Slashdot Mirror


Kim To N. Korean Military: Be Ready To Use Nuclear Weapons At Any Time (reuters.com)

PolygamousRanchKid writes with this story from Reuters, excerpting: North Korean leader Kim Jong Un ordered his country to be ready to use its nuclear weapons at any time and to turn its military posture to "pre-emptive attack" mode in the face of growing threats from its enemies, state media said on Friday. The comments, carried by the North's official KCNA news agency, marked a further escalation of tension on the Korean peninsula after the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday imposed harsh new sanctions against the isolated state for its nuclear program. South Korea's defense ministry said on Thursday North Korea launched several projectiles off its coast into the sea up to 150 kilometers (90 miles) away, an apparent response to the U.N. sanctions. ... North Korea has previously threatened pre-emptive attacks on its enemies including South Korea, Japan and the United States. Military experts doubt it has yet developed the capability to fire a long-range missile with a miniaturized warhead to deliver a nuclear weapon as far as the United States. Says PolygamousRanchKid: "Oh, joy oh joy... I knew that 2016 was missing something: the threat of nuclear war!"

24 of 321 comments (clear)

  1. Shut up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Just stop paying attention and he will go away.
    It works on internet trolls right? Right?

  2. Nuclear weapons aren't the deterrent by Harlequin80 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is no real risk of a nuclear strike coming out of NK. The real deterrent they have is the massed conventional artillery pointed at Seuol. Any attack on NK would have to be so overwhelming as to destroy the artillery in a minute. If not millions of civilians die.

    1. Re:Nuclear weapons aren't the deterrent by Dorianny · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There is no real risk of a nuclear strike coming out of NK. The real deterrent they have is the massed conventional artillery pointed at Seuol. Any attack on NK would have to be so overwhelming as to destroy the artillery in a minute. If not millions of civilians die.

      Nobody is seriously considering a first strike on North Korea. All their bolstering about their enemies threatening attack is for domestic consumption. With the new sanctions imposed life in North Korea is about to get even harder and injecting a new dose of fear in the populace helps to keep them under control. The truth is that what South Korea fears as well as China fear most is a rapid collapse of the regime and millions of immigrants making a mad-dash for the borders

    2. Re:Nuclear weapons aren't the deterrent by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      rhetorical threats from a mentally unstable leader

      Kim is NOT mentally unstable. His actions are deliberate and rational. The Kim dynasty has been in power for 70 years. They have wrung concession after concession out of the rest of the world. If Kim negotiated calmly, no one would cave in to his demands. But by issuing threats, and using bizarre behavior, he has been able to get his opponents to accept any deal this is even halfway sane.

      The North needs to deescalate.

      That would be foolish. It would lead to the end of his regime. He needs an external enemy to justify his rule.

    3. Re:Nuclear weapons aren't the deterrent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You sure? He's friends with Dennis Rodman.

      Enough said.

    4. Re:Nuclear weapons aren't the deterrent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Look, I know your teachers taught you to strictly adhere to writing standards, but this isn't a New York Times article or an essay for the Knowledge Bowl. It's a fucking internet forum. Get a real hobby instead of 'self-appointed usage police.'

    5. Re:Nuclear weapons aren't the deterrent by thesupraman · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Why?

      As things stands the US has a nice easy to present bogeyman which is almost zero actual threat to the US.
      If they removed them, they would gain little, and lose a useful political piece (got to keep the unwashed masses scared of something,
      god forbid peace came to the middle east, nice to have a backup!)

      The US gets to prod them with a stick from time to time (always nice to carry out live fire exercises right on their ocean border zones) to
      keep the system churning away, NK gets to point to a terrible enemy to their existence, really it works for those in power on both sides.

      Or did you think it was for the benefit of the general masses on either side? Really?

    6. Re:Nuclear weapons aren't the deterrent by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right. Through a minefield designed to stop T-72's. I don't think you realise the enormity of the situation there.

  3. The silver lining around every (mushroom) cloud by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Look at the bright side - the day after a North Korea 1st strike, the problem with North Korea will be solved. Or at least disappear.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re:The silver lining around every (mushroom) cloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Whether he has the authority or not to prevent it, no president would have the power to stop it. The will of the people to counter attack would be overwhelming and to attempt to prevent that would just end up getting him removed legally or (most likely) otherwise and replaced with someone who will if not the military telling him to fuck off and attacking anyways.

      But all shit talking aside, if North Korea attacked, Obama would sign that attack order without hesitation. Hell, you can see everything he has done to stay in conflict in areas Bush had already forced him to withdraw from with an international agreement signed before Obama took office. He isn't as much of a pussy as the GOP makes him out to be, he isn't a bulldog by any means, but he would sign that order within seconds of a nuclear attack being discovered.

    2. Re:The silver lining around every (mushroom) cloud by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Who said anything about President Obama? The second Little Kim acts out, CHINA will obliterate North Korea.

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
    3. Re:The silver lining around every (mushroom) cloud by Jeremi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, because millions of innocent dead is a bright side. Some of the things you say are so stupid they're baffling.

      I see you didn't quite follow his reasoning, so let's go over it. The millions of innocent dead are the downside. The fact that it couldn't happen a second time, because after a nuclear exchange the problematic North Korean government would no longer exist, that's the bright side.

      Accuse the parent poster of joking in bad taste if you want, but what he posted was perfectly logical.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  4. This is when editors really need to step in by rebelwarlock · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Says PolygamousRanchKid: "Oh, joy oh joy... I knew that 2016 was missing something: the threat of nuclear war!"

