U.S. Plans Pre-emptive Strike If N.K. Conducts Nuke Test

Why invade? Just pummel them....

Certainly North Korean/any state must feel the ramifications of calling the bluff of the international community/ most powerful nation on the planet.

Its in their hands – they have whats coming to them.

Originally posted by they see ALL
why cant they test their weapons???

i dont get it...

we tested ours...

The US has double standards. It wants everyone to disarm while it continues to develop its own WMD program. Maybe the US should lead by example and disarm. After all we aren't their superiors. They are in no way obligated to do what we tell them to. They aren't even obligated to listen. And a strike without approval from the UN Security Council would be illegal I believe. The use of nukes would be an act of terror and would almost certainly result in war crimes charges being brought against our leaders.

Remember every country has a right to defend itself whether the US likes it or not. And if you believe everything the US says you'd have to believe that nukes are a deterrant.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by koji_K
what can we expect from occupying North Korea?

-koji K.

Why do you think we'd invade?
Absolutely nothing, no article or anything, has indicated that we'd invade or even are planning to invade NK.

We'd invade them only if after we attacked them they started to invade SK.
And by "we" I mean most of the world (meaning the notion of a draft is laughable as we'd have every ally and China on our side).

Two reasons.

First, we have had for some time now plans to invade North Korea. Check out www.nyu.edu... and the various SIOP's described at globalsecurity.org, under "North Korea". The US would be pretty dumb NOT to have plans available for an invasion of North Korea, all things considered.

Second, the Bush administration has (sadly, imo) adopted a policy of pre-emptive military action, they've made this pretty clear through explicit declarations and, of course, actions.

So, the plans exist and the will exists. Do I think we will invade North Korea? Not likely, but then, in the times since the Korean war, I think we're more likely now than ever before to do so, under the current administration and circumstances.

-koji K.

[edit on 7-5-2005 by koji_K]

Double standards??? - that’s what comes along with being the most dominant force on the planet - live with it. Ive said it many times - why play by someone elses rules.....

Certainly id hope the united states has plans for every possible invasion/ possible conflict on the planet - that’s what strategists are paid for - its up to the politicians and military who can make a more educated decision whether it would be beneficial to enact such strategies.

Leave the public to decide the next pop idol winner - individually they are self indulging drones.

[edit on 7-5-2005 by Vanguard]

Originally posted by Vanguard
Double standards??? - that’s what comes along with being the most dominant force on the planet - live with it. Ive said it many times - why play by someone elses rules.....

Certainly id hope the united states has plans for every possible invasion/ possible conflict on the planet - that’s what strategists are paid for - its up to the politicians and military who can make a more educated decision whether it would be beneficial to enact such strategies.

Leave the public to decide the next pop idol winner - individually they are self indulging drones.

[edit on 7-5-2005 by Vanguard]

Yeah they are really dominating those insurgents in Iraq. What is it now? About 4 years down and Afghanistan and Iraq still aren't safe and these two countries didn't even have a real military. Some domination. I respect no country that cannot follow the rules. There is nothing worse than a hypocrite.

Domination is irrelavant - the position of oppostion of tranny and unjustice is maintained.

Thats whats important - our moral standings rather than the actual effects.

[edit on 7-5-2005 by Vanguard]

This is not a good thing. We should not preempt a nuclear strike under any conditions save a nuclear attack. So what if nk detonates a nuke, they are definatly not the first. I have supported US wars in the past but i draw the line here. Nuclear weapons should never be used. fellow americans we can not allow this administration to pursue a policy that will put us on the brink of nuclear war.
If we preempt, you think china is just going to sit by? hell no, they will attack in kind.

Its important to maintain the threat of pre-emptive strike - carrying out a pre-emptove strike is another thing entirely.

think behavioural adjustment and the eventual penalties of all parties to playing out such a game.

Its all a big game until the bluff is called - and we know that the US never bluffs.

