If you DON'T support militaristic action against NK, why not?

[Doppel]

The words "never again" are generally used in reference to the holocaust. Although Germany perpetrated this act, they were only able to do so because the world did not step in earlier on. Keeping in mind that history, and quotes like this: "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.", let's look at this recent UN Report to come out about North Korea. And I didn't pick the comparison to Nazi-Germany, the UN report did.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/17/world/asia/north-korea-un-report/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

(CNN) -- A stunning catalog of torture and the widespread abuse of even the weakest of North Koreans reveal a portrait of a brutal state "that does not have any parallel in the contemporary world," a United Nations panel reported Monday.

North Korean leaders employ murder, torture, slavery, sexual violence, mass starvation and other abuses as tools to prop up the state and terrorize "the population into submission," the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in North Korea said in its report.

more:

One witness, a survivor of a North Korean prison camp, told the commission of seeing a guard beat a nearly starving woman who had recently given birth, then force the woman to drown her baby.

If you don't believe that last bit, it doesn't matter. It's one story of thousands, all of which sound similar. Over the years we've got reams of information pointing to how horrific this regime is, how utterly depraved: mass arrests, killings, starvation, labor camps. Surveillance, fear, all of it and everything. NK has become a great experiment in how to be brutal to a population.

Here's what I think: I think we do nothing, the world does nothing. Eventually the regime crumbles and then we look back after having an even clearer picture of how awful it was and pretend that if we had really known we would have done something.

I don't think there's any degree of horror that NK can create at this point to get us as a world to act.

 

[werepossum]

Certainly not now that North Korea has nuclear weapons. Makes little sense to start something that would kill hundreds of thousands of South Koreans to save North Koreans, most of whom would probably aid Chubby Lil Kim in his fight.

Like so much in this world, we don't have a good choice and a bad choice, only two bad choices. In such a situation, inertia typically rules.

 

[sandorski]

Doing so opens up a can of worms.

 

[Doppel]

Certainly not now that North Korea has nuclear weapons. Makes little sense to start something that would kill hundreds of thousands of South Koreans to save North Koreans, most of whom would probably aid Chubby Lil Kim in his fight.

Like so much in this world, we don't have a good choice and a bad choice, only two bad choices. In such a situation, inertia typically rules.

I think there's very reasonable doubt about their nuclear weapons--are they actually weaponized; can they really do anything with them.

I wouldn't put it beyond the NK regime in a desperate last act of betrayal to nuke the south just for grins, but let's say there's exceptional confidence (as reasonable as intelligence ever can be) that they are not weaponized and/or can be neutered. Would you then support any interdiction?

Apparently China won't even sign off on this matter going to the security council.

 

[IronWing]

Very dangerous, you go first.

 

[Kadarin]

They wouldn't even have to use nukes... Seoul is within artillery range of NK batteries.

 

[Svnla]

Which country will lead the coalition to take on NK? I don't think the US has the stomach or cash to do it now after our adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[Zaap]

As much as the human rights abuses within NK suck (and frankly, the same can be said of many rotten dictator-run shitholes around the world) there's just not going to be military force used to stop them.

If it were a world where nations actually did work together to stop hellholes like NK from existing, and everyone else had everyone else's back on preventing/enforcing that such places don't exist, it might be a different story.

But we don't live in that world. No one is going to step up and go at NK militarily. The US should just stay as far away from any entanglement in that mess as humanly possible, short of NK directly attacking our ally SK.

If the US or any other nation or coalition of nations even tried to go after NK, it'd just get spun into those nations being the aggressor(s),warmongering, etc. The world is so nuts in reality, it'd actually end up being a PR victory for NK, who'd spin it as they were the innocent victim of evil western imperialists- and the sucky thing is, lots of dimbulbs worldwide would buy it.

It'd also cost a shitload of money that no one has, on top of all the money no one has that we're already dumping down a rathole.

The only solution to NK is just to wait their stupidity out, and keep an eye on them in the meantime, that they don't get too out of hand as far as spilling too much of their idiocy beyond their own borders. (I'm speaking of course in terms of the insane leadership of NK, not the common people who are just caught up as pawns.)

