Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    The government of SK don't need such convincers, they are far too well integrated into the policies of the US to require them. Either it was (a) propaganda aimed at the general population in SK - in which case, why, unless they are deeply afraid, which isn't the case by most accounts or (b) aimed at the NK government, as a crude attempt to put the frighteners on. Both (a) and (b) appear to be quite foolish.

    It will probably emerge in due course (as it often has in the past where US policy is concerned) that this was some poorly thought-through overreaction by the Pentagon or the White House, against the better judgements of State, or some different combination of those elements.

    Treating NK as a 'rational' player that can be scared into restraint probably isn't logical. It's difficult to know what's happening there - most reports by experts suggest this is part of some kind of internal difficulty Kim is having and a need to portray himself as tough. Escalation on the part of the US and SK will lead to further escalation by him if that is true.

    A more cynical interpretation of US actions is that they do now intend to make a final solution to the NK problem and provoke a reaction serious enough to induce war. Perhaps removing Kim now might not be the worst thing one can imagine, but the cost will most probably be terribly high. Seoul is very vulnerable to quick attack for example. Japan is also probably at risk from missiles, although they are well defended.
    Just because SK has an incredibly close relationship with the US does not mean they do not need some proper reassurance from time to time, quite a few nations are starting to question just how a reliable ally the US is, especially with a rising China and its economic problems. I can easily see why SK would want the US to put its money where its mouth is so to speak, rhetoric only goes so far.

    Some are starting to wonder if this is more than a move by Kim to reassure his powerbase in North Korea, first there was the satellite launch then a nuclear test now a constant barrage of rhetoric, there is a small chance there could be more going on than internal difficulty. Whilst threats won't work on a nation like North Korea appearing weak can be just as dangerous as provoking NK via military exercises. Look at the first Gulf war, Saddam attacked Kuwait because he did not believe America would step in, the US needs to avoid a repeat of that situation.

    I highly doubt the US is trying to provoke some sort of final solution, it is completely against their interests, South Korea's and China's. I honestly think given the consequences trying to remove Kim would be the worst possible thing. Every player in the region wants the status quo. Any conflict would cost the American's hundreds of billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives, only a lunatic would want another war on the peninsular.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I wouldn't be amazed to see a Chinese led invasion in the near future to topple the Kim dynasty and replace it with a more placid puppet state. It would also ease a hell of a lot of tensions in East Asia, which would be good for everyone, and it couldn't be said that it was the fault of the US.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    You're very silly to think that they are a push over, they aren't. In fact if you ask a soldier who are the most craziest and determined threats, they won't say Russia, they will say North Korea.


    This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lee R)
    You're very silly to think that they are a push over, they aren't. In fact if you ask a soldier who are the most craziest and determined threats, they won't say Russia, they will say North Korea.


    This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
    1)Russia isn't a threat to anyone.
    2)How would some "soldier" know anything about the ferocity of NK soldiers? The Korean War ended decades ago.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Just because SK has an incredibly close relationship with the US does not mean they do not need some proper reassurance from time to time, quite a few nations are starting to question just how a reliable ally the US is, especially with a rising China and its economic problems. I can easily see why SK would want the US to put its money where its mouth is so to speak, rhetoric only goes so far.

    Some are starting to wonder if this is more than a move by Kim to reassure his powerbase in North Korea, first there was the satellite launch then a nuclear test now a constant barrage of rhetoric, there is a small chance there could be more going on than internal difficulty. Whilst threats won't work on a nation like North Korea appearing weak can be just as dangerous as provoking NK via military exercises. Look at the first Gulf war, Saddam attacked Kuwait because he did not believe America would step in, the US needs to avoid a repeat of that situation.

    I highly doubt the US is trying to provoke some sort of final solution, it is completely against their interests, South Korea's and China's. I honestly think given the consequences trying to remove Kim would be the worst possible thing. Every player in the region wants the status quo. Any conflict would cost the American's hundreds of billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives, only a lunatic would want another war on the peninsular.
    Very good article here on the SAIS website about the repeated failures of the US and the West to understand what the NK regime are really up to and regular mistakes in policies towards them.
    http://38north.org/2011/04/quagmire/

    These mistakes appear to be continuing - their number one goal is regime survival and they will react wildly if they believe that is seriously being threatened. Sadly, it appears that the current US govt is indeed engaged in regime-threat activities rather than intelligent handling of this Stalinist antique led by an unknown, probably fairly irrational young 'leader', who may or may not be a figurehead.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    You can't seriously say it's the US's fault.

    How can you negotioate with a country that insists it has the right to a first strike against yours. The US is the "Sworn Enemy of Korea". Probably because they went to help the south.

    NK has one ally, China, what does that say about them? They hardly want to be friends with anyone. If they piped down and discontinued their ICBM research no one would care anymore.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Very good article here on the SAIS website about the repeated failures of the US and the West to understand what the NK regime are really up to and regular mistakes in policies towards them.
    http://38north.org/2011/04/quagmire/

    These mistakes appear to be continuing - their number one goal is regime survival and they will react wildly if they believe that is seriously being threatened. Sadly, it appears that the current US govt is indeed engaged in regime-threat activities rather than intelligent handling of this Stalinist antique led by an unknown, probably fairly irrational young 'leader', who may or may not be a figurehead.
    I'll give it a proper read later but so far the article seems a tad one sided, blaming most things on the US and SK. I mean come on NK replies to live fire exercises with an actual artillery attack on the South and its the South and US's fault?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Was that article written by NK? Sounds like it.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    I'll give it a proper read later but so far the article seems a tad one sided, blaming most things on the US and SK. I mean come on NK replies to live fire exercises with an actual artillery attack on the South and its the South and US's fault?
    No, it's not saying that, it's talking about the best ways to handle such an impossibly idiotic and cruel regime without having to go to war.