    We don't need this stupid bullshit in the summary. I'll read the comments if I want stupid bullshit.

  5. Well its been quiet with ISIS by future+assassin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    so guess the western powers need to throw rocks on another buggie man/hornets nest/

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  6. Re:Nuke North Korea by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So basically, you want to nuke North Korea because you want to nuke North Korea.

    And you assume that Kim is not a rational actor. That's a big assumption. Especially since he seems to have proved himself quite adept already at removing possible threats to the power that he was born and raised to assume as the scion of a Stalinist dynasty.

    (And I am also an EU citizen, and you most certainly do not speak for me.)

    Thanks for playing!

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  7. His numbers don't add up. by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So he picks a fight and some good and innocent people die, but 100% of his country gets vaporised in the counter strike. He had better check the weather before he wumps SK too, because at the moment the fallout would poison most of eastern China. Or does he realise that and is trying to intimidate Xi Jinping as well? Somehow I don't think that strategy is likely to go well for him.

    Cue cartoons of him in a nappy trying to count on his fingers, because that is the magnitude of his arsenal and the nature of his behaviour.

  8. Is there a trend, here? by hyades1 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Does anybody else notice an increase in right wing FUD in the stories covered here...stories like this one, that barely qualify as tech-related, if they do at all?

    I'm learning to think it's not a real week at Slashdot unless we see at least a couple of "Obama sucks because" stories, three or four "Windows 10 only phones home a hundred times a second because if loves you" stories, and a few like this one, where the "authorities" we're supposed to dislike and mistrust say they don't think North Korea can get a nuke-carrying missile as far as the US.

    Can we get back to the Slashdot that used to keep this crap somewhat isolated and filterable, please?

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    1. Re:Is there a trend, here? by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd rather have articles about programming and computers, really.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Is there a trend, here? by hyades1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Funny how you never protested when the off-topic, non-tech stories agreed with your point of view".

      I have. Less often, because it's well-covered by many others here.

      As a conservative you have failed to notice that in the past couple of decades, the Fox News approach (a conservative lie is just as good as the truth...they've been caught so many times I've lost track) passes as "fair debate".

      What you're seeing here is an invasion by the right wing echo chamber. Debunked lies cycle through over and over again, no matter how often they're refuted, and every objective fact has its carefully-crafted, time-wasting conservative cut-and-past boilerplate response.

      If you want more of that kind of drek, go to Fox News. Please quit polluting decent websites and wasting the time of intelligent people with your paranoid, agenda-driven bullshit.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  9. Re:It's just all bluster. by thesupraman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since you ask a serious question, then why not a serious answer.

    My ballpark would be 100,000 people dead depending heavily on the type of ordinance (HE, AP, Incendary, Frag, etc)
    so, that is around 1% of the population. Remember, those shells will land roughly randomly - I am assuming they have been
    setup to specifically target the population (if totally random then it will be MUCH lower).

    However your figures are highly flawed, as you are not allowing for losses in the NK artillery, or for desertions in people who dont
    actually want to shell their own families (remember, Korea was only separated a few generations ago), equipment failure, etc.
    You are also assuming all of those pieces can reach high popluation densities, however the border is long and the ranges not that great.

    By your own claims (and I agree) their most common artillery piece is similar to the D20, around 20km range.
    The center is Seoul is 30-40km from the border (30 if you count a specific inset area..), so they only have the closer areas to
    target, which are lower density. They would also need to have concentrated all their artillery in a very small and specific region to even
    target Seoul.

    And, lastly, think about what they would 'gain' by such an attack. The rest of the world would wipe them out.
    No more young girl harems for the great leader, no more european sportscars, no more playstation, no more living as kings for the ruling class.
    If they are lucky they will be reduced to running and hiding while they are being hunted after the fall of their state.

    Hard to see their motivation for such an attack..

  10. Re:Nuclear weapons aren't necessarily missiles by msauve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "special operations types are highly capable and have proven it ... the sub ran aground ... recon team executed the sailors ... Most of the recon team was killed..."

    "Highly capable" doesn't mean what you think it means.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  11. Re: North Korea's next target ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The US does not hate China dude. If North Korea attacked China, the US would assist- if China needed help swatting that fly, which they would not.

    Your whole preconception is wrong.

  12. Re:North Korea's next target ... by TomGreenhaw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    LOL, hell no.

    The fact is Americans love the Chinese. We buy their products like crazy. We love their food. We admire their art, exotic language and respect their ancient heritage. We welcome their people to study and work here. Sure we complain about the trade imbalance and the gamesmanship between our governments. But for the things that really matter they are our brothers and would instantly and without hesitation rally to their aid.

    Make no mistake, if North Korea would actually use nuclear weapons in anger against *anybody*, it would cease to exist as a political entity in less than a week.

    --
    Greed is the root of all evil.
  13. Re:North Korea's next target ... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Costly at first to feed and house millions of Germans who had been starving for two generations and had been used to planned poverty, but they caught up surprisingly fast.

    Koreans have been one people since the beginning of history. We tend to forget that the whole idea of North Korea dates back only to the immediate postwar years. NK is a fake country that has existed this long only because of the perceived support of China, which is now finding the place to be more trouble than it's worth. When the wall comes down. no matter what the reason, Both Korea will immediately cease to exist, and there won't even be any equivalent of Ostalgie.