means, take the US Revolutionary War as an example), but to say that it "went well" isn't appropriate as war is about people killing people (War on Drugs included).

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if the US wanted a war with North Korea this would not be the time.

The US will not go to war with North Korea willingly, period, stop, end.

Going to war with North Korea essentially means going to war with China because if the US wins, that means a US ally (South Korea) on the Chinese border, which the Chinese will not tolerate.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[gtall]

Look at Okinawa, Iwo Jima, Saipan, etc. if you want to see the effect "carpet bombing" would have on the Norks' entrenched positions. The U.S. isn't going to carpet bomb anything.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[gtall]

And if the U.S. did nuke N. Korea, the U.S. would kill most S. Koreans and Japanese and a whole lot of Chinese. It would be a stupid option and no American president or Congress would ever agree to such a thing. And the U.S. Military would strenuously object as well, not to mention most S. Koreans and Japanese and whole lot of Chinese.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[femtobyte]

And to really underestimate the power of getting some nutritious food and knowing that some of your family is no longer spending the rest of their miserable lives in one of NK's versions of a Stalinist death/labor camp.

History over the past half century shows that America isn't real good at this part. In all the countries we've worked to "liberate," from Vietnam to Iraq, we generally do so at immense cost to civilian architecture: what little they already had of agriculture, clean water, electricity, sanitation gets reduced to rubble; disease and starvation kill far more than our direct bombings. I doubt North Koreans will come to love us for food and freedom, because we've shown zero capability of actually improving food and freedom through war. If history is any guide at all, there will just be millions pushed over the line from severe malnutrition to starvation, and whatever goons we install as the new government will become notorious for sadistic crackdowns against dissent (keeping the same old death camps running, just with a new slew of occupants).

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[gtall]

The U.S. has nothing much left in Iraq except a few State Dept. employees and contractors for securing them. Do try to keep up.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[realityimpaired]

You're both forgetting about China, who might have a few things to say about a large scale US military operation on their border...

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[femtobyte]

North Korea has been waving their gun around for a long time. Even though you may not care about this from an American perspective, NK has for decades been fully capable of launching devastating attacks on major South Korean population centers (which don't require intercontinental long range missiles). Outside the perspective of "only American lives matter," NK's longer range weapons don't fundamentally change the diplomatic situation: they are still, as they have always been, capable of going out with an unacceptable suicidal bang, simply continuing the same decades-long tense standoff (in order to continue, on their side, receiving aid money/supplies as appeasement). NK's current round of bluster is really nothing new; and, while there is no certainty in dealing with madmen, there is also no positive reason to expect that NK's actual policies (of waving a gun with their finger on the trigger, but stopping short of anything beyond warning shots) have changed.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[thenextstevejobs]

You seem to underestimate 60+ years of uninterrupted regime propaganda.

+5 Insightful?

Let me tell you as someone living in Korea that there is zero question here about whether or not North Korea wants to blow Seoul. I'll give you a hint -- they wouldn't drop bombs on Seoul even if the US was nuking Pyongyang.

While the North has been a separate country for a long time at this point, the people on the two sides of the DMZ do not at all consider each other enemies. The rhetoric from the North about destroying the South is firmly directed at the South Korean government.

People have a racial unity here that you can probably not even imagine. Here's an attempt at an analogy. Would the Israelis bomb a city of 100% Jews?

The North considers the people in the South to be essentially captive by a traitorous government that's being dictated behind the scenes by the US and other foreign influences. They want to 'liberate' their relatives and their people, not bomb them into dust because they don't like what they consider to be a minority of them who are oppressing the rest.

I know the story about the artillery within range of Seoul makes a good scare piece, but there's zero chance they will be wantonly killing all the South Koreans just because it's technically a separate country.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[LVSlushdat]

The fact that Barack "Chamberlin" Obama, the appeaser, is ordering this, pretty much guarantees if NK *does* have the stones to lob a nuke at SK/Alaska/Hawaii, that Obama won't retaliate in kind.. I strongly suspect "Lil Kim" and his cronies have the wherewithall to hit SK pretty much anywhere, with whatever nuclear materials they have, and perhaps as far as Alaska/Hawaii... Lil Kim doesn't even have to aim it very well.. Get it close to Anchorage or Honolulu and do an airburst at 50K ft.. Can you say EMP? Those cities would lose their electronic infrastructure, and likely not very many casualties, except for electronics...

We learned in WWII from the original appeaser, Neville Chamberlin, that appeasing flat-ass crazy dictators didn't work.. Give em a inch and they take a mile.. We need another Eisenhower... He stood up to NK/China and put in place the armistise that survived until Lil Kim got ahold of it just now..

We is soooo screwed with Obama at the helm....

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Zontar The Mindless]

The humanitarian side of it would be difficult regardless of when the war started. China might have to invade from the north and set up refugee camps inside North Korea to prevent millions of refugees from spilling over the border. Now you have to take care to not bomb the Chinese soldiers inside North Korea.

Not too many people outside China seem to get this.

The Chinese would probably be just as glad as not to see Kim and his posse jet off to Tenerife or someplace and leave the place to the South (see DDR, dissolution of). The Chinese would no longer have to be bothered with propping up a régime that has become an embarrassment if not outright liability to them; they wouldn't have to deal with (yes, potentially millions of) North Korean refugees (if anything, they'd probably like to move back about 10 million ethnic Koreans who already live on the Chinese side); and the South would be kept occupied for the next 20 years or so rehabilitating the North, they don't have any islands we think ought to be ours--so sure, let the US continue to be their good friend. Whatever.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[thrich81]

But the last whole century tells a different story. The rebulding of Europe and Japan after WWII went well in the areas which were under Allied control after the war, due largely to the Marshall Plan in Europe and US directed changes to governance in Japan. And S. Korea was in the same state as N. Korea at the end of armed hostilities in 1953 -- they have turned out rather well. Vietnam doesn't count in this analysis because the US lost that war and wasn't available to help rebuild. The Iraq fiasco to a large extent was due to incompetence in the Bush administration who ignored the analyses of the experts who told them how many troops, etc, would be required to maintain order after the fall of the government but didn't want to believe them.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

You cannot bomb back into the stone age..what is still basically the stone age.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[realityimpaired]

None of this will happen, of course. Because China doesn't want what amounts to a prosperous Germany right next door.

Yes, they do. That would be huge for their trading prospects. What they don't want is the US military entanglement that comes with South Korea.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[femtobyte]

All right, so Vietnam "doesn't count" because we didn't win --- even though, if we had, we'd still have already destroyed nearly all their dams and irrigation systems, and doused the whole country in carcinogenic defoliants, so I can't see the outcome being a lot more rosy after that point.

But, just so you don't think Bush's bungling in Iraq is an isolated incident of failed US "helpfulness," why don't you read up on the history of a few more countries where we've "helped out," including Cambodia, East Timor, Chile, Iran, Guatemala, and Pakistan. Remember that the successful re-building in Europe/Japan took place with some American money, but under the guidance of the relatively socialist policies of the regions; empire building guided more by US-centric capitalist ideology (e.g. Thomas Friedman's Chicago School acolytes advising Pinochet) doesn't work out so well.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[circletimessquare]

which is the only reason north korea even exists

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[realityimpaired]

You have a crazy twitchy person with his finger on the button for a nuclear weapon. They keep talking about striking the US directly, but if they really wanted to do some damage they'd go for Japan or South Korea, both of which can be hit quite easily.

Now it's *possible* that Kim-Jong Un is just pretending to be bonkers. But it's also possible that he actually is bonkers. Do you really want to take that gamble?

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[adamchou]

A war like that takes months of planning and logistics if it's going to go well.

You make it seem as if this hasn't already happened. We're still in a state of war with them. I'm stationed here on the Korean peninsula and we go through peninsula wide exercises twice a year to simulate a war here. On top of that, we go through tactical training at a unit level even more frequently than that.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[fnj]

And we have already given up in Afghanistan. We're not really at war there either. We don't know what we are doing there, but it's certainly not a war.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[adamchou]

since North and South Korea are culturally very similar, speak the same language, and are the same people basically

I'm sorry, but you seem to be extremely uninformed. Their language isn't completely different, but it differs enough that a North Korean would only understand about 60% of what a South Korean says.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[binarylarry]

With North Korea gone and a prosperous Korea in place, why would the heavy US presence continue?

We're there mainly because of SK's bat shit insane neighbor.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[adamchou]

What gives you the impression that North Korea doesn't want to kill South Koreans? Hell, the North tortures it's own citizens. What makes you think they'll even second guess bombing the shit out of Seoul? The citizens of North Korea probably have no animosity towards the South, but they're not the ones dropping bombs. And I don't know which South Koreans you're talking to, but I know plenty that would love for us to go and destroy the North.

Btw, Living in South Korea doesn't mean anything. I live in South Korea too and I'd beg to differ with your position.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Waiting for the crops, duh...

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Zontar The Mindless]

It's the 48th parallel, and it has actually not been the border for about 60 years now.

Level the country = kill tens of millions for no other reason than they had the misfortune to be born residents of a pustule state.

There... Does your dick-waving make you feel like more of a man now?

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[rubycodez]

fair market value of targets completely irrelevant and useless point of view for the purposes of warfare. Risk and benefit analysis of war doesn't include those numbers.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't think so. China has spent far to long crippling the US economy and from the statements made by the Chinese president the ONLY country who thinks America is still the world's super power, literally is America.

