[Closed] What's the evidence that North Korea is a threat?

agreed all it gives them is the power to inflict enough losses on their enemies [ or anyone who invades them] that it assures they wont be invaded by land.

Kim knows if he attacks his regime and his country is annihilated so he wont ever use it aggressively - though he will pretend he might.

See also Iran

I keep thinking (not my strong point mind) is that even if NK chucked an ICBM or 2 at the USA, the USA could probably neutralise NK with conventional weapons without (much?) detriment to South Korea.*

*does not include China &/or Russia's response.

I have no idea what the US ICBM defence is at the moment either, if any.

I have no idea what the US ICBM defence is at the moment either, if any.

Enough to neutralise one or two ICBMs being chucked at them.

Nothing the rest of the world can do unless they want to confront China.

🙄

Enough to neutralise one or two ICBMs being chucked at them.

I'm sure the Yanks have something 'science fictiony', Lasers & electromagnetic railguns maybe?

It's laughable to be honest

Perhaps not so funny if you are a South Korean.

I'm not convinced that in their last moments they would be thinking 'well at least the US will get some pay back'

Ultimately, he'd have to be nuts to use a nuke as a first strike weapon (although he doesn't come across as the most balanced individual). But it would give him leverage, and probably mean he could get away with much more than he might otherwise.

As for hitting the US.. No chance.. There is a reason the soviets had thousands of missiles, they banked on only a tiny percentage hitting their targets.

I think the big problem is that North Korea probably has dozens of relatively short range missiles that could take out major cities in South Korea and Japan.
The leadership doesn't seem to be particularly rational or stable either. If they are going to lose control they might well decide to go out in a blaze of glory.

It's been unstable for decades and hasn't attacked anyone as yet though. Agree it probably becomes more dangerous to the local region the closer it gets to the dynasty's end. But tbh, i suspect that's a long way off and the NK dynasty will be about as long as China wants it there.

esselgruntfuttock - Member
the USA could probably neutralise NK with conventional weapons without (much?) detriment to South Korea.*

I'd say that really depends on how brainwashed the population really is. As, if recent conflicts are anything to go by, it's a lesson that air power is only so effective on it's own. Then again, a Korean war would likely be more an army than guerilla war, at least to begin with, so air power would probably have some effect. But after that you're into the realms of guessing what comes out of the power vacuum, i guess.

NewRetroTom - Member

I think the big problem is that North Korea probably has dozens of relatively short range missiles that could take out major cities in South Korea and Japan.

Shitloads of traditional artillery pointed at Seoul, lots of which can deliver chemical and biological weapons. This is taken less seriously today than it used to be, which might be good (if it really isn't as scary as was said ) or bad (if it's just hawkish people trying to overcome objections).

But it's kind of the perfect antidote to next-generation warfare- clever anti missile systems, precision guided munitions etc aren't that much good against a whole lot of people firing a whole lot of pound shop guns from up a fortified mountain without any need for complex command and control

It's all pretty awful.

It does seem strange to me to be provoking the hornets nest (nk).

Do i think they are likely to do a first strike? No, it would be self destructing based on the repurcussion. As such just leave them be ... A bit like don't annoy the village idiot.

Plus I don't understand the end game goal of NK. What are they seeking to achieve ?

Plus I don't understand the end game goal of NK. What are they seeking to achieve ?

Bargaining chip to end sanctions?

Do i think they are likely to do a first strike? No, it would be self destructing based on the repurcussion. As such just leave them be ... A bit like don't annoy the village idiot.

Plus I don't understand the end game goal of NK. What are they seeking to achieve ?

NK has an opportunity to elevate it's positition as the Chimp in the white house wants to make something of it.
It's fairly certain that anyone with any grasp of the situation there is telling him to stay well back. As said the ability of NK to go down in a balze of glory/civilian death the size of the convential army is 4th in the world, bigger than Russia, if Afganistan and Iraq looked messy then this would be a blood bath.

The issue for NK is all it's options are end game scenarios, they will continue to push as they can at the moment. Trump is giving them all the coverage and talking up their threat level/status which makes them feel good, nice to show the people that the US fears them makes it easier to convince them they can win a ground war.

China's is really worried about is umpteen million NK refugees

I did also doubt it'd be beyond China's ability for it just to pull a new city out its arse and house any potential refugees if it wished. 😆

I'm struggling to see that as a viable fear.

They'd probably hardly even notice if they all upped sticks and jumped across the boarder.

It's an 880 mile border with a small number of crossing point. Much as all the North African Migrants shouldn't impact the EU in total these would all be heading through small palces - like Greek Islands and Southern Italy. They will notice and they will have a massive economic impact.