    There were some really interesting discussions with US and Asian officials on BBC Radio 4 news this lunchtime, the consensus amongst them was somewhat similar, but to be fair the US State Dept former head they had on was despairing about the willingness of the NK regime to commit long-term to any agreement. Basically when they want more resources they throw tantrums and make threats.

    It was also very interesting that people now believe that China is choking off NK's food and oil supplies.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    No, it's not saying that, it's talking about the best ways to handle such an impossibly idiotic and cruel regime without having to go to war.

    There were some really interesting discussions with US and Asian officials on BBC Radio 4 news this lunchtime, the consensus amongst them was somewhat similar, but to be fair the US State Dept former head they had on was despairing about the willingness of the NK regime to commit long-term to any agreement. Basically when they want more resources they throw tantrums and make threats.

    It was also very interesting that people now believe that China is choking off NK's food and oil supplies.
    North Korea's strategy was summed up by one think tank as being ferocious, crazy and weak. They manage to appear all of these three things at once, http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/feroc...orean-strategy

    I always tend to hear mixed things about China. Sometimes the Chinese seem sick of North Korean antics, other times they are willing to support NK no matter what. It's strange. Although if they are finally starting to cut off economic assistance, really the only thing keeping NK afloat we might see some real changes, good or bad...
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jimbo1234)
    Actually it really isn't.
    The official figure for the USA is that 90% of the population would be dead after 6 months...and this makes perfect sense as an EMP would knock out every car or lorry built after the 1970. Now considering a normal supermarket gets about 2 full artic. deliveries a day, imagine what would happen after a week of no deliveries combined with no water, heating etc.
    Now NK can't do this as the altitude to do such a thing is very specific and I think the warhead has to be extremely large, but it is a major problem.
    True. Let's forget that most Pacemakers would blackout under such circumstances could healthcare crisis. The Water purifying stations would not function and power generators would collapse as the Nuclear device detonate over the air. Fortunantly, important services like Hospitals would have back-up generators. Since you are studying electrical engineering, could you elaborate more on this discussion about EMP's.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    There was space borne nuclear detonation over US navy instillation that was conducted by the SAC (Strategic Air Command) during the height of the cold war; The results would be terrifying. These high altitude Nuclear testings can generate an EMP, and charged particles resulting from the blast can cross hemispheres to create an auroral display.


    The debris fireball stretching along Earth's magnetic field with air-glow aurora as seen at 3 minutes from an RC-135 SC Aircraft
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Nevertheless, the NK could not really threaten the USA with an Nuclear tipped missiles, no matter how accurate the ICBM is. There are far too many Aegis Destroyers in the Asia Pacific rim, namely the Arliegh Burke DDG which has the infamous SM-2 (now the newer SM-3) Anti-Ballistic missiles. Let's not forget that Japan has over 20 PAC-3 Patriot ABM/AAD systems at the Home Islands of Honshu and Kyushu. But judging by the ineffectiveness of NK military technology (like Scud C missiles or the continual use of T-54/5 tanks), I bet even upgraded I-Hawks could be effective against NK missile technology.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    However, the USA could easily over power NK electronic warfare capability by sending in EF-111 that can operate from S.Korean/Japanese based airfields.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Type 052D)
    However, the USA could easily over power NK electronic warfare capability by sending in EF-111 that can operate from S.Korean/Japanese based airfields.
    Shame the Americans retired them in 1998 then, isn't it?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Even if the US suffered an EMP strike, it won't knock out everything. Electronics will survive or some will be repairable within days if not hours. Some contries powergrids are more susceptable than others. Military systems are going to be hardened. So if NK launched their single missile, which takes weeks to set up and is very obvious on satalite images. Their country would be flattened and if not by the US, someone else will do it.

    They should be ignored for now as they are just attention seeking imho.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Shame the Americans retired them in 1998 then, isn't it?
    Doh :P! I forgot! The last time I saw them was in an documentary about the first gulf war (During the Air campaign)
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Type 052D)
    Doh :P! I forgot! The last time I saw them was in an documentary about the first gulf war (During the Air campaign)
    US now uses the Boeing EA-18G. It has an ...unfortunate... name.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pegasus2)
    Even if the US suffered an EMP strike, it won't knock out everything. Electronics will survive or some will be repairable within days if not hours. Some contries powergrids are more susceptable than others. Military systems are going to be hardened. So if NK launched their single missile, which takes weeks to set up and is very obvious on satalite images. Their country would be flattened and if not by the US, someone else will do it.

    They should be ignored for now as they are just attention seeking imho.
    First off all, no NK missile has the capability to reach Continental USA. Second of all, the USN has over 17 Aegis destroyers in the Asia-Pacific, therefore the SPY-1D radar (AESA Phased array radar) would track them down and attempt to shoot it down via the SM-2/3 missiles or at-least derail it's tejectoary path during the terminal stage. Only two nations on earth can stop an ICBM during the terminal stage, that's the PRC and the USA.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    US now uses the Boeing EA-18G. It has an ...unfortunate... name.
    I thought they were primarily using F/A-18 Super Hornets (under the command of the US Navy) for both EW and SEAD (Suppression of enemy air defense)!? What I do know is that they will be replace by the F-35C/B.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 16, 2013
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.