The world knows who's is charge and it's not the USA. It's the Chinese and they wouldn't go to war with America because they OWN to much of America's ass as it is. The only thing that would cause a US vs Chinese war would be if America told the Chinese they wouldn't honour their debts. What is it now 1.2 trillion dollars the US currently owes to China? I think that figure is a bit old so it might be more now ...

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[rubycodez]

where do you get that silly idea? air bursts don't make fallout, underground penetration bursts don't either.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[rubycodez]

hole in your logic, in such regimes those huge forces are purposely very dependent on top command. take out command and control and the whole thing turns into a headless chicken

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

"The US and South Korea could defeat North Korea over the next couple of weeks if necessary, but at what cost?"

Remember that we started the conflict in the Middle East with GWB announcing the mission was over, and only learned the true cost ten years later.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[gtall]

You cannot withdraw immediately because of all the equipment. That's a logistics problem. The other problem is not handing the country to the Taliban. So the U.S. continues to support (yep, the U.S. is still fighting) the Afghanis. If reports are true, some of the provinces are revolting against the Taliban. They aren't expressing any support for the government, they are just pissed at the Taliban for stealing their sons and turning them into human bombs, taking their girls for marriage before they get a chance to sell them to their great-uncles, etc. Islam values women and getting proper payment for them is important in their culture.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

backing Kim Jong-Il into a corner where he might as well strike first with all he's got

Which isn't much, since he died over a year ago.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[gtall]

You forget thermo-nuclear weapons, they're big, they're nasty and yes indeed air-bursting them doesn't suddenly make the radiation go away. Underground penetration doesn't really help kill the Nork army, and it does still release radiation unless you can drill down a mile and make sure your yields are low. You have some magical notions about nukes.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[fnj]

For years and years I drank that same general brand of kool-aid. I'm not doing it any more. Yes, there are logistical and own-forces security problems involved in withdrawal, but no, we're not withdrawing with all deliberate expedition. As for not handing the place over to the Taliban, that's been settled for quite a while now. We don't have the strength and the commitment to dictate who ends up with it. It is certainly going to end up with the Taliban, or with forces very much like the Taliban. Whether that happens in one week or 1-2 years doesn't make a lick of difference, but losing more US forces lives in a self-admitted lost cause sure as HELL makes a difference to ME.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[dcollins117]

...simply continuing the same decades-long tense standoff (in order to continue, on their side, receiving aid money/supplies as appeasement).

Clearly, giving money and supplies to North Korea is simply rewarding bad behavior. Continuing to do so is IMO insane, unless your goal is to encourage the same behavior.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Your.Master]

You've got to be trolling. If North Korea nukes anybody they are fucked immediately. In that scenario, it wouldn't matter if Obama was a robot sent from North Korea with the express mission of sabotaging the United States.

Not firing a test missile on a particular day is not even *remotely* appeasement. Chamberlain ceded territory to Hitler.

For that matter, Chamberlain is the one who actually declared war against the Nazis. The US sat it out for years. He takes a lot of flack for somebody who was only a middling appeaser.

Kim Jong Un is batshit insane and the shame of it is, he just might take millions of people down with him. Though in a sense, he already has.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

For fuck's sakes, given that you like to talk about the man so much, why don't you bother learning to spell his name?

C-H-A-M-B-E-R-L-A-I-N

Cretinous bloody Yanks. And by the way, WWII started in 1939, just in case you didn't know that either.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[thenextstevejobs]

My impression comes from the content of news dispatches, propaganda and speeches from the North Korean media and military leadership. While they show imagery and make threats of destroying US cities and non-military targets, the rhetoric geared towards the South talks about destroying the 'traitorous' government and military (and occasionally media outlets) here and are not threats towards the general public. As for those in the South, most people here have aunts, uncles, and other extended family in the North and don't want to see their relatives murdered just because the regime running the North is awful.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[rasmusbr]

Yes, but North Korea reportedly has many, many kilometers of deep underground tunnels and bunkers. The leaders could be hiding anywhere at any given time.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe the best military action is to strike NK first to avoid some of the damage to South Korea. It might not go over that great internationally but at some point this has to come to an end.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[tqk]

We probably have a nuclear sub or 2 off the cost. We could empty all tubes on NK and level the country.

Murdering millions of innocent non-combattant peasants, nice. I thought Milosevic was dead. See you at the Hague when you're done, ASSHOLE!

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Deploy fracking equipment and flush them out.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Nimey]

...and you're not sharp enough to understand that the purpose of this propaganda is to turn the South Korean people against its government (thereby weakening it, and by extension weakening the SK military) & lull these same citizens into a false sense of security.

The North would like nothing better than to conquer the South, and would not hesitate to kill mass numbers on both sides to do it. The North's elites don't even care about their own peoples' lives or the quality thereof; they will have even fewer compunctions about people who think "wrongly".

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[r1348]

My comment was obviously referring to a hypotetical US invasion of NK, as the parent post was drawing a parallel to Iraq.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[r1348]

Oh yes, the usual "world's saviours and protectors" rethoric...
Reality check: you're there because it's the closest to China you can be without starting a war.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

You forget thermo-nuclear weapons, they're big, they're nasty and yes indeed air-bursting them doesn't suddenly make the radiation go away.

'Radiation' needs a vector to be transmitted. That's what fallout is: lots and lots of irradiated soil thrown into the atmosphere.

Without that, there is only a prompt radiation risk.

Back you go to your books.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are right about regular people. But their masters think differently. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardment_of_Yeonpyeong

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, Thought that republicans pissed on the homeless. But as you point out, them democrats are in office, they like kittens.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is bullshit. I have a friend who was a machine gunner in the ROK defending Seoul. He said his mission was to survive for one minute--long enough for the ROK fighters and bombers to get in the air.

Additionally, your claim that Koreans wouldn't kill Koreans is debunked by the countless massacres that occurred during the course of the Korean War.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[tqk]

We need another Eisenhower... He stood up to NK/China and put in place the armistise that survived until Lil Kim got ahold of it just now.

That's news to me. I thought it was the Truman-MacArthur show.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[isorox]

(snip jingoism)

It worked so well in iraq and Afghanistan.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[CrimsonAvenger]

Even if the US wanted a war with North Korea this would not be the time. A war like that takes months of planning and logistics if it's going to go well.

There are offices in the Pentagon devoted to making and updating warplans. Continuously.

If you are under the mistaken belief that DPRK is a country we've never developed plans to invade, you need to wake up and smell the coffee....

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

EMP from an airbust 0.2KT weapon? Really?

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[CrimsonAvenger]

knowing that some of your family is no longer spending the rest of their miserable lives in one of NK's versions of a Stalinist death/labor camp.

This isn't as big an issue as you might think, since DPRK tends to lock up the whole family rather than an individual. I understand that three generations of the family is considered "normal".

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[femtobyte]

Rewarding NK's misbehavior sucks; I don't think anyone disagrees with that. The problem is, no one has yet gotten agreement on a working solution that doesn't involve Seoul being reduced to rubble in the final temper-tantrum of the NK leadership (and mass chaos in the now headless country completely unprepared to take over the reigns of a very precarious civil society from authoritarian dictatorship). A lot of "solutions" have risks that may seem "not so bad" to us in the USA, but are unacceptable both to South Korea and China (who will suffer from the fallout of a messy collapse in NK).

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[CrimsonAvenger]

Yes, they do. That would be huge for their trading prospects. What they don't want is the US military entanglement that comes with South Korea.

Which would probably be non-existent if DPRK went away - only reason we're there is to keep the DPRK from successfully attacking the RoK.

Bet on it, if Korea were unified, our troops would be out of there in a couple years.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering you led with it in a condescending, pedantic response, you might have checked and noticed that the post-WW2 division of Korea was at the 38th parallel, instead of responding with a metaphorical dick-wave of your own. Even Wikipedia could show you that.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or vietnam.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[sociocapitalist]

North Korea has been waving their gun around for a long time. Even though you may not care about this from an American perspective, NK has for decades been fully capable of launching devastating attacks on major South Korean population centers (which don't require intercontinental long range missiles). Outside the perspective of "only American lives matter," NK's longer range weapons don't fundamentally change the diplomatic situation: they are still, as they have always been, capable of going out with an unacceptable suicidal bang, simply continuing the same decades-long tense standoff (in order to continue, on their side, receiving aid money/supplies as appeasement). NK's current round of bluster is really nothing new; and, while there is no certainty in dealing with madmen, there is also no positive reason to expect that NK's actual policies (of waving a gun with their finger on the trigger, but stopping short of anything beyond warning shots) have changed.

I don't think that only American lives matter. My point is that the longer we wait, the more 'bang' NK's suicide will generate.

They are not moving in any positive direction and I have no reason to believe that waiting longer will benefit anyone but Kim.

I also don't call sinking a SK ship or shelling SK islands to be warning shots.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[sociocapitalist]

I know the story about the artillery within range of Seoul makes a good scare piece, but there's zero chance they will be wantonly killing all the South Koreans just because it's technically a separate country.

Because they didn't kill any South Koreans in the Korean war right?

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[WGFCrafty]

More citizens have seen SK movies, with quicker spread of information the lies are showing cracks. See dailynk.com 2011 interviews. They were told the South was less developed and poor, but the movies and years of receiving food aid from bags stamped ROK, and the currency devaluation which made years of work vanish instantly, perceptions are changing.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[interval1066]

Wars rarely go as planned. The history of NK is quite simple. NK wants trade and military concessions from the west; they threaten to go nuke, we say "ok, what do you want", China says "yeah, that's what they want", we give it to them, they shut up for a few years, it starts all over again. What's different now is China's had enough of it. So NK is doing the only thing it knows how to do; stamp it's feet harder.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[ScentCone]

you're there because it's the closest to China you can be without starting a war.