Nah. Sorry sounds like nonsense to me. A couple of million people isn't going to make much difference to China.

The EU is about 750 million, look a the impact that has had on Southern Europe. China has money but is not in itself a rich country all over. How do you accomodate that many people without it being an impact
[img] [/img]
They will be crossing into areas of low population and support, would require a massive humanitarian effort. China's economy is not performing well at the moment, growth is slowing and huge numbers of the population still live simple low income existances in rural areas. Perhaps they could ship all of the N Koreans to one of thier empty factoiry cities but they would still need jobs, food and help.

It not the reason why China refuses to cut off nk.

Read this in an article yesterday:

“Kim Jong-il’s legacy was mixed – he let the army run the country for 10 years because he was afraid of a coup,” said Robert Kelly, a North Korea expert at Pusan National University. “Kim Jong-un has tied himself to the success of the nuclear programme, which is why denuclearisation is not going to happen.

Trump’s public comments on North Korea had played into the stereotype of Americans propagated by the state’s media.

“The US is central to North Korean propaganda, so when Trump talks about sending an armada to the Korean peninsula, or bombing North Korea, that plays into their hands.”

Nicholas Smith, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Canterbury in New Zealand, believes that Kim’s rhetoric and actions are “a carefully crafted strategy of brinkmanship, designed mostly for maintaining his domestic grip on power”.
“The biggest challenge in his position as supreme leader – one all autocrats face – is how to maintain his authoritarian rule,” Smith wrote in an opinion piece for the Conversation.

“Kim Jong-un, like his father Kim Jong-il, has been able to pursue this strategy of brinkmanship with great success, at least for domestic purposes. This is mainly because despite all the international repercussions to date – ostracism, sanctions, and threats of intervention – China has been willing to prop up North Korea.”

The retaliatory launch of ballistic missiles by US and South Korean forces on Wednesday morning will not only have reminded remind Kim of the military might of his enemies, but reinforced a tenet of Kim dynasty propaganda: that North Korea is surrounded by hostile forces intent on its eradication.

“Kim Jong-un loves this, because it reinforces the image of North Korea standing up to a big, bullying imperialist,” Kelly said. “It fits exactly with the way North Korea wants to be portrayed, rather than the rogue, gangster state that it really is.”

“It would help if Trump backed away a little. His childish, personalised tweets bring the US down to the level of the North Koreans, and we know from the racist and sexist things it said about Barack Obama and Park Geun-hye that you are never going to win a mud-slinging contest with the KCNA.”

A threat to who? They might not be a threat to the US or the UK or Europe militarily, but a nuclear NK will change the balance of power in the region towards China's favour. That is the issue, Its a similar thing to Cuba and Russia and the Cuban Missile crisis in the cold war. It's about China pushing its influence into the region - a good old classic game of US/western capitalist/democratic model vs. Socialist dictatorship. A clash of values, and preventing them from gaining more territory, power and influence.

Lets say for example NK throws a nuke over to Singapore (they could and would be crazy enough to do it as the evidence supports). then what? The west will feel they need to intervene/retaliate somehow then the ball is in our court. We were pulled into WW1 and WW2 protecting other nations rather than defending ourselves from a direct threat. Do we retaliate with nukes and all the ramifications of that? retaliate with conventional means and risk an entrenched conventional war with Korea, that will cost thousands of US and their allies lives or even worse than all of that - have to have a serious dialogue with NK which will just be demeaning, embarrassing and humiliating for the US and us in the west - to have to take seriously a buffoon of a nation and regime like NK.

It suddenly makes life very complicated and extremely risky for us.

A few people have said KJU would have to be nuts to use nukes.

I think needs to be factored is that he is. He himself is the 3rd generation of the family myth that he is supreme leader and there's nothing to suggest he, unlike say his grandfather and possibly father, doesn't believe those myths.

I think it's possible that if he had the capability he'd use it. KJI wouldn't have done I'm pretty sure but his boy is seemingly more unstable.

Of more concern though is the Orange One will do something pre-emptive and equal as stupid in the meantime.

There's not much risk at the moment, the worry is though at some point in the future (once NK has a viable ICBM with a nuclear warhead) that you then have a situation with a slightly deranged leader that would probably do anything to hold onto power (it's not like he'd live long if there was a coup). I'm not sure if I was the US I'd want to be relying entirely on a missile defense system.

I think the best solution is China to engineer a coup and then take over administration of NK, trouble is the US wouldn't be able to leave that situation alone as they'd look weak in the region. So we're left with a dictator knowing that projecting power (or trying to) is the only way he can stay in power and two superpowers realising the current situation, though shit, is probably better than any of the likely alternatives.