 

[Doppel]

Which country will lead the coalition to take on NK? I don't think the US has the stomach or cash to do it now after our adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It ought to be the UN. An international coalition should address it.

 

[Svnla]

It ought to be the UN. An international coalition should address it.

Like how the UN is dealing with Syria right now? China will veto anything against NK in the UN Security Council.

 

[nageov3t]

using the WW2 analogy, if Germany was killing all the German Jews but not invading its neighboring countries, and France, Poland, England, et al were all OK/indifferent to what was going on inside German boarders, do you think the US ever would have unilaterally bombed the Reich?

it's a situation with no great answers, but I'm not sure if forcibly removing the regime from power is worth potentially having Seoul leveled in retaliation. it would be far too easy of a decision for the US to make when we're not the ones inside of North Korea's strike range.

 

[rommelrommel]

They wouldn't even have to use nukes... Seoul is within artillery range of NK batteries.

Largely a myth.
http://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet...p-between-rhetoric-and-reality/#axzz2tdpTBZf0

Cliffs
Most nk artillery can't reach any part of Seoul.
The artillery that can can't reach the whole city.
Seoul is pretty hardened via conventional attack.
Nk artillery would be devistated by counter battery fire if it concentrated on civy targets.

 

[piasabird]

What about all the Americans that will die defending South korea and all the South Koreans that will die. It makes more sense to keep the status quo. That way they are only killing their own people. Are you going to send your son and daughter to die? What happens when China gets involved in the war like they did last time?

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

So, imagine a scenario where the entire NK government is removed with minimal casualties. What then? How do you manage the population? How do we assure China we have no military interest in their country? What do we do with those in Seoul who might want control of the north? Winning a military victory against the north is the smallest of the considerations.

 

[Greenman]

The question is, how many of the people we're trying to save will we have to kill? I would guess (and it's a wild ass guess) that at least some of the civilian population would fight for the little turd in charge. We'd have to kill all the command and control (a good idea even if nothing else was done), we'd have to kill most of the army, same with the navy and air force. Then we'd have to kill a lot of civilians because they think we're the devil himself. In the end, would it be a better answer than doing nothing?

 

[piasabird]

What makes you think the USA doesn't have nukes ready to fire at North Korea right Now? Besides the idea is kind of absurd since Seoul is like 24 miles from the DMZ. North and South Korea are smaller than the state of Florida. One cant nuke the other without a good chance of nuclear clouds floating back over the border or contaminating China and japan and a whole lot of other countries. It is the act of a Mad Man.

 

[Zaap]

There simply isn't a way that huge numbers of NK citizens won't be killed.

There's either:

1. The shitty regime running its natural course, with no outside intervention= huge death toll for NK citizens.

2. Outside military action attempting to force some other outcome for NK= huge death toll for NK citizens, PLUS huge death toll and expenditure of money no one has for other nations as well.

Both are shit sandwiches.

#1 is the better choice.

 

[Brovane]

South Korea has the most to lose if anyone attacks North Korea. They have to decided if it is worth it to attack North Korea and right now their is no indication that anyone in the South Korean government seriously consider this. The only government that could seriously pressure North Korea is China and so far they really don't seem to want to reign them in. So the situation is really crappy but the power of the UN is very limited and without support from both China and South Korea to act nothing is going to happen.

 

[Northern Lawn]

China needs to help, we could use trade sanctions against them for motivation. China is N Koreas only allie but I think they think if North Korea is as successful as south korea, it might ignite revolution in China itself.

So yeah, I blame China for North Korea, might even be a puppet gov.

 

[werepossum]

Largely a myth.
http://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet...p-between-rhetoric-and-reality/#axzz2tdpTBZf0

Cliffs
Most nk artillery can't reach any part of Seoul.
The artillery that can can't reach the whole city.
Seoul is pretty hardened via conventional attack.
Nk artillery would be devistated by counter battery fire if it concentrated on civy targets.

