Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

North Korea scrap all non-aggression pacts with South Korea Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    I think South Korea, china, Japan et al will breath a sigh of releif.

    You need to stop thinking tactical nukes evaporate the whole of North Korea. They would. Just small areas.

    but you've also forgotten about the human right to survival for north koreas neighbours
    South Korea would've breathed a better sigh of relief if their sunshine policy plan hadn't had the backdrop of America's rhetoric and been replaced by no plan at all.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mmmpie)
    That was in the mid 1950s. We don't know what technological cast-offs North Korea might have picked up from China and the USSR, so it's difficult to judge. In theory most of the relevant technology is all subject to non-proliferation treaties, so they would have to reinvent it from scratch; in practice, who knows.

    At the moment, North Korea's nukes are not an effective deterrent. You're right that if we're going to intervene we need to do so before they become a deterrent. As I mentioned to MatureStudent36, we have thermobaric weapons with yields comparable to the small nukes that North Korea appears to possess - but if they continue to advance their nuclear technology that might not be the case for long. Thermobaric weapons aren't subject to non-proliferation treaties, so the US has probably provided such weapons to South Korea already.
    Nuclear proliferation relates to the war head. Not the delivery vehicle. They have the bomb bit.

    but you are right about the big conventional stuff.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Isambard Kingdom Brunel)
    No war is pointless. International reputation is at stake.

    Little kids in Uruguay will be watching the news, I don't want them thinking the UK is a pushover, and the North Koreans are champions, do you?

    War without casualty is like a salad without water-cress.
    That's the worst simile I've ever read.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    They may have produced some prototypes of pathetic low yield A-Bombs, but they are no where near making H-Bombs which get you into the megaton range.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Nuclear proliferation relates to the war head. Not the delivery vehicle. They have the bomb bit.

    but you are right about the big conventional stuff.
    There are restrictions on long range missile technology. Nowhere near as comprehensive as for nuclear warheads, admittedly. The main barrier to developing an ICBM is the re-entry vehicle, which is effectively a part of the warhead and isn't shared lightly. It's not getting the bomb in the air, it's getting it down in tact to the target.

    Even if they don't set their sights on things like MIRVs, it will be a while before they can hit anything with it. A bigger risk is very-high-altitude detonations, with the associated EM pulse doing lots of infrastructure damage.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mmmpie)
    That was in the mid 1950s. We don't know what technological cast-offs North Korea might have picked up from China and the USSR, so it's difficult to judge. In theory most of the relevant technology is all subject to non-proliferation treaties, so they would have to reinvent it from scratch; in practice, who knows.
    The tech for the delivery vehicle is just space stuff, which knowledge of which I would guess is widely available in the international world. Minimising the bomb, more difficult but my point being in 1957 there weren't the manufacturing processes there are now, you could buy a 1950's supercomputer in the form of a phone today. The limitations which existed then are not there now.

    At the moment, North Korea's nukes are not an effective deterrent. You're right that if we're going to intervene we need to do so before they become a deterrent. As I mentioned to MatureStudent36, we have thermobaric weapons with yields comparable to the small nukes that North Korea appears to possess - but if they continue to advance their nuclear technology that might not be the case for long. Thermobaric weapons aren't subject to non-proliferation treaties, so the US has probably provided such weapons to South Korea already.
    Barely, I mean the biggest conventional weapon in western service is 10 kilotons, the last nuclear test was supposed to be 6-9kilo tons. Its also deceptive because unlike the US and USSR I'm guessing North Korea isn't just churning out the levels of weapons grade material for fun. The fact their last bomb wasn't that big doesn't automatically mean that is the biggest they can build.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    They should've let MacArthur nuke the Chinese border in 52.
    :lolwut: You think?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)
    The tech for the delivery vehicle is just space stuff, which knowledge of which I would guess is widely available in the international world. Minimising the bomb, more difficult but my point being in 1957 there weren't the manufacturing processes there are now, you could buy a 1950's supercomputer in the form of a phone today. The limitations which existed then are not there now.

    Barely, I mean the biggest conventional weapon in western service is 10 kilotons, the last nuclear test was supposed to be 6-9kilo tons. Its also deceptive because unlike the US and USSR I'm guessing North Korea isn't just churning out the levels of weapons grade material for fun. The fact their last bomb wasn't that big doesn't automatically mean that is the biggest they can build.
    You really underestimate how complicated and expensive the "delivery vehicle" actually is. The knowledge of that is not widely available in the international world. China for example, has just over 40 ICBMs. The UK has none. India has none. The idea that North Korea, a country which has no economy could just produce ICBMs using off the shelf technology is ridiculous.

    Putting something in space is not the same as putting something in space, having it orbit around the globe, re-enter and hit a target accurately. The North don't even have a space programme. The crucial bit also is developing the technology to prevent the thing being intercepted. It's no use if it becomes a turkey shoot for the other side when you launch your missiles.

    The North have only done only a handful of rocket launches. They've managed to get something into space just once, the other attempts have been total failures where the rockets have blown up or ended up in the Pacific. Bare in mind that the technology they've used is outdated Soviet technology, which was obsolete 40 years ago.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)
    I agree people would be happy, but I think all political will would be for a conventional strike.

    I'm just wondering where these facilities are placed, near any built up area or such.

    I'm pretty sure the only aircraft than can deliver it is currently the B2. Although I'm guessing a B52 would be capable. As I said, I can't see us getting involved on a military level, I just don't see what we would be bringing to the party that isn't already there.
    It's not surprising why North Korea focuses so much on having a large military and developing nuclear weapons. The US and other western nations constantly discuss bombing North Korea, and send warships on "training exercises" very close to the border. Any nation that constantly gets threatened by military invasion from superpowers would be very scared and want to get some sort of weapon as a deterrent.