[edit on 7-5-2005 by Vanguard]

It would certainly be looked at by the international community as an unprovoked attack and charges would certainly be imposed on our leaders and possibly sanctions against the US as well. It would not be pretty. So Kim really needs to die of a heart attack or a car accident. It is obvious that by looking at his hair he is unaffected by electricution :-)

Originally posted by Indy

Originally posted by they see ALL
why cant they test their weapons???

i dont get it...

we tested ours...

And if you believe everything the US says you'd have to believe that nukes are a deterrant.

Hey buddy, did you ever learn about the COLD WAR? Nukes were THE reason total war didn't break out between the USA and Soviet Union. It's ironic that weapons capable of killing millions of people at a time are so peaceful...

Originally posted by koji_K
EDIT: I should add I wasnt thinking in terms of a great revolution by the people, more something along the lines of Kim Jong Il dying of an "accident," having a huge state funeral, and the country slowly and subtly becoming more open under whoever the new guy in charge would be... but even this view probably underestimates the fear everyone there lives in.

-koji K.

My thoughts exactly. Whether Kim decides to abscond with his millions, dies of natural causes, has a terrible accident, or just decides to quit, he has to go. The man is crazier than a $hit-house rat. This is what I meant by "regime change".

Originally posted by koji_K
While Iraq had oil, which hopefully will pay some dividends before I have to start relying on Medicaid and social security, what can we expect from occupying North Korea?

-koji K.

In light of the latest developments, the content of THIS document should not be under estimated.

Objectively speaking, referring to your statement, what do you expect other countries / peoples will do when they read comments from people with your ideas? This is probably what 90% of the poeple in this country think, starting from our President. Domination, empire building, slavery.

I am appalled.

I really hope that this Koran Leader is killed and removed from power by some smart N Korean instead of having to kill millions of peoples, like IRAQ.

Originally posted by WisdomMaster

Originally posted by koji_K
While Iraq had oil, which hopefully will pay some dividends before I have to start relying on Medicaid and social security, what can we expect from occupying North Korea?

-koji K.

In light of the latest developments, the content of THIS document should not be under estimated.

Objectively speaking, referring to your statement, what do you expect other countries / peoples will do when they read comments from people with your ideas? This is probably what 90% of the poeple in this country think, starting from our President. Domination, empire building, slavery.

I am appalled.

I really hope that this Koran Leader is killed and removed from power by some smart N Korean instead of having to kill millions of peoples, like IRAQ.

You misunderstand me. I'm not asking "what do I get out of a war with North Korea, as an american." Instead, by my question, I am trying to probe the minds of those who actually make the decisions, the administration and the policy makers. Who, incidentally, I have found myself at odds with so far as reasons for war go.

For example, Bush tells me and my fellow Americans, "You'll be a lot safer with Saddam gone." These are the reasons I'm speaking of. Is Bush telling the truth? Well obviously not, given that Iraq has now become a hotbed of terror and Islamic fundamentalism, whereas before it was the only secular regime in the region.

Declaring war against N.K. without a damn good reason would be wrong for all sorts of reasons. But reasons, as I'm sure you know, are different from official justifications, and it was the latter I was inquring about. Reading my other posts on this thread, you will find that I support your opinion that the best thing that could happen for N.K. is a removal of Kim Jong Il from within, with a minimum of bloodshed.

-koji K.

First of all...to the comment about the strategists and situation in Iraq..ive said it before and no1 seems to grasp this so listen up:

we do have strategists with war plans for every possible scenario on earth. we even have a plan (I THINK its called code orange) for a massive pacific naval battle with Japan again..lol

anyway we are locked in this bad ground war in Iraq, because with all the balls that we have in our military. we are trying to save as many civilian lives as possible.

had this been ww2, we would a bombed EVERY city to the rubble and killed anyone who we thought was hostile..