No, we're there because China started a war. And their proxy in that war (North Korea) insists its still on.

Oh yes, the usual "world's saviours and protectors" rethoric...

So, what has your country done to prevent NK from rolling into SK? What did it do when they first tried, and what has it done since? If the US is just faking it, in terms of protecting SK from the north, there must be someone else doing the actual work. That would be you, I guess?

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[LWATCDR]

Yep but I would bet that they would rather get ride of NK. Think of it from China's point of view, would you rather have a nation like South Korea on your boarder that you can trade with and make money or one like North Korea that keeps begging for money and threatening to start WWII. No North Korea no need for the US to keep troops in South Korea. Sure maybe a few troops or even joint exercises now and then but I doubt China fears the US launching an invasion from a unified Korea. If they did not fear the flood of refugies flooding north and nukes they would probably cut off aid to North Korea and allow them to collapse.
Of course their is also no reason that a Kim with nothing to lose might not decide to drop a nuke on China for betraying him.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

All right, so Vietnam "doesn't count" because we didn't win --- even though, if we had, we'd still have already destroyed nearly all their dams and irrigation systems, and doused the whole country in carcinogenic defoliants, so I can't see the outcome being a lot more rosy after that point.

To be fair, his quote was that it didn't count because we weren't given the oppertunity to help. Had we been able to help them rebuild, it wouldn't have been as devastating as it ended up being.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[flimflammer]

The truly terrifying thing about this post is that there are people who actually think this sort of thing is a good idea.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[rubycodez]

there are tools for that trivial job, killing living things in a mine is easy....

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

try trillions of dollars. Which you have to ask your self, can america afford another war right now? is china's pockets big enough to loan the yanks another couple of trillion?

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

No he understands how propaganda works. He is trying to claim every one will get free tvs.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

america tortures it's own citizens.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[gmhowell]

We probably have a nuclear sub or 2 off the cost. We could empty all tubes on NK and level the country.

Murdering millions of innocent non-combattant peasants, nice. I thought Milosevic was dead. See you at the Hague when you're done, ASSHOLE!

Curtis LeMay had something to say about 'innocents' during war.

Of course, he was a psychopath...

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[davydagger]

North Korea isn't eastern Europe.

No one in Eastern Europe really liked communism or Russian rule.

They were puppet states with little if any popular backing.

Regimes like Cuba, Vietnam, and NK, are regimes that did have, at least at one point popular backing, and were founded by charismatic leaders viewed as heros, because the people knew FAR worse than the regimes that got set up there.

Cuba - if you read history you knew cuba was never a democracy, Batistas regime was far worse than Castros. The revolution that Castro fought wasn't even communist until a few years after the revolution, after the US denounced it, and they needed political backing.

Vietnam - was lead by Ho Chi Min. He was fighting a gureilla war against the French before WW2, the Japanese durring WW2, and the French again after WW2. He was a US ally in ww2 against the Japaneese. He expected the US to help vietnam get indepedence after the war, they didn't, so he went to Russia and turned against the US. Still the constitution of Vietnam has very similar pre-amble and rhetoric to our own. The regime in the south was held together by nothing but the US Government, and fell apart when we abandonded it in 1973.

North Korea - Kim Il-Sung, the founder, like Ho Chi Min, was another anti-Japaneese insurgent in WW2, and extremely popular for fending of the Japaneese in WW2, this cemented his popularity. NK is isolated from the outside so no one in NK has any idea of the rest of the world beyond what they are told. They just know who saved them from the Japaneese in WW2. Visitors are carefully screened and chaparoned.

NK is also NOT a sattelite state of any other regime at current, as hard as it is to believe. They remained hardline stallinist durring China's "cultural revolution", and breshnev's liberalism, and later the fall of the USSR. Their policy of self-reliance and isolation has fended off Russian and Chineese reform policies at whrecking their once vibrant economy.

They have this massive army, and experts disagree with what state of repair their ancient military vehicles are in.

Which is entirely irrelivant because they do not have the fuel to power even a 1/3rd of their force for a signifigant amount of time, nor does any of it stack up to the latest NATO equivilants.

Further adding to the mix, is the rugged mountains of NK, making tank warfare almost worthless, along with most other armored vehicles. A battle with NK would be determined with infantry. NK's 120,000 strong special forces/light infantry corps being the only formation we really have to worry about, and their vast networks of tunnels.

These requires really little if any infastructure support, as they will steal provisions and equipment from the enemy, and try and infiltrate deep inside enemy lines.

Its also unlikely that if NK tries and nuke someone, it will not be done with missiles. It would be carried by these special forces by hand, and detonated in place.

Also, read more H. John Poole. He'll explain most of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._John_Poole

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[davydagger]

rhetoric != reality

So while they might use rhetoric to get you on their side, Its yet to be seen what they'd actually do in practice.

Rhetoric and propaganda are generally askew of the truth.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[mjwx]

I think that it's probably a move meant to give the North Koreans a chance to back down and declare 'victory' to their own people so that the crisis can end before things become unpredictable.

This,

Lil' Kim is probably just dealing with some internal unrest. Just manufacturing a crisis so that he can suppress his opposition. Every general who was under Kim Jong Il probably has their eye on the top job, the threat of war keeps them busy whilst the internal trouble is sorted out. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a purge in the NK military before this is over.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[mjwx]

All right, so Vietnam "doesn't count" because we didn't win --- even though, if we had, we'd still have already destroyed nearly all their dams and irrigation systems, and doused the whole country in carcinogenic defoliants, so I can't see the outcome being a lot more rosy after that point.

Still, if you've been to Vietnam lately you'll find they rebuilt themselves quite well without the US's help.

They are nearly up to the same industrial level as Thailand and Thailand received a metric shitload of US money.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't think so. China has spent far to long crippling the US economy and from the statements made by the Chinese president the ONLY country who thinks America is still the world's super power, literally is America.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

As you say, China owns about a trillion dollars of American debt. You think that means they own us but the old joke "if you owe the bank a hundred dollars, you've got a problem, but if you owe the bank a million dollars, they've got a problem" applies.

Worst comes to worst, the US will just devalue the dollar or even disavow the debt.

The Chinese cannot afford to write-off a trillion dollars just to hurt America.

Also, America is China's biggest export customer. "Crippling" the US economy would destroy or severely damage their own economy. At least until they can develop their own internal economy enough to pick up the slack.

China may be the future super power, but the US is still the present super power. Whether you like it or not.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Worst comes to worst, the US will just devalue the dollar or even disavow the debt.

ROFL! You must be american! LOL! BWAHAHA!

Also, America is China's biggest export customer. "Crippling" the US economy would destroy or severely damage their own economy. At least until they can develop their own internal economy enough to pick up the slack.

Now I know you have no idea. China has designed its economy to be independent of the US, Unlike the Eurozone etc. China has a fully sustainable economy that does not require importing or exporting from ANYWHERE. Their goal is "taking over" as their is no real need for them to play in the world stage.

China may be the future super power, but the US is still the present super power. Whether you like it or not

Only in Hollywood.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, we don't give a fuck.

Wanna know why?

1. Korean terrorism is kind of impossible, due to their inability to hide.

2. We despise the proterrorism EU and have mostly gained diplomatic immunity, AND we have invasion plans for Belgium, if they kidnap any of our soldiers.

3. Korea, like Iraq, is asking for it. They might not have even had a real third nuclear test, but they did have a first one, and are proliferating -- and are talking a lot of smack.

4. Like Iraq, we want to make an example out of them: small nukes won't protect you if you piss us off.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[manu0601]

The US and South Korea could defeat North Korea over the next couple of weeks if necessary, but at what cost?

Well, not sure, but if NK really has the capacity to send missiles to USA west coast, even a single successful hit on a big city would be high price.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Kim Jung Un: "I Win. I make you dance, puppet!"

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Nefarious Wheel]

Curtis LeMay had something to say about 'innocents' during war.

Of course, he was a psychopath...

Wrong. He was a high-functioning sociopath. do your research!

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[CAIMLAS]

Where have we heard this before? Oh right, by the Jews in Germany, the Polish, etc. etc. directly prior to and somewhat during WWII. "They are our people, they would never do this to us!"

There were similar sentiments prior to the US Civil War, and, well, pretty much every genocide and civil war.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

america tortures it's own citizens.

This.

Just turn on your TV on any weekday afternoon ...

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Milosovic, eh? That's a new one. Methinks the comment about nuking Iran hit kind of close to home for you.

Frankly, I (and many others) think that that the Islamic world is the greatest threat which Western Civilization faces. Yes, North Korea is a present concern. But don't worry. We'll get around to nuking Pakistan, Mecca and Iran.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

"and backing Kim Jong-Il into a corner"

Ok, you know he's dead, right?

Re: Are You Kidding Me?

[MisterSquid]

And if China were to abide by the terms of its defensive treaty with North Korea, by militarily aiding North Korea, America could use its Death Star to blow-up planet China. What could possibly go wrong?

This may be the funniest Slashdot comment I've ever read. Well played.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Xest]

Most of the people fighting on the North's side were Chinese.