Setting aside the immediate impact of any war - nuke or conventional - the regional economic consequences could be catastrophic. Without Chinese support in terms of food, there would be a humanitarian disaster as millions of North Koreans would die of starvation as well as the economic shock to South Korea and probably Japan and hence globally - a scenario nobody wants. The North Koreans have lived under severe oppression for decades, so unless China is going to support a popular uprising and bear the economic consequences, they'd rather just stick to the present situation as it is the least-damaging option. The problem now is the man with the small hands and the big button...

if they attack south korean or send missles into japan they'll get annihilated(a shitfest will be unleashed mind).

Never get involved in a land war in Asia. It's a classic blunder.

The nukes are just sabre rattling. The threat is a new Korean war, in which the west may defend the south but China or even Russia could defend the north. A drawn out Korean war is not something the US will want to get into however, and definitely not if China is involved.

NK are poor and weak militarily, regardless of having a showpiece missile that might be lucky in hitting somewhere but probably won't. They aren't stupid though. They know their weakness and are trying to, in their eyes, survive by threatening everyone.

The problem comes when someone like Trump takes action militarily. NK will launch what they've got and head for the south. Missiles and technology spent/wasted, it's then a ground conflict.

Have to also remember that the north is still technically at war with the south and believes the whole area is theirs.

NK are poor and weak militarily, regardless of having a showpiece missile that might be lucky in hitting somewhere but probably won't. They aren't stupid though. They know their weakness and are trying to, in their eyes, survive by threatening everyone.

There is a reason the soviets had thousands of missiles, they banked on only a tiny percentage hitting their targets

Not really. The US only had a deployed anti ICBM missile for (IIRC) less than a year of the cold war, and even then it just protected a missile field (as per the anti ballistic missile treaty provisions). The USSR chose to put up a slightly more credible anti ICBM set up around moscow (which is why we developed the chevaline warhead system - given the UKs limited number of missiles we had to guarantee being able to destroy moscow to have a credible deterrent). The system is basically firing a missile to let another nuke off at 100,000ft in front of the nuke you're trying to destroy - it's not subtle (it's also still deployed).

The reason the Russians had thousands of warheads pointing at the US was largely to maintain strategic parity, the secondary reason was because there is / was a lot of targets you'd want to hit. A lot of those targets were 'hard' to destroy (e.g. missile silo) so you need to lob a load megatonage at them to be assured you could destroy them as a near miss wouldn't destroy them (near miss being more than 400m away or so). Obviously this is less of an issue if you're trying to destroy a city - presumably if / when the north Koreans get a nuclear tipped ICBM they'll be targeting a city as their technology isn't good enough to hit anything else.

The US does now have a 'working' deployed anti ICBM (deployed in Alaska), it also has the THAAD system (this is what got deployed to South Korea) recently and it also has ageis destoryers / cruisers which have some anti ballistic missile capability. Most of this is focused on hitting slower moving short ranged ballistic missiles rather than a proper ICBM (which will be going much faster), it's also not had the greatest hit record. If it was an attack of one or two, they'd certainly be in with a shout of hitting them, but if it was 10+ they'd probably be screwed.

NK need provoking with a nasty stick, send something horrid over and let's see just what they have for retaliation... that'll show us all just what they've got, when they've shot thier load there will be nothing left and the world can continue being threatened by ISIS.

#nukeemdanno

mikewsmith - Member 
Care to let us know the size of the NK military? As above the psychology of maintaining that the US sees you as a massive threat is important for them

Size of the army is not their strength, other than as you say for psychological reasons. Sure, it is a strength, but they are effectively weak when it comes to an armed conflict, especially if it involved air conflict.

Though if it is assumed they aren't wiped out by air strikes, if it comes to a ground war that army becomes their strength in at least a conflict with the south, as it did in previous war. Assuming though they have the support, supplies, and even enough food. Assuming also they have the desire to fight for their great leader. The image we are presented with is that they are all loyal, but reality is severe poverty and deprivation.

NK remembers that the US killed about 20% of its people in the 1950s, and has a record of near-genocide in Asia.
That's why they are scared and posturing.
The US loves to have an enemy to justify their huge armed forces, & NK is a suitable threat to complain about.
It helps to distract from the real problems.. [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40514995 ]domestic firearms[/url]

The fact that they have a history of firing missiles towards / over Japan should be a bit of a hint.

North Korea is basically the really pissed and aggressive 5'2" Glaswegian, gobbing off at everyone at last orders

NK need provoking with a nasty stick, send something horrid over and let's see just what they have for retaliation

North Korea is basically the really pissed and aggressive 5'2" Glaswegian, gobbing off at everyone at last orders

Ye think so pal? That's fightin' talk where I 'm fae.....MON THEN!