    Maybe North Korea does provoke the South sometimes, but stop pretending that it doesn't happen both ways. If the US and the South really only wanted to perform "training exercises" with their Navy, there is plenty of ocean on the planet far away from North Korea to do so.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bart1331)
    It's not surprising why North Korea focuses so much on having a large military and developing nuclear weapons. The US and other western nations constantly discuss bombing North Korea, and send warships on "training exercises" very close to the border. Any nation that constantly gets threatened by military invasion from superpowers would be very scared and want to get some sort of weapon as a deterrent.

    Maybe North Korea does provoke the South sometimes, but stop pretending that it doesn't happen both ways. If the US and the South really only wanted to perform "training exercises" with their Navy, there is plenty of ocean on the planet far away from North Korea to do so.

    Of course you're right.

    after all, lets just think of how many North Korean ships have been torpedoed by the south and Americans. How many times they've shelled the north, seized their boats, fired at their troops across the DMZ, conducted sabotage on their coastline and kidnapped their people and invaded them.

    I like to look at things from all angels but in this case ocams razor applies.
    the south and the west have done everything possible to calm the north down.

    if you're at university try and track down a South Korean student. Ask them whats happening. You'll be suprised
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peachz)
    Surely this is like the kid who constantly says, 'i'm gonna commit suicide.' All words and no action. (I hope.)
    Yes perhaps, although he has just given the instructions 'annihilate the enemy' and 'make the first gunfire' if tensions boil over.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    I would not be surprised if there was conflict in that world due to the actions by North Korea
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bart1331)
    It's not surprising why North Korea focuses so much on having a large military and developing nuclear weapons. The US and other western nations constantly discuss bombing North Korea, and send warships on "training exercises" very close to the border. Any nation that constantly gets threatened by military invasion from superpowers would be very scared and want to get some sort of weapon as a deterrent.
    What interest do you think the US has in North Korea beyond its being provocative. Back in the 1950's Korea a battle ground in cold war its motives were clear, but what exactly does the US want now? I can't see anything. North Korea on the other hand has a dictatorship to uphold, a terrible economy, a far advanced big brother, and the constant requirement for US aid. Don't for one moment kid yourself, North Korea can't be frame as the poor little guy in this. North Korea is under no threat of invasion beyond its actions, what is threaten is the North Korean regime losing their grip on power.

    Maybe North Korea does provoke the South sometimes, but stop pretending that it doesn't happen both ways. If the US and the South really only wanted to perform "training exercises" with their Navy, there is plenty of ocean on the planet far away from North Korea to do so.
    How many direct provocations has either the US or South Korea made? Military exercises are show of force not direct action. In the last few years, the North has regularly put military vessels in South Korea waters a number of which have resulted in battles, they sunk a South Korea ship in South Korean waters, and shelled a South Korean Island. Can you give me an incident of the US or South doing similar? Its a similar story at the DMZ with the fire and the tunnel incidents.

    I know its cool to play the US is the bad guy card these days but that simply isn't the case. North Korea is the problem here, even China and Russia aren't willing to offer support anymore.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Cold war:

    USA: I'm going to Atom bomb you.
    USSR: I'm going to Atom bomb you.

    USA: I'm going to Hydrogen bomb you.
    USSR: I'm going to Lithium bomb you.
    USSR: I'm going to Tsar bomb you.
    USA: I'm going to ICBM you.
    etc.


    ..nothing happens because both sides don't want war because it would result in mutual assured destruction.

    North Korea: I'm going to preemptive strike yo' ass.
    Conclusion: Nothing will happen.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ruffiio)
    Cold war:

    USA: I'm going to Atom bomb you.
    USSR: I'm going to Atom bomb you.

    USA: I'm going to Hydrogen bomb you.
    USSR: I'm going to Lithium bomb you.
    USSR: I'm going to Tsar bomb you.
    USA: I'm going to ICBM you.
    etc.


    ..nothing happens because both sides don't want war because it would result in mutual assured destruction.

    North Korea: I'm going to preemptive strike yo' ass.
    Conclusion: Nothing will happen.
    The great leader is off his moobs... don't underestimate him.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Pyongyang McDonalds:

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=78e_1362304150
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 122025278)
    Pyongyang McDonalds:

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=78e_1362304150
    That is amazing. I really hope none of this kick off North Korea is one of my top travel destinations. Such a cool place to visit.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)
    That is amazing. I really hope none of this kick off North Korea is one of my top travel destinations. Such a cool place to visit.
    Complete with politicaldissidentmeat Big Mac
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    That wasn't a good idea, Pyongyang, not a good idea at all. For the sake of North Korean citizens, I hope there won't be a war since in such a militarised country where people are indoctrinated to follow their leaders blindly, you'll probably get large numbers of people unnecessarily sacrificing themselves for a corrupt regime. It'd be heartbreaking to see innocent people die for a mad regime...
    But then again, it seems that North Korea has been making such announcements for quite a while not so we'd of course have to ask the question to which extent this can be seen as a serious threat.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ruffiio)
    ..nothing happens because both sides don't want war because it would result in mutual assured destruction.

    North Korea: I'm going to preemptive strike yo' ass.
    Conclusion: Nothing will happen.
    Issue with this being at present there is no threat of MAD since the North cannot deliver a nuclear strike. What might happen is a pre emptive strike to ensure the situation that you described does not come about.
 
 
 
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: March 10, 2013
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?
Useful resources

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.