There were about 600,000 South Koreans, backed up by 300,000 Americans and about 15,000 British fighting against only about 250,000 North Koreans.... but 1.3million Chinese, and about 25,000 Russians.

The Korean war had very little to do with Korea vs. Korea, it was all about the West vs. Communism.

It happened because after World War II, when Japan was kicked out of Korea, the US and Russia decided to split it up, taking part of it each.

The Koreas never split and fought because of any inherent distaste for each other, but because of post-World War II, cold war politics. The Koreans never got to have a say in their division.

As such, North Koreans killing South Koreans in the Korean war was entirely about being forced into it by the great superpowers - the US vs. Russia/China than it was because of any inherent dislike amongst the Korean people.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[hairyfish]

and set up an unconventional delivery mechanism like a nuke in a shipping container addressed to New York.

I'm not sure you understand how a full military blockade works.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[sociocapitalist]

Most of the people fighting on the North's side were Chinese.

There were about 600,000 South Koreans, backed up by 300,000 Americans and about 15,000 British fighting against only about 250,000 North Koreans.... but 1.3million Chinese, and about 25,000 Russians.

The Korean war had very little to do with Korea vs. Korea, it was all about the West vs. Communism.

It happened because after World War II, when Japan was kicked out of Korea, the US and Russia decided to split it up, taking part of it each.

The Koreas never split and fought because of any inherent distaste for each other, but because of post-World War II, cold war politics. The Koreans never got to have a say in their division.

As such, North Koreans killing South Koreans in the Korean war was entirely about being forced into it by the great superpowers - the US vs. Russia/China than it was because of any inherent dislike amongst the Korean people.

I agree with you on all points but...at the same time there were nonetheless Koreans killing Koreans regardless of whether they wanted to or not.

Before it was...encouraged at least if not forced, as you say, by the powers fighting over capitalism and communism (agree with you completely on that point by the way) where today it would be the 'leaders' of North Korea forcing their people to fight / kill Southerners and vice versa.

The people actually doing the fighting have very little say in the matter of who they are fighting.

Re: Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Invade Beligum, In a perverse way It would be fun to see you try . The rest of Nato Maybe even Europe would hand you your arses on a plate. More likely you ruling class would just spout hot air about any one sent for trial and not actually do anything about it for a year or so and then try and strike a shady deal under the table

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Talderas]

No, we're there because China started a war. And their proxy in that war (North Korea) insists its still on.

We're there because the person who was in charge of the war there was an utterly incompetent general who decided that charging towards China's border with Korea with an army was a sound idea that wouldn't ever possibly provoke a counter attack that would lead to a split nation.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Of all the hear say going on, not a single person has mentioned the obvious.. Kim Jong is being pressured by the UN to rattle his saber to generate fear of Nuclear War. In turn the other UN countries rally the people against Korea to stimulate there economies... Cold War anyone?

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh PLEASE. NK will never fire the first shot. They're right now in the process (as they are EVER year) of saying they'll do all kinds of stupid shit, back down at the last minute after the USA and others guarantee to send them a ton of free shit to support their people (which of course will inevitably not come anywhere even remotely close to their people in the end).

They rinse and repeat this process EVERY YEAR. Why would you even SLIGHTLY think that they'll actually DO anything? They KNOW they'd be wiped from existence in like... 45 minutes after the first shot.

However, I believe the reason they're ratcheting things up a few notches this year is because Kimmy there is actually SMARTER than the last one. He's learned from the Taliban terrorists, and knows that the absolute best way to destroy the USA is to make them waste an absolute shitton of money, and destroy themselves from the inside in the name of "security" and "freedom", or whatever other terms the USA loved to throw around after 9/11.

The reason that he knows unequivocally that this plan will work is because the USA is the USA. Ask your average American, and they will absolutely say that they won the war on terrorism, because Bin Ladin is dead, and there haven't been any giant terrorist attacks in the USA since 9/11. This is because the USA hates looking bad, and so USA loves telling its populace that it's winning everything. The war on terror, the war on drugs, whatever other arbitrary stupid wars it's declared. The USA doesn't lose. That's what the average American absolutely KNOWS.

SO... since no matter what, the USA is going to tell its people that "the USA is winning" in whatever they're doing at the moment, NK can keep cranking up the notches. The USA will absolutely never fire the first shot, so NK can keep escalating things more and more, and as long as THEY don't fire the first shot, the USA will just sent a ton of troops, supplies, ammo, etc, etc over to keep a close eye on them, all the while causing the USA to spend crazy amounts of money doing so, which will in the end have absolutely zero payoff.

NK makes the USA go broke (since I'm sure Kimmy's also well aware that the USA is so incredibly far in debt that if they can make the USA push that envelope further, shit's gonna pop soon), when they feel they've made the USA spend enough money, or some other country does something that gives them reason to stop, they'll make the obligatory announcement that they'll pull back everything in exchange for whatever reward they'll get for doing so. NK declares that this was a victory to their people, the USA declares it a victory to THEIR people, and then Kimmy can rinse and repeat next year if the USA's budget envelope hasn't popped yet.

tl;dr: NK isn't being stupid. They're being far smarter than the USA right now, and are absolutely winning this cold war, using the exact same style tactics that allowed the terrorists to win against the USA with 9/11. If anything, NK is the smartest country yet, since they're accomplishing this without even having to kill a few thousand people with a plane like the Taliban did.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Boy, you sure have swallowed the North Korean unicorn-flavored Kool-aid.

Re:Are You Kidding Me?

[Zontar The Mindless]

I'm gratified that you found my typo so exciting.

(Nevermind all those folks getting vaporised or whatever.)

here's my prediction

[etash]

kim jong un, the son of kim jong il who lately became known as kim jong ded, was recruited by the CIA during his switzerland university years and is acting together with the US to bring down the regime by triggering some sort of crisis.

Re:here's my prediction

[MrL0G1C]

If this were true, there would be no reason for Kim to trust the CIA, if the regime falls, they'd deny all knowledge / feed him to the wolves.

Re:here's my prediction

[etash]

yes, because in a country of 24+ million it is impossible to find a body double, or someone who looks enough like him and throw the poor impostor to the wolves

Re:here's my prediction

[PolygamousRanchKid]

yes, because in a country of 24+ million it is impossible to find a body double

Kim Jong Un is a fat boy. Fat folks are in short supply in North Korea.

Re:here's my prediction

[turkeyfeathers]

In a country of 24+ million starving people, it probably would be impossible to find a body double for that pudgy lunatic.

Re:here's my prediction

[etash]

now i must admit that was a valid point!

Re:here's my prediction

[Anonymous Coward]

Kim Jung Un is the fattest north korean to ever live - any body-double-swap would have to be accompanied by a story of his miraculous weight loss.

Re:here's my prediction

[Anonymous Coward]

Simple, he contracted some sort of disease. Maybe cancer. That can drastically cut your weight, right? Or is that just a side-effect of western treatment?

Re:here's my prediction

[MightyYar]

Even now, Lockheed scientists are working full 8-hour days in a crash plan to develop a fat-seeking missile.

Their testing is slowed by the need to find a test site well away from a Wal-Mart.

Re:here's my prediction

[Anonymous Coward]

While NK is short on food, I suspect they can gather up enough to make a body double fat as well. They'd do that even if it meant some family somewhere starves to death.

Re:here's my prediction

[hairyfeet]

If he can get enough food to feed his fat face i have no doubt he'd be able to get enough to feed his double.

There is actually a lot of precedent for this, from Saddam which supposedly had no less than 4 doubles he'd use to make "appearances" in places that weren't strictly Baathist all the way back to Hitler whose use of a double was well known enough the Soviets had their soldiers scour the German countryside to find Hitler's dentist just to make sure the body they found was his and not the double.

Re:here's my prediction

[Type44Q]

Fat folks are in short supply in North Korea.

But are they in... high demand? :p

Re:here's my prediction

[MrL0G1C]

Why wouldn't they throw him to the wolves, he'd cause less trouble if dead. The CIA has a history of backing assassinations and assassination attempts.

Makes sense

[Quick Reply]

They are just saving it up for a real target, which could up come pretty soon. Those things aren't cheap.

Re:Makes sense

[aliquis]

What's cheaper than and more efficient than fighting wars?

To not do it.

Re:Makes sense

[tftp]

What's cheaper than and more efficient than fighting wars? To not do it.

That is correct - as long as you can convince the other side to do the same. Such sets of two rational actors don't wage wars; but if any one of them is not rational, or has political goals that are not aligned with "cheap" or "efficient", then you have a problem. The USA went to war against Iraq after 9/11 in an irrational way; to this day there is no reason for doing that, except that Bush wanted a war of his own. It would be cheaper and more efficient to leave Saddam alone, as he did a good job on keeping his country together (by force, and by terror of his sons, but that's up to Iraqis to sort out.)

Han shoots first

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like US blinks first
Oops, I think we just had our own Berlin Wall moment

Re:Han shoots first

[charlesbakerharris]

I thought George Lucas had retired from writing awkward, unfunny, meaningless drivel. Yet here you are, posting on Slashdot.

Judgement Day

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the Americans had it coming with all their lies, killing and illegal invasions. Shameful country. I hope this 4th of July will be well lit by Kim's fireworks.

They can't guarantee anyone's safety because

[Anonymous Coward]

they really don't know where the missile will land ... could hit anything, sorry

Why do yu need a new intercont missile ???