North Korea's idea of "being threatened" is not the same as yours OP. They can send a missile to South Korea / Japan very easily. They do not comply with international rules and agreements. This is a country which executes senior officials with anti-aircraft guns on a regular basis. Yes they are a threat.

Previously in their history North Korea were almost wiped off the map because of extensive bombing. The americans even bombed their dams (which is a war crime) because they had run out of targets to bomb.

Clearly North Korea are no threat to anyone outside their border (it is laughable to suggest that they are in my opinion) and American intelligence confirms that their reason for arming themselves is purely defensive.

If you look at the negotiations North Korea havent been unreasonable (compared to the other side) but they have pretty few options if the Americans issue threats.

Noam Chomsky has spoken extensively about this, the rhetoric (about them being a threat) mainly spouted by the media isnt even agreed upon by the American public (in polls).

I'm surprised that the North Koreans have managed to launch anything.. thought that the Americans would have sabotaged everything with a stuxnet type virus.. I imagine that's what caused the failed tests so far

I'm surprised that the North Koreans have managed to launch anything.. thought that the Americans would have sabotaged everything with a stuxnet type virus.. I imagine that's what caused the failed tests so far

Id hypothesise that the reason they've got as far as they have, bearing in mind Iran didn't get anywhere near, is that the closed nature the country means there isnt a network of CIA agents dropping USB sticks arround Pyongyang. And its backwards-ness means it doesnt have computer networks to exploit. Bearing in mind nuclear weponary is actually 1940's tech, you dont need a PC.

Not really. The US only had a deployed anti ICBM missile for (IIRC) less than a year of the cold war, and even then it just protected a missile field (as per the anti ballistic missile treaty provisions). The USSR chose to put up a slightly more credible anti ICBM set up around moscow (which is why we developed the chevaline warhead system - given the UKs limited number of missiles we had to guarantee being able to destroy moscow to have a credible deterrent). The system is basically firing a missile to let another nuke off at 100,000ft in front of the nuke you're trying to destroy - it's not subtle (it's also still deployed).

I stand corrected.. You are right. The reason they wanted bigger bombs like the tsar was because they didn't think their bombers would get through.. I appreciate not the same thing at all.

thought that the Americans would have sabotaged everything with a stuxnet type virus. I imagine that's what caused the failed tests so far

There's the placement of the tools and then there's the operation of the tools to initiate disruption. The former obviously isn't publicised and the latter has to be attributable as an 'enemy action' although it's pretty obvious who'd have the motive for attacking NK. It's extremely likely that the Americans have something in place - the closed nature of NK presents additional difficulties but there are very creative ways of gaining control of industrial systems.

Remember Stuxnet is nearly 10 years old so there will have been significant development in cyber weapons since.

See
https://www.wired.com/story/russian-hackers-attack-ukraine/
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/17/world/middleeast/us-had-cyberattack-planned-if-iran-nuclear-negotiations-failed.html

EDIT: Failed tests equally attributable to lobbing missiles a long way being fundamentally difficult and requiring a lot of trial and error in the absence of cutting edge computer modelling.

I can't remember where I read or heard it but apparently even the best missile defence systems can only cope with 4 out of 5 incoming missiles. So NK only need to launch 10 missiles to land one in all probability.

Previously in their history North Korea were almost wiped off the map because of extensive bombing. The americans even bombed their dams (which is a war crime) because they had run out of targets to bomb.

Clearly North Korea are no threat to anyone outside their border (it is laughable to suggest that they are in my opinion) and American intelligence confirms that their reason for arming themselves is purely defensive.

If you look at the negotiations North Korea havent been unreasonable (compared to the other side) but they have pretty few options if the Americans issue threats.

It's bad enough when one country is led by a leader who's often appeared to be on the edge of mental illness – earlier this year, Sen. John McCain called Kim Jong-un a "crazy fat kid," though Psychology Today deemed Kim "power-addled" but "rational." In the case of the U.S-North Korea standoff, not only North Korea but the United States too is led by a man who exhibits a "dangerous mental illness," according to a panel of psychiatrists at a Yale University conference, who called him "paranoid and delusional."

But if Trump is angling for a military showdown with North Korea, the most likely result would be catastrophic. In addition to its nuclear arms, North Korea reportedly has 8,000 pieces of artillery and rocket launchers trained on South Korea and Japan, capable of firing a staggering 300,000 rounds in the first hour of war. Estimates of the number of people killed in South Korea, including Americans, suggest as many as 300,000 dead in just days. And if North Korea's Kim suspects that even a limited, preemptive American military strike is ultimately aimed at decapitating the regime and toppling his government, he's likely to unleash not only his nukes but an array of chemical and biological weapons, too, resulting in casualties in the millions.