Poll - Should North Korea be invaded?

[bernse]

Assuming the US and its allies could, of course!

 

[bernse]

 

[Schadenfroh]

i vote this to be moved to politics forum

 

[NogginBoink]

Interesting question, and one that has lots and lots of dimensions.

Everything that Iraq's leader was accused of doing could be said of North Korea. This despot abuses, tortures, and starves the citizens of his nation. From a purely human rights standpoint, I think he needs to go.

Should the U.S. be the one to do it? Well, in the current political climate, that's a tough call to make. If GWB hadn't gotten our country to where it is now, I'd say yes. Now, I just don't know.

 

[filmmaker]

The second North Korea launches a weapon, that 2 mile border between North and South Korea will become very small very fast.

 

[bernse]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
i vote this to be moved to politics forum

You are probably right - I didn't even know AT had a politics forum! My bad!

 

[Hammer]

its inevitable

 

[alphatarget1]

bribe the chinese and have them invade north korea.

 

[Aquaman]

Wow........ even though THe US & allies are much more technically advanced............ they will have much higher casualty rate then in Iraq. I don't think they will be a pushover. It would be a longer war and that crazy dude may use nukes :Q

Cheers,
Aquaman

 

[MegaloManiaK]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
i vote this to be moved to politics forum

I was about to ask where that poll option was.

Take it to P&N they'll argue about it all day long.

Thats why there is a P&N forum.

 

[DanTMWTMP]

PHOK NO!....once there is any sign of invasion ....Seoul is dead...there are hundreds of thousands of artilery batteries aimed @ Seoul ..once war starts, Seoul will be flattened...meaning half of my family members will die..


and say goodbye to samsung memory and lcd's, LG phones and their cheap optical drives, hyundai cars (errr....wait, i probablywon't miss that....)


I DO NOT WHAT THIS TO HAPPEN NO MATTER WHAT. the stupidass dictator wants a ton of attention...but an even stupider US president called BushJr bashed @ NK like couple yrs ago, and NK went all crazy and started to do this crap(NK goes wtf, US bans oil shipments, NK has no choice but to start up their nuke powerplants just to survive w/ electricity, byproduct of this?..oo nukes...)
...all the peace negotiations btwn SK and NK down the drain..the efforts of the clinton's admin and SK's previous admin down the drain because of dumbass bush wants to stand tough (kennedywanted to do that, and that got us vietnam war..)




N.K. War will mean high casualties for the US..it will be an all out war...and the NK dictator has nothing to lose..he can use nukes whenever he wants...which will mean a smallscale nuke war..and that whole region will be radiated..


. the best way is to somehow smuggle good-ole USA propaganda and mcdonalds into NK and have the people revolt....why don't they modify an SR71 and have it drop a bunch of flyers over NK....no SAM has yet to shoot down that airplane so why not...


but honestly, to me this is a lose-lose situation......they have missiles that reach alaska..and if left alone, will soon have missiles that reaches the west coast..and i live near LA/SD area....goddamn it...i don't want NK missiles flying here.

man, can't they dispose and take care of this thing splintercell style?


i'm sad now...Seoul in ruins and my family dead...or possible death by missle strike in 10 yrs...
i guess it really doesn't concern u guys though....

hopefully it'll get resolved in a peaceful manner....idon't want my hometown gone

 

[preslove]

This is a stupid hypothetical, we wouldn't have the troops even if we weren't bogged down in Iraq. NK has a million man army, and as Dan(whatever) said they have artillery up the @$$ that would destroy everything up to Seoul. All they do is train for this invasion, and i'm pretty sure they would kick @$$ for a while. Our troops there are pretty much speed bumps to slow NK down enough to get a rapid response over there.

 

[alchemize]

How about instead adding a selection:

"We should plan military air strikes to disable the ability to develop nukes, and for the defense of SK for any reprisal attacks. But we should not invade."