because of the bleeding heart liberals that have power here *cough*forexample:hillary*cough*
we are wasting precious time and money and lives digging out these insurgents.. lemme ask you this

why did we atom bomb Japan and not invade.. because the casuatulties on both sides would have been over 1 million

well this is the same scenario as that, only we invaded, we didn’t drop the "proverbial A bomb"

these are the same liberal b@$t@rd5 that run visiting the terrorist prisoners. the ones who protested the prisoner abuse scandal in Iraq when our boys where getting decapitated only a few miles away in those cities. that SHOULD HAVE BEEN BOMBED. they are also the ones who want all the immigrants in the USA to be allowed to have driver’s licenses now (so we can LOCATE THEM) believe this crap? im dead serious about it.. they don’t mind all the illegals running across our boarder and its getting worse...

im going off on a tangent about them because it will be their fault when this country gets screwed over..

now its for this same reason that a ground war in NK wont happen, and if it does.. it will be completely differnt..we will be bombing everything to crap... because that’s how a war is fought... unfortunately much better men realized this back in the 40s...

but this could only happen if the leaders re-attached their balls and didn’t worry about the media and liberal sc u m that will let this country fall apart..

also, if NK brings SK into a conflict with the USA, it will bring in the U.N and the rest of the "world" which means they will be obligated to send troops and the USA wont be alone..

and a pre-emptive strike against the NKs would only consist of a air strike on their missile sites most likely, and wouldn’t we all rather have that crap there gone before they get ICBM capabilities and can blackmail the world?

I bet the wimps who don’t want us to put a stop to the NKs will be singing a different tune when Kimmy gets ICBMs that can reach any of their countries as well..

and by the way... we already have Special Forces there...its common sense

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
had this been ww2, we would a bombed EVERY city to the rubble and killed anyone who we thought was hostile..

In WWII a delcaration of WAR was submitted by the Germans and Japanese against the U.S. verbally and tactically - only then did the U.S. invade. 911 was not an act committed by Iraqi citizens nor the Iraqi government. The Iraqi economy was completely crippled. War was not an option nor the ability to sustain war on part of the Iraqi's. There were no WMD and the evidence purported was completely ficticious.

Now lets look at the flip-side. The gas agents used by Saddam were sold to him by the U.S. Halliburton, the CIA, and top brass had been planning an invasion to take Iraqi oil fields for over ten years. Iraq is an OPEC member and is why oil prices are so high - punishment for seizing an OPEC state. Iraq is the perfect playground for fighting a Jihad war against Iran and anyone who wants to pick up an Ak. This is a flawed American Enterprise Institute conception for dealing with the Jihad issue. This does not eliminate terror - it does the complete opposite. It gives young boys experience in warfare and creates a mass struggle against a defined enemy.

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
we are wasting precious time and money and lives digging out these insurgents.. .

The reason being is we have alreay taken what we were after - oil. Once the fields are secure enough for the U.S. to leave we'll leave only to return under "Engagement Under American Economic Interests."

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
why did we atom bomb Japan and not invade.. because the casuatulties on both sides would have been over 1 million.

Ridiculous. Shows you know just as much about historical engagement as your present opinions. Japan was finished, a net boycott surrounding the Island would've been sufficient.

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
well this is the same scenario as that, only we invaded, we didn’t drop the "proverbial A bomb".

We were never at war with Iraq. We are liberating them (of their commodities).

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
these are the same liberal b@$t@rd5 that run visiting the terrorist prisoners. the ones who protested the prisoner abuse scandal in Iraq when our boys where getting decapitated only a few miles away in those cities. that SHOULD HAVE BEEN BOMBED.

You forget that the likes of William Casey are the ones who setup Mujahedin in business. Who gave them stinger missles, which we attempted to buy back at $50,000 each, once we figured it was a bad idea after all. We trained, equipped, and supported numerous terrorist groups around the world - only to have them turn on us like sick dogs. It's called a flawed policy of letting your evil minded children play with matches in foreign countries under secret directives that only the kids know about.