I don't think this means what you think it means. In the first place, we know little about what is hidden in the mountains of the DMZ. We know they have SOME domestic guns and some Russian guns capable of striking Seoul. We have no idea how many domestic guns may have been manufactured and are now hidden there since access is only by the most loyal military and slave workers (who don't return) and one does not parade rail-mounted artillery. In the second place, there are roughly a million South Koreans in greater Goyang alone, and a LOT of North Korean artillery can reach Goyang. Northwest and west of Goyang are some very high density areas easily within artillery range of the mountains just beyond the DMZ, Gimpo alone housing probably over a quarter million. This is NOT something to be taken lightly. Even beyond war as a rule, even beyond the nuclear question, this area has half a century of artillery build up specifically to punish one of the highest density population centers in the world in case of war by the craziest regime in modern history.

As far as counter-battery fire, North Korean artillery along the DMZ is hidden in caves, supposedly with multiple caves per piece. Conventional counter-battery fire would be largely useless as it has to be very accurate, fire during the North Korean piece's fire mission (i.e. before it is withdrawn deep into the mountain), and match trajectory. Too high a trajectory and the round impacts on the mountain above; too low a trajectory and the round impacts on the peaks below. (Having a looping trajectory firing at a known target the tunnels do not need line of sight to Seoul.) One needs either pinpoint accuracy available on a moment's notice, which would be available only after breaking down North Korea's air defenses in the region (which might not be that difficult but would surely take weeks) to allow us to stack strike aircraft within range, or pinpoint accuracy with thermobaric warheads to allow destruction by igniting ready rounds and/or killing crews before blast doors (where present) are closed. Our thermobaric warheads are typically either relatively short range or gravity bombs. Smaller thermobaric warheads could be adapted to glide bombs and larger thermobaric warheads might do the trick with JDAM kits IF we can exactly place the piece and strike before it is fully retracted, but neither of these are guaranteed effective. Such a conflict would be very nasty for a lot of South Koreans.

 

[unokitty]

“A true war story is never moral. It does not instruct, nor encourage virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behavior, nor restrain men from doing the things men have always done. If a story seems moral, do not believe it. If at the end of a war story you feel uplifted, or if you feel that some small bit of rectitude has been salvaged from the larger waste, then you have been made the victim of a very old and terrible lie. There is no rectitude whatsoever. There is no virtue. As a rule of thumb, therefore, you can tell a true war story by its absolute and uncompromising allegiance to obscenity and evil.” — Tim O’Brien, The Things They Carried

I'm done with war.
Uno
Sentry Dog Handler
US Army 69-71

 

[Jaskalas]

If you DON'T support militaristic action against NK, why not?

In a couple decades we will have mature laser and rail weapons deployed for our military use. Imagine a North Korea where no mortar or missile from their side can journey through the sky because we'd have the capacity to melt ANY number of foreign objects out of the sky.

Our defenses are destined to raise beyond anything imaginable, but we're not yet prepared to face such challenges today. Our advanced technology needs time to mature. Once that happens we can ensure no nuke ever leaves their land. Then we can end them.

 

[werepossum]

I'm done with war.
Uno
Sentry Dog Handler
US Army 69-71

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

John Stuart Mill

Thank you for your service.

 

[werepossum]

In a couple decades we will have mature laser and rail weapons deployed for our military use. Imagine a North Korea where no mortar or missile from their side can journey through the sky because we'd have the capacity to melt ANY number of foreign objects out of the sky.

Our defenses are destined to raise beyond anything imaginable, but we're not yet prepared to face such challenges today. Our advanced technology needs time to mature. Once that happens we can ensure no nuke ever leaves their land. Then we can end them.

Maybe. Certainly that would be a lot better for the South Koreans, but we'd still kill an awful lot of North Koreans to save them. War is and always will be an ugly, nasty business, and not to be taken lightly even with an overwhelming technological advantage.

 

[davmat787]

Doppler, I have posted basically the exact same sentiment in this forum, feeling something has to be done for humanitarian reasons.

South Korea would need to do a ton of preparation to handle refugees, but how do you'd do that on the sly? And then you have to somehow get Russia and China on board.

Meanwhile, world leaders are grateful North Korea is virtually impossible to get news out of so we don't have to see on our tv's the kind of horrors that are described in your OP. That would force action after all.