 

[MovingTarget]

That is a very scary situation if we did invade North Korea. Does the North Korean Government deserve it from the way they treat their own people? Definitely. But like DanTNWTMP mentioned, Seoul is toast if we do, regardless of nukes that the North may have working as of now or not. That is my fear. Sadly, there are no good options here. If we take out the nuclear facilities strategically, they invade SK or really mess it up bigtime. If we invade, then we're really in for it in terms of civilian casualites in SK. But we cannot continue to pander and kiss up to the DPRK like we have in the past. The only viable optioin at this point is to try to calm this down and wait it out by doing nothing, taking a wait and see attitude. This means not making any references of military action, thereby riling them up. Also, we should not try to appease them either by giving them more aid, allowing them to continue with business as usual. We all know appeasement has worked in the past

Can we beat NK? Sure, but only if we can stomach the losses of our soldiers and millions of South Koreans. I hope it doesnt come to that, but it may eventually if they actually try to use those weapons.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: alchemize
How about instead adding a selection:

"We should plan military air strikes to disable the ability to develop nukes, and for the defense of SK for any reprisal attacks. But we should not invade."

This makes more sense than an invasion, however your suggestion carries a very high risk that 2 or 3 nukes (right now) could get lobbed somewhere. That is generally considered a bad thing.

I am not sure what the solution is, but an attack at this moment seems to create more problems (read massive casualties) than people in the region want.

 

[StormRider]

There are no good options.

Invade and we will see massive civilian and military casualites.

Do nothing and we risk seeing NK sell nukes to terrorists groups (Very poor starving nation with nukes do not mix well).

 

[0roo0roo]

wheres the preemptive nuke option?

 

[glenn1]

Interesting question, and one that has lots and lots of dimensions.

What i want to know is why PRC is being so non-chalant about the freaks in Pyongyang. You'd figure that having a neighbor who's a backwards, starving nation of aggressive nutcases that's looking to pick a nuclear fight with the world's only superpower would be something they'd be just a bit concerned about...

 

[spaceman]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
wheres the preemptive nuke option?

 

[dexvx]

The minute the United States lobs a few bombs North Korea's way, Seoul will be smashed by approximately 8,000 North Korean artillery capable of delivery approximately 500,000 rounds per hour (not the small arse rounds, mind you). If Kim is irrational enough to use nukes, Tokyo would be a #1 target with their intermediate ballistic missiles, with the possibility of Seattle (ironic that I live there), Los Angelos, Honolulu being a prime target for their intercontinental ballistic missiles.

It would take a massive nuclear pre-emptive strike to nullify just the North Korean artillery batteries pointed at Seoul to the point of no threat. However, South Korea, China, Russia, and Japan would protest the nuclear strikes because of the nuclear fallout (because we all just love living in post nuked land dont we?). In other words, no, Bush doesnt have what it takes to actually stand up to a real foe, or a "dilemma" in general.

 

[bernse]

Originally posted by: presloveThis is a stupid hypothetical, we wouldn't have the troops even if we weren't bogged down in Iraq.

From the OP: Here, I'll bold it for you so you'll see it.

Assuming the US and its allies could, of course!

 

[her209]

civilian casualties and collateral damage are unavoidable right?

 

[NogginBoink]

Here is a story about what's going on inside NK today.

So very very sad.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Yes, we should invade North Korea because the world's got to end some time and I say sooner rather than later.

 

[kage69]

Yes, it's incredibly sad. The number of families destroyed by Kim Il and his lackeys is mindblowing. I've heard other references to canniblism as well, but was unaware of the sex trade defectors sometimes become ensnared in.
A picture of a starving 5 year old Korean boy haunted me for months, and still makes me feel ill to think of it. Hearing the NK leadership espouse it's political bigotry and pretend to be threatened, while making village children sift through chicken sh!t for undigested corn makes me dream about ending Kim Il with my bare hands. I don't care what your nationality, ethnicity, religion, or political agenda is: a real leader doesn't relax in a suite, partaking of duck, cognac, whiskey and Cubans all the while believing the bottom 30% of his population doesn't matter. This assh0le makes Bush or Chirac look like JFK.

As Sun Tzu opined, when a leader is more interested in preparing for war than he is making wagons and roads for trade, he has lost the way...

I fear for ALL Koreans.