[Anonymous Coward]

Why the heck are you still developping new fangled intercontinental missile ? Haven't you checked out ? Cold war is over, what you already have is enough, if you want to develop stuff for NASA do it so, with incidental benefit for your nuclear warfare, but doing it the other way around, develop new missile with accidental NASA benefit is so 1980 backward head-in-the-ass thinking...

Re:Why do yu need a new intercont missile ???

[gatkinso]

Minuteman III was developed in the 1960's. Sorry about your ignorance.

Re:Why do yu need a new intercont missile ???

[turkeyfeathers]

I see the problem here and you're both right. Minuteman Three was developed in the 1960s, but the latest iteration Minuteman One Hundred and Eleven still needs to be tested... you don't think the military-industrial complex has been idling for these past four decades now do you?

Re:Why do yu need a new intercont missile ???

[gigaherz]

They are not testing for development purposes. They are testing if they STILL WORK. Because you wouldn't want to be attacked and then realize the missile has been dead for a decade or 2.

Re:Why do yu need a new intercont missile ???

[MightyYar]

Well, you can't just leave a missile in a silo for 5 decades and expect it to still work. Anyway, the mission has changed for ICBMs. There are far fewer, so the individual missiles must be more accurate and more reliable.

Re:Why do yu need a new intercont missile ???

[Tastecicles]

um... the Atlas and the Titan were ICBM launch platforms. NASA discovered a secondary use as Mercury and Gemini launchers.

In fact, the whole entire space program is an incidental to ballistic missile technology developed by Nazi Germany, for weapons of mass destruction, during the Second World War.

Re:Why do yu need a new intercont missile ???

[jedidiah]

> Why the heck are you still developping new fangled intercontinental missile ?

We have crazy dictators threatening us with a nuclear first strike.

Re:Why do yu need a new intercont missile ???

[gmhowell]

Well, you can't just leave a missile in a silo for 5 decades and expect it to still work. Anyway, the mission has changed for ICBMs. There are far fewer, so the individual missiles must be more accurate and more reliable.

God forbid there's a near miss with a nuke.

Re:Why do yu need a new intercont missile ???

[MightyYar]

It rather depends on the yield.

Appeasement

[Anonymous Coward]

Because appeasement and good intentions has worked out so well for us in history.

What happens on Wednesday?

[Anonymous Coward]

'they could not guarantee their safety from next Wednesday'

Why? what is happening on Wednesday. Have I missed some thing or is some thing going to happen that we dont know about?

Do as We Say, Not as We Do.

[Anonymous Coward]

How predictable most posts are:
* We testing if stuff still works == good
* Them testing to develop stuff (regardless of reason) == bad

Opportunity Cost

[sociocapitalist]

You have to ask yourself...what is the cost of not going to war against North Korea now.

Do you want to wait to be certain that he has not only nuclear capability and also medium range missile capability but the ability to launch medium range missiles with nuclear warheads (which may not currently be the case) ?

Re:Opportunity Cost

[AmiMoJo]

You are starting to understand how they feel about you. That is the real problem here. They can't just abandon their long range nuclear weapons programme because it is the only thing protecting them. They have to play this dangerous game.

I don't know what the solution is. I know what it isn't though: military intervention.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[TubeSteak]

On the other side of the scale is an extremely weighty counter-question:
Can the USA afford another ground invasion and the regime change + nation building that would follow?

The answer to that is unequivocally "No"

Re:Opportunity Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

You have to ask yourself...what is the cost of not going to war against North Korea now.

The cost would depend on China's reaction:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War#China_intervenes_.28October_.E2.80.93_December_1950.29

While NK is annoying, the Chinese probably appreciate a bit of a buffer between South Korea and themselves.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because our default state should be to let other people alone. It's not our job to police the world and tell all the nations what they can and can't do and force them to comply with our wishes.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[BrendaEM]

It's a good question, but I feel it's an odd one for a Slashdotter to have posted.

1.) The United States is a part of an international community that would look down upon us for taking aggressive and provocative measures, even toward a nutcase.
(Is he a nutcase if he becomes a hero to his people by standing up to the US? There is a reason why he is doing what he is doing.)

2.) North Korea and China are allies, at this point, and it would be prudent to make sure that is not the case if the US must take action.

Unfortunately, patience is a virtue to be held until the last possible moment before something terrible happens. Although patience takes time, it gives you time that you could use to prepare for a terrible moment.

If the US had acted too quickly in World War II, we might not have had the manufacturing capability that we had. True we were a sleeping giant, but there are 3,000,000 British .303 rounds in the hull of the Lusitania, which speak that we were not such a sleeping giant. So, now let us appear to sleep.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. NK is a bully child in the playground. Fists can be ignored but when he pulls out a knife you have to do something about him...before he pulls out a gun the next time and starts shooting.
Got that somewhere.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

You are starting to understand how they feel about you. That is the real problem here. They can't just abandon their long range nuclear weapons programme because it is the only thing protecting them. They have to play this dangerous game.

I don't know what the solution is. I know what it isn't though: military intervention.

Just. Plain. Stupid.

Being obnoxious but someplace nobody much cares about was the only safety NK ever had. Being obnoxious and waving around nukes will get people, even their nominal protector, China, thinking hard about how to flatten them before they do something unfortunate.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[rve]

Most likely, South Korea would supply most of the ground troops and assume all of the nation building duties. The main risk for the USA would be provoking China or Russia into getting involved.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

wah , wah cry me a river are we supposed to be sorry for you when the America state bully finally gets a dose of your own favorite medicine.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[sociocapitalist]

It's a good question, but I feel it's an odd one for a Slashdotter to have posted.

1.) The United States is a part of an international community that would look down upon us for taking aggressive and provocative measures, even toward a nutcase. (Is he a nutcase if he becomes a hero to his people by standing up to the US? There is a reason why he is doing what he is doing.)

Even if we assume he is not a nutcase, he has stated that he is willing to kill potentially millions of people (ie Tokyo) with nuclear weapons.

I find it interesting that you think that it's the US that is taking 'aggressive and provocative measures' when NK has twice recently actually attacked SK, not to mention threatening everyone else within range.

2.) North Korea and China are allies, at this point, and it would be prudent to make sure that is not the case if the US must take action.

China will not go to war to protect North Korea. China is all about money now and their money comes from the west.

Unfortunately, patience is a virtue to be held until the last possible moment before something terrible happens. Although patience takes time, it gives you time that you could use to prepare for a terrible moment.

Patience is fine if there is no urgency. At some point waiting becomes counter-productive and allows the enemy to make gains that are not in anyone's best interest.

If, for example, we had attacked NK before they had nuclear weapons, we would have removed a risk that we currently have to face.
If we had, for another example, attacked NK a couple of weeks ago, we would not now face the risk of their mobile hidden launching platforms.

The patience that you advise only benefits the (self proclaimed) enemy.

If the US had acted too quickly in World War II, we might not have had the manufacturing capability that we had. True we were a sleeping giant, but there are 3,000,000 British .303 rounds in the hull of the Lusitania, which speak that we were not such a sleeping giant. So, now let us appear to sleep.

Very poetic but immaterial.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[sociocapitalist]

On the other side of the scale is an extremely weighty counter-question:
Can the USA afford another ground invasion and the regime change + nation building that would follow?

The answer to that is unequivocally "No"

It's no more 'no' than any other war the US has gotten involved with.

My point is that the longer we wait to shut NK down, the higher the cost (in every way) is going to be.

Compared to the farcical Iraq war, I think that taking out NK now is not only fully justified but is actually unavoidably necessary.

With regard to nation building...the US probably turns a profit on that normally but in this case I suspect the remains of NK would be handed to China instead.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[WGFCrafty]

You are starting to understand how they feel about you. That is the real problem here. They can't just abandon their long range nuclear weapons programme because it is the only thing protecting them. They have to play this dangerous game.

I don't know what the solution is. I know what it isn't though: military intervention.

I think both sides keep pouring gas over the peninsula (U$ refined!) The question is increasingly: who lights the match?

Not that that is the only outcome, but China is getting unnerved. See Xi Jinping's comments today.

Most destitute N Koreans would welcome a war, if only to help remove themselves from abject poverty. It's really enlightening to read the 2011 interviews of them on dailynk.com

Re:Opportunity Cost

[sociocapitalist]

You are starting to understand how they feel about you. That is the real problem here. They can't just abandon their long range nuclear weapons programme because it is the only thing protecting them. They have to play this dangerous game.

I don't know what the solution is. I know what it isn't though: military intervention.

You must be joking.

The US wouldn't give a flying fuck about North Korea if they weren't actively testing nuclear weapons and delivery mechanisms, not to mention loudly threatening every western interest in reach.

And what exactly to do you propose as an alternative to military intervention?

Re:Opportunity Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

"If the US had acted too quickly in World War II, we might not have had the manufacturing capability that we had. True we were a sleeping giant, but there are 3,000,000 British .303 rounds in the hull of the Lusitania, which speak that we were not such a sleeping giant."

Ok, maybe you don't know this, but the Lusitania was sunk in 1915. World War I, not II. I guess I missed your connection.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, they could.... NOT be douchebags and threaten to bomb the everloving piss out of everyone every goddamn month. They could also NOT have the entire planet want to bomb them for specifically saying they're making nuclear warheads for the express purpose of turning the USA and other countries they hate into an uninhabitable wasteland.

Oh hey, look... I just solved the North Korean problem outright. If they do the above, I absolutely guarantee they they do NOT "have to play this dangerous game", because the rest of the planet WON'T want to turn NK into a smoking crater if they just STOP THREATENING TO KILL EVERYONE AROUND THEM.