You don't bomb civilian populations with 1000lb bombs becuase there are a few bad guys. You certainly wouldn't bomb detroit becasue there are a thousand crack dealers would you?

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
im going off on a tangent about them because it will be their fault when this country gets screwed over..

The fault lies with the institution who equips terrorists and allows them to train for Jihad (Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Syria,) and with the government entities that support their initiatives (white house).

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
now its for this same reason that a ground war in NK wont happen, and if it does.. it will be completely differnt..we will be bombing everything to crap... because that’s how a war is fought... unfortunately much better men realized this back in the 40s.....

No, a ground war in Korea would be suicidal and a draft would hardly be sufficient. The much better men in the 40's waged war because they had to not because of corporate, emotional, or contractor interests.

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
but this could only happen if the leaders re-attached their balls and didn’t worry about the media and liberal sc u m that will let this country fall apart..
.....

The media is ran by the government. Write your congressman.

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
also, if NK brings SK into a conflict with the USA, it will bring in the U.N and the rest of the "world" which means they will be obligated to send troops and the USA wont be alone.......

The USA is alone. Once Russian and the EU finish signing their security and economic initiatives they will be coming for the U.S. The have already started devaluing our dollar at a frenzied pace. The EU is our enemy and will do everything to bring us under their control. You think the Russians have forgot how we bankrupt them in Afghanistan and collapsed their economy? You don't know any Russians do you? They will never forget and they will seek revenge at every turn. Putin is old school GRU who lived out the downfall of his mother land. Notice he was one of the first to pledge joint support against terrorism after 911. Stay close to your friends but closer to your enemies. Too simple.

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
I bet the wimps who don’t want us to put a stop to the NKs will be singing a different tune when Kimmy gets ICBMs that can reach any of their countries as well.........

Ol' Kimmy is interested in economic trade with "those" countires, not warfare.

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
and by the way... we already have Special Forces there...its common sense

Common sense is a virtue that is surely lacking in this day and age.

I would be highly surprised if we had special forces in North Korea... the stakes just seem too high if they got caught. We either 1.) sit on our asses and let them become another USS Pueblo, 2.) piss N.K. off to the extent that they invade S.K. or nuke something or something equally stupid and destructive, or 3.) use it as a pretext for invasion ourselves. (ourselves meaning the U.S.)

More likely we use South Korean spies and US satellites and comint ops.

-koji K.

[edit on 9-5-2005 by koji_K]

Originally posted by koji_K
I would be highly surprised if we had special forces in North Korea... the stakes just seem too high if they got caught. We either 1.) sit on our asses and let them become another USS Pueblo, 2.) piss N.K. off to the extent that they invade S.K. or nuke something or something equally stupid and destructive, or 3.) use it as a pretext for invasion ourselves. (ourselves meaning the U.S.)

More likely we use South Korean spies and US satellites and comint ops.

-koji K.

[edit on 9-5-2005 by koji_K]

Got to dissagree with you here. We almost assuredly have SFs on the ground there. They provide things that Sats and other assets just can't.

What would the worst case be even if they got caught?

NK would say they captured USSFs, we would say they didn't. Even if they prove beyond a doubt they have them, then what? Do they go to war with the US?

Yeah, thats what Kim wants to do - declare war on the US and force all of NATO into joining the fight against him. Nuke the south? Oh yeah, another great idea...I wonder who could get ICBMs to NK faster, Boomer subs or Minute Men missleers?

Kim wouldn't do a thing, and no one would care that we had spies on the ground over there - Europe and the rest of the world is just as scared of this nut bag as we are. This isn't like Iraq with people not thinking the leader is a threat. Kim is known to have nukes, and is globaly agreed on as being the single most unstable leader of a nuclear power.

Originally posted by vincere7

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
had this been ww2, we would a bombed EVERY city to the rubble and killed anyone who we thought was hostile..

In WWII a delcaration of WAR was submitted by the Germans and Japanese against the U.S. verbally and tactically - only then did the U