Shocking how that works.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

The Lusitania was sunk in 1915. It didn't have much relevance to World War II.

Re:Opportunity Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Talk about a nut job. You really think all news and information is 100% correct? You honestly believe that Kim Jong Un really told us what his plans are, in order, and where they are to be executed, and under what circumstances?

And if it fails...

[Livius]

And since missile systems are corporate welfare programmes with no actual military purpose, maybe it would be a good idea not to have a test that could go badly and provide the wrong kind of encouragement.

Re:And if it fails...

[ScentCone]

And since missile systems are corporate welfare programmes with no actual military purpose, maybe it would be a good idea not to have a test that could go badly and provide the wrong kind of encouragement.

Spoken just like someone who's never had a SCUD come sailing over their border to land indiscriminately in the middle of the town where you live and work. But of course your assertion is iron-clad here on Slashdot, because you used the magic root password: "corporate." Yes! If it takes a group of people to form a business to make or do something bigger than running a dog grooming operation out of Mom's basement, it must be Eeeevil. I realize that you make your game playing money by putting flyers for that dog grooming company under people's windshield wipers, and that you make your own paper for those flyers from crushed dandelion leaves so that don't buy them from Corporate Paper Goons ... so, you definitely get street cred for that.

Re:And if it fails...

[gtall]

Actually, the missile part of DoD is the cheap part, the real money is in pensions, health care, active duty military, etc.

Re:And if it fails...

[davydagger]

There is plenty of pork in the military, but missle systems are a concept are not one.

Battered Wife Syndrome

[Anonymous Coward]

Mustn't stand up to the little belligerent freak, he might get violent if we set him off. Sure, we can beat him silly but he'll just take it out on the kids.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[amiga3D]

There are only two ways to handle a madman with nukes. Either kill him or try to placate him. Pick one.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't settle for less than both.

Try to placate him... until you can kill him.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[Redmancometh]

Fuck, I already used my mod points.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[Luckyo]

And now you understand why NK leadership acts the way it does. Who wouldn't when faced with people who outnumber and outgun you hilariously, and want you dead very, very much.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[amiga3D]

Too bad you posted anon. That's a plus 5 comeback if ever I saw one.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[amiga3D]

Really? Are you kidding? Nobody gives a shit about NK except maybe South Korea and China until Dear Leader starts acting like a madman threatening to blow his neighbors away. We want him dead because it's scary to have a lunatic with nukes. When it was just the US and the good ole USSR staring at each other we pretty much knew that neither side really wanted to pull the trigger, they had too much to lose. Now you've got this syphilitic little shit that may just be crazy enough to pull the trigger and he's jumping up and down talking about nuking people. Yes, we'd like him dead.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you underestimate how serious the cold war was. Read up on the Cuban missile crisis.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[binarylarry]

Oh yeah? Let us know how that turned out.

Re: Battered Wife Syndrome

[DigiShaman]

NK leadership lies to its own people. The truth as it seems is a sign of weakness. The majority of the population have been brainwashed institutionally in layers upon layers of lies.

Personally, I could give two shits about them. I don't wish them ill harm. But honestly, the can just piss off. Their lies however are about to get them killed. I don't like the idea of my country nuking NK to oblivion, but I sure as hell will not take whatever they plan on throwing at us without retaliation. NK just needs to chill the fuck out!

Re: Battered Wife Syndrome

[Luckyo]

If you somehow believe that any Western leadership doesn't lie to its people, I have land on the moon to sell you.

The problem in NK is totalitarianism. Not "lying to the people". If that was a serious problem, all nations in the world would be in trouble, and us Western nations would probably be more in trouble then those with less freedoms, as politicians tend to generally talk less in those. And as a result they also lie less.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[amiga3D]

A perfect example. When push came to shove the USSR backed down. They knew where it would go and didn't want to go there. Just like we backed down many times later rather than push things too far. Too much to lose.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[interval1066]

And now you understand why NK leadership acts the way it does.

You're joking, right?

Re: Battered Wife Syndrome

[s.petry]

Come now, I could go to history and tell you to read up on COINTELPRO but how about more recent and tell you to read up on Fast and Furious? If you think that lies are a unique problem to North Korea, you are sadly mistaken. I'd start telling you about the Gulf war and Afghanistan, but you would probably immediately label me a "conspiracy theorist" just like people have been brain washed.

I'd agree that North Korean leadership is more evil than the US, but lets not use easy to label "hypocrite" methods of demonstration.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[Anonymous Coward]

Watch out little NK, Merica has nukes and they aren't afraid to kill 100 of thousands of civilians with them.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah so they just pick on the little weak countries that don't have nukes yet. Oh wait, maybe that's incentive to make nukes.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't you think seeing america back down like that to russia, because of all the nukes is some kind of incentive for little countries not getting their way to build nukes. Get rid of all your nukes and apologies to the Japanese, then we will chat about all the other countries being madmen.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[Kittenman]

A perfect example. When push came to shove the USSR backed down. They knew where it would go and didn't want to go there. Just like we backed down many times later rather than push things too far. Too much to lose.

Not so - it was a trade-off. Kennedy pulled missiles out of Turkey, USSR pulled out of Cuba. Refer here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_missile_crisis

There was a requirement that the Kennedy deal didn't get told publicly - one reason I didn't know about it 'til I saw it in my daughter's history books. My dad never did, and died thinking Kennedy had stared Krushchev out,,,

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[mjwx]

I wouldn't settle for less than both.

Try to placate him... until you can kill him.

Because state sponsored assassination/regime change has never resulted in a worse leader getting in. I mean when they put the Shah in power in Iran it all came up roses didn't it.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[buybuydandavis]

Right answer. Say "nice doggie" and reach for a stick out of sight.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[buybuydandavis]

Yes, we'd like him dead.

Is there anyone who wouldn't? He's torturing millions of his subjects while threatening tens of millions more. He is small pox, and should be eradicated with extreme prejudice.

Re: Battered Wife Syndrome

[spongman]

Except the missiles in turkey were only there to keep the Turks happy, otherwise they probably would already have been removed and re-cycled. Their defense role had long been replaced by subs.

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for sharing!

Re:Battered Wife Syndrome

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean, when they took the kicked out the shah

40 year old tech

[Lawrence_Bird]

though they have "upgraded" bits and pieces of the originals over the years. Have to wonder whether it would have been cheaper to deploy a newer missile than continue to fuck around with retrofits (and for another 20 years based on current plans).

Re:40 year old tech

[Anonymous Coward]

Some things work to the point where if it ain't broke, don't fix it. The orignal designs are near-optimal for the intended role, and what few updates there are tend to be minor improvements. For instance the B-52s are another weapons platform that has been kept going for years longer than expected, and the A-10 may also end up extended as there's no good replacement able to do its job.

As for the missiles, solid fuel missiles don't have much in the way of moving parts. The missiles should be reliable provided they keep well in storage and minor maintenance done to keep batteries up and lubricants from drying out is adequate. Other parts shouldn't be too hard to update either, if the rest of the hardware is known, it should be fairly straight forward to design a "plug-n-play" guidance system update with any revisions in later maintenance packages. Basically scheduled test launches like this aren't really much as tests (we know the missiles typically work as intended), but more of a quality control measure in regards to inventory.

ob. yeah, whatever

[Tastecicles]

"Kim..."
"WHAT?"
"Eat your Snickers."
"WHY!?"
"'Cos you turn into a right megalomaniac when you're hungry." ::CHOMP!::
"...Better?"
"Oppa Gangnam Syle!"

Aldrizzell?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when is Aldrizzell a reputable news source? Like I could give two rats asses what ANYONE writes in that roll of toilet paper.

Re:Aldrizzell?

[acidfast7]

I like it a lot. AJE + RT + euronews + BBCi + CNNi + N24 = reasonable approximation of both sides.

You don't know much about Military do you?

[s.petry]

Come now, stop and think. What does North Korea have that can not be stopped at will, and don't you realize that those logistics have been worked out pretty consistently? Does North Korea have an Air Force? The answer is "NO", they do not. The few planes they have would be shot down within seconds of taking flight. Nothing they have compares with the US or South Korean planes.

Does North Korea have a Navy? The answer is "NO". They have a few small boats and subs, that like their military planes, would be neutralized within minutes of an engagement.

The few North Korean Soldiers on the border that lived after the first hour of engagement would be just like the Iraqi Army in Gulf 1 and 2. We would have more problems with refugees and surrendering troops than we would the N. Korean Military. ("We" being S. Korea more than the US)

We are not very worried about the few T72 tanks that NK has, so the only thing that may cost a few lives is the initial artillery fire. Air power would eliminate that artillery pretty quickly. Oh, and before you hype the short range rockets remember that those are worse than artillery. They are fire and forget with very poor range, extreme inaccuracy, and often don't even explode on impact.

The biggest rational fears are with the few scud missiles they have, which are inaccurate and slow. We have had Patriot batteries in South Korea from long before we saw them in the Gulf wars. Think about what they have been trying to hype on the News over the last couple days. "N. Korea has moved 1-3 medium range missiles to the east. Really, 1-3 missiles is a concern when they are scud type missiles? That is laughable if you stop and think about it! It would be sad of course if they were to hit someone with one and people died, don't get me wrong. But it is not a big military threat.

I have not quite figured out the game that's being played politically, but the hype of doom and gloom is grossly exaggerated. I have some speculations, but at present they are not very sound. Some considerations are "Why has China not stopped NK from threats?" China has that much power over NK, perhaps they want to be involved? Why has the US propaganda media (Fox/ABC/NBC) been hyping NK as a real military threat like they did the Iraqi Army? We know their capabilities, and have no reason to over play them unless our politicians (or perhaps more appropriately the people pulling their strings) want a war.

And lets not put this into terms like the propaganda machine might. We don't need to invade and capture North Korea to win and neither does South Korea. We take out anything in their military that "may" cause anyone else harm and leave them the fuck alone. Let the great leader sit in the sand box and cry because you took his shovel away for trying to hit other kids with it. If South Korea want's to drive up to the capital and make it official, that's fine but the US does not have too, and should not consider it.

There is no need for a long drawn out Gorilla war, and if we get into one it's our the politicians fault. Our politicians need to be dealt with harshly if that happens.

Re:You don't know much about Military do you?

[rasmusbr]

Yeah, I don't even know if North Korea has an air force in a practical sense. They cut to stock footage of airborne Mig-21:s (and older planes) in the propaganda film that they released the other week, which I guess suggest that they don't have anything that flies today.

North Korea does however have a tremendous amount of old military equipment including thousands of tanks and armored vehicles. If those are still able to roll and if they were allowed to mobilize and drive up to the DMZ they could cause a lot of trouble because of their sheer numbers if they were allowed to break through into South Korea. Their special forces could also cause lots and lots of damage if some of them managed to get through.

I'm not the one who brought up the idea of invading North Korea. I'm just pointing out that it would be costly and problematic.

I guess the most convenient way to end a war, should one erupt, would be to bomb them until their defenses are broken enough that you could safely patrol their air space with drones. Once you can do that you could maintain a relatively cheap low intensive war indefinitely or until there is some sort of regime change or revolution.

Re:You don't know much about Military do you?

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no need for a long drawn out Gorilla war

oooo ooo o oo o oo O OOOOO OOOOOO AAA AAAAA AAAAAAAA *beats chest* OO OOO OOOOOOO!

Re:You don't know much about Military do you?

[rasmusbr]

By the way, I'm afraid that China has a lot less influence over the north that one might think.

North Korea is basically the world's largest cult compound. China supplies food and energy, but you have to keep in mind that the folks who depend on those resources to survive are basically expendable for the greater good of the 'cult'. Plus, China doesn't really want to starve North Korea because that would trigger a refugee crisis along their border, which they don't want.

Re:You don't know much about Military do you?

[s.petry]

That is poppy cock and I think you know it. If China said "knock it off or we stop shipping you goods" North Korea would have to stop. It's not like they can import Oil, or in fact most other resources needed to fight a war, without China shipping it in. It's not like the slave labor in the coal mines is enough to heat the prison camps, let alone propel a vehicle.

While I agree it's a cult, cults are dependent on other members of society to survive.

China deals with the refugees the same way North Korea deals with defectors currently. Lets not kid ourselves here. If China was really worried about the inhumane treatment of people.. well, you know.. just look at what they do with their own people or those viscous monks from Tibet.

Re:You don't know much about Military do you?

[WGFCrafty]

I'm wondering what a gorilla war would look like? Planet of the apes? ;-)

Re:You don't know much about Military do you?

[s.petry]

North Korea does however have a tremendous amount of old military equipment including thousands of tanks and armored vehicles. If those are still able to roll and if they were allowed to mobilize and drive up to the DMZ they could cause a lot of trouble because of their sheer numbers if they were allowed to break through into South Korea. Their special forces could also cause lots and lots of damage if some of them managed to get through.

You do realize that Iraq's old tanks and personal carriers were taken out in approximately 48 hours don't you? So no, I don't think there is too much fear of the old T-60s driving through the DMZ. Iraq _was_ considered the 5th largest armored force in the world at the time.

N. Korean special forces would not be allowed to leave the country. The leader knows that if they did, they may catch a whiff of food coming from a restaurant and find out there really is such a thing as Food and defect immediately.

Re:You don't know much about Military do you?

[Anonymous Coward]

Plus, China doesn't really want to starve North Korea because that would trigger a refugee crisis along their border, which they don't want.

You mean starving any more than they already are?

Re:You don't know much about Military do you?

[davydagger]

" Does North Korea have an Air Force?"
yes actually. Semi-modern MiG-21s. They also have a lot of them. Comparable to F15s. Do they have fuel is another story.

"We are not very worried about the few T72 tanks that NK has"
T 62s actually. probably one of the worst abortions of a tank ever. even for its day it was terrible and its service in its origin country Russia was short lived before they improved it. If not outdated, it used the same engine as the earlier T55 with heavier armor, thus slower, and less agile. Its turrent also has to be elevated and rotated a certain way to reload the gun, making it awkward to use and giving it a dismal 4 rounds a minuete fire rate.

Oh, why are we talking about Tanks, there are going to be no great tank battles in NK. Tanks are pretty worthless in mountains anyway.

"The few North Korean Soldiers on the border that lived after the first hour of engagement would be just like the Iraqi Army in Gulf 1 and 2. We would have more problems with refugees and surrendering troops than we would the N. Korean Military."

Most of them will be in tunnels with a relatively few rear guards getting hit with air/artilery fire.

"The biggest rational fears are with the few scud missiles they have,"
No, ABMs will take care of thoose.

Our biggest fear is the 120,000 man strong light infantry/special forces brigade of the NK Army. That is the only part that actually that poses and actual threat, and its a big one, especially with all the tunnels, some into south korea. I'm guessing the rest of their military is for show, and weapons for export.

Re:You don't know much about Military do you?

[davydagger]

"You do realize that Iraq's old tanks and personal carriers were taken out in approximately 48 hours don't you?"
No actually. They're largest formation of tanks was taken out in the course of a single afternoon by a single company of American M1A1 tanks in what is known as the battle of 73 easting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting

One of the major reasons for the Iraqi defeat is the open space of the desert where the M1A1 tanks shine, and American tank doctrine rules.

Another reason is the Iraqi commander did not know about GPS, and how the Americans could cross the featureles dessert, and defended a road, in traditional tactics.

This is 2013, and NK leadership have internet, and aparantly cell phones. They also have mountains where tanks are irrelivant.

They also have a fuckton of artilery which works great in mountains, and decades to compute firing tables for dug in guns.

"N. Korean special forces would not be allowed to leave the country. The leader knows that if they did, they may catch a whiff of food coming from a restaurant and find out there really is such a thing as Food and defect immediately."
dear lord I hope your joking.

Re:You don't know much about Military do you?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why has the US propaganda media (Fox/ABC/NBC) been hyping NK as a real military threat like they did the Iraqi Army?

Maybe the planned "cuts" in the defense budget?

Strictly Theater

[DaveAtFraud]

No one seems to have pointed out that North Korea has no national means of detecting the launch of such a missile and it's doubtful that they have a radar that would be able to track the RVs when they hit around Kwajalein. I guess someone hanging around Vandenburg AFB (where we launch the operational readiness test flights; not an operational ICBM field) could phone Kim-jung Un and tell him we launched it but that's about it. Likewise, an ICBM launched from the U.S. at North Korea would follow a great circle ballistic trajectory that wouldn't take it anywhere near Kwaj. Nor would a missile launched from Vandenburg at Kwaj have a trajectory that looks at all like it's headed for North Korea.

Stupid diplomatic theater. Do something meaningless but make sure the world knows about it.

Cheers,
Dave

Re:Strictly Theater

[Anonymous Coward]

> I guess someone hanging around Vandenburg AFB

Exactly, it's called the news media. Do you really think Vandenburg could launch a MMIII and no one would notice?

Re:Strictly Theater

[DaveAtFraud]

Actually, they do it all of the time. Just no pays any attention since they do it all of the time. The operational readiness launches have been going on from Vandenburg for as long as Minuteman has been deployed. The Air Force also does other launches from Vandenburg on a fairly regular basis. If you know what you're looking at and/or where the missile was launched from you can tell whether it was a minuteman or something else. Most people don't know (and don't care).

Cheers,
Dave

Re:Strictly Theater

[davydagger]

"No one seems to have pointed out that North Korea has no national means of detecting the launch of such a missile"
The press, and they will read outside newspapers.

US = bankrupt and can't afford 3 occupations ...

[acidfast7]

It makes fiscal sense not to provoke the DPRK. the US is essentially bankrupt and can't be spending money to occupy a third country (Afghanistan, Iraq and DPRK). Personally, I'd like to see the US slide further down the economic slippery slope (hello from Germany) but it really doesn't make long-term fiscal sense ... not that it has ever stopped the US before.

Welcome tourists!

[Chewbacon]

No, seriously, they are still open for tourism. These guys are throwing a fit like a 6 year old wanting McDonald's over broccoli for dinner.

Re:Welcome tourists!

[cffrost]

No, seriously, they are still open for tourism.

Why wouldn't they be? As of this writing and to the best of my knowledge, the Kaesong Industrial Complex remains open as well. Both are sources of revenue.

These guys are throwing a fit like a 6 year old wanting McDonald's over broccoli for dinner.

The child in your analogy has a legitimate grievance — broccoli provides inadequate protein and caloric density necessary for maintaining a child's growth.

Re:US = bankrupt and can't afford 3 occupations ..

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe the idea would likely be to have South Koreans occupying the North as a reunified state headed by the government in Seoul. Think more like West/East Germany reunification...this is still a cold war conflict, you know.

all this really is

[gearloos]

First, the US is delaying its test because it doesn't want it to be misunderstood and provoke an attack on S. Korea. Thats probably all. The whole threatening thing is for the most part a show to justify the continued militarization of N.K. and also to solidify the new regime's power over the people and gain their trust.

At this point, I doubt that's true.

[Anonymous Coward]

NK's most recent tantrum is being heavily scrutinized by China, and the U.S. or SK would likely be in the clear as long as they didn't strike preemptively.

You're missing out on important facts

[oztiks]

This article really says it all ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/07/snl-kim-jong-un-declares-gay-marriage-legal-in-north-korea_n_3032251.html

This is what happens when you send Dennis Rodman over as an ambassador!

Re:US = bankrupt and can't afford 3 occupations ..

[rubycodez]

you're confused, exporting war, weapons and death is the business model. we'll go bankrupt if we *don't* do that

Re:US = bankrupt and can't afford 3 occupations ..

[acidfast7]

exporting does *not* equal maintaining a presence somewhere else. it's also not a sustainable business model. i wish you the best of luck (not really)

Re:US = bankrupt and can't afford 3 occupations ..

[rubycodez]

the presence is part of the export and the business model really is working, who's economy is in better shape than the US?

Re:US = bankrupt and can't afford 3 occupations ..

[acidfast7]

Germany for sure. Most of Northern Europe as other examples. You guys aren't even AAA anymore ... lol

Re:US = bankrupt and can't afford 3 occupations ..

[acidfast7]

this should bring you up to speed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_rating_by_country

Obsolete

[Anonymous Coward]

The SS 18 Satan made any silo based missile obsolete long ago. With 10 1 megaton warheads, extensive spoof capability and a CEP around 200 meters no silo based anything can be counted on to survive.

Seoul is such a nice place to visit

[ssssww]

I agree to what 'Zedrick' said.

This is not a war game. It cannot be undone.

If the second Korean War breaks out, Seoul will disappear in thirty minutes by North Korean artillery. And there are ten million people living in Seoul.

I do not believe "[the] cost of not going to war against North Korea now" is way less important than ten million lives(this makes up one-fifth of Korean population by the way).

If you still think I am wrong, come and live in Korea; especially Seoul. Then we will talk.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,446776,00.html

"While North Korea may be moving to ratchet up the crisis, not even Washington's hawks are pushing for a military response — at least not yet. Its conventional artillery capability would allow North Korea to flatten Seoul in the first half-hour of any confrontation."

Re:Seoul is such a nice place to visit

[Xest]

"If the second Korean War breaks out, Seoul will disappear in thirty minutes by North Korean artillery. And there are ten million people living in Seoul."

This is complete rubbish and the ability to destroy Seoul thing is just complete and utter bluster.

Hitler spent about 3 years trying to destroy London and he had far more devastating munitions available than North Korea does. This is in part because Hitler had an air force capable of dropping large bombs whilst the North Korean air force wouldn't even be able to get close to Seoul. Artillery alone isn't going to destroy a city, even if they fire first, and get a few rounds off before they're hit by large conventional weapons like MOABs and cruise missiles, people will die but it'd be in the tens of thousands at worst. That sounds awful, but when you consider that 230,000 people died in the 2004 Tsunami it's still small fry as disasters go. Again, if London managed to survive the Blitz, then Seoul can survive a North Korean bombardment. It'd be bad, but it's not going to be 10 million dead, city destroyed bad, not even close.

North Korea doesn't even have the communications and intel required to make their artillery particularly effective, they'll have no idea if they're even hitting targets, they'll really just be firing blind for the most part.

So sure there will be casualties, but what's worse, it happens now when there are tens of thousands of deaths, or in a few years when North Korea has a larger, more capable nuclear stockpile?

I don't see how else this problem can resolve in all honesty, Kim Jong Un is young, he'll probably be around another 40 years, and you're never going to convince a crackpot like him to change, he's only going to get more capable, and more dangerous. He's not even listening to China anymore.

Minuteman comes in minutes

[Anonymous Coward]

No wonder they want to delay that. Miscalculations might cause a sticky mess for the North Korea.

Re:US = bankrupt and can't afford 3 occupations ..

[rubycodez]

Credit rating isn't the economy. How about Human Development Index, U.S. is #3.

credit rating irrelevant

[rubycodez]

wrong, this will bring you up to speed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index#Very_high_human_development

Re:credit rating irrelevant

[skapaft]

You should at the very least be using this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_HDI

Westerner Living in South Korea

[Anonymous Coward]

North Korea has always felt it's had to make provocative statements. It's what they do. It's more about internal politics and making sure that the country comes across as powerful. There needs to be an external threat so that the populace stays in line.

The major difference here is that the United States media is just moronic enough to go along with it. Sometime last month CNN was airing reports on how the media failed the nation in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 and the road to the Iraq war, including being complicit in the misinformation campaign. What's happening now? Kim Jong Un is trying to talk tough to placate his military, and now it's impending war 24/7 on the Western news networks. They're being smarter about the misinformation campaigns -- Betteridge's Law violations like this one being somewhat less duplicitous than outright fabrications -- but it's still irresponsible media.

As for some of the saber-rattlers here on Slashdot, and those modding them up, Jesus Christ, go study some fucking history. Not even ancient history, but recent history. Go look up lies about forces on the Iraq border, about babies being pulled from their incubators, Colin Powell lying to the United Nations. Iraq was not a threat to the US, but you went ahead, drank the Kool-Aid, and allowed morons to lead you into the stupidest conflicts of the past few decades. Just because a guy has a weapon it does not mean he's a credible threat. CHILL the FUCK OUT.

North Korea is a bully? Please. They're awful to their own people, sure, but unfortunately that's on their own people to do something about it. What's the cost of NOT doing something about North Korea? Shut the fuck up. The cost of doing something about it is the instant death of hundreds of thousands of South Koreans.

North Korea will do nothing, because the moment they decide to do something they'll be bombed into the stone age. South Korea will do nothing, because the moment they decide to do something Seoul will be leveled. It's mutually-assured destruction, and it's worked for the last few decades.

The only risk is if the United States elects another PNAC figurehead who thinks that it's ok for hundreds of thousands of Asians to die for no reason just so that some juicy contracts can go towards military contractors. There's little risk of that happening so long as you STOP BEING MORONS.

Hits, Not War

[Anonymous Coward]

I won't even try to spell Kim's name. But, if all this posturing and threat are the product of a moribund, command economy and sanctions, then the solution is a command change. Just hit Kimmy and about 30 military leaders.

Gun Control

[taucross]

Just because a man has a bomb doesn't mean he's going to launch it at someone, right guys? Guys? Bombs don't kill people, people kill people. Let's say maybe he gets his warhead out at parties to impress a few ladies. So what? Does that mean we should ban bombs? No. Plenty of people get their bombs out at bombing ranges to blow up a few tin cans with their friends. This doesn't mean we should bomb them.

Now I'm not saying that bombs aren't dangerous. I probably wouldn't let my kid handle it until they were at least three years old. But if some dude has a bomb, and he can legally own that bomb - maybe it's even a constitutionally protected bomb - then he has a right to have a bomb. Even a concealed bomb.

Bomb. Teehee. Sounds funny if you say it enough.

Can NOT find Official Press Release

[Zeorge]

This delay was "released" on Friday, I can't find anything relating to this at all. I wonder if this was spawned by Al Jazera or the like and it went viral. Can anyone find an actual official release? All I see is the same opening paragraph, political filler, but no authentic, non-repudiable source. http://www.defense.gov/releases/ http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-and-releases There was a delay for a Minuteman III test out of Barksdale but that was released on 2/28/13 for an upgrade to it systems: http://www.afgsc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123291773

China joint op

[phorm]

Actually, I've wondered what the possibility of a joint-op with China would be. While I doubt you'd see them working under US command or visa-versa, it could be a case of "you start from the top and we'll start from the bottom" scenario.

That would give China a chance to exercise some military muscle while actually looking like a good guy in the international community. As it's a fairly expansionist country I wouldn't be surprised if they tended to hold onto any territory they seized, though.

Re:China joint op

[realityimpaired]

I think it's more likely to be a backroom deal where China does the invading, and the US agrees to leave SK... but the US-China relations aren't quite there. Yet. :)

Part of the issue is that China and NK have a mutual defense pact right now. Also, NK has a very large standing army and a major terrain advantage that makes current conventional warfare techniques of limited use. If they strike first, all bets are off though.

Re:China joint op

[crontabminusell]

...it could be a case of "you start from the top and we'll start from the bottom" scenario.

Didn't work so well for East Germany for 40ish years or so, though.

Who is "we"

[phorm]

The biggest rational fears are with the few scud missiles they have, which are inaccurate and slow.

We of course America and not S Korea, which has major civilian population centres within range of bombarding artillery etc. Not that it's a new threat, but it is a new leader and possibly a new flavour of crazy, especially if the international community doesn't give into his tantrums as they have with past leaders

Re:US = bankrupt and can't afford 3 occupations ..

[Anonymous Coward]

but it really doesn't make long-term fiscal sense ... not that it has ever stopped the US before.

I love your statement there. You could probably get money for accurately predicting the future. ;)

A good environmental decision

[Optali]

A good decision from the environmental point of view:

Kim Fat Ung and his generals would crap his pants from fear and envy and this would fill the whole Korean Peninsula with a meter of pure shit.

But it wasn't necessary after all; the Chinese just told fatso to shut the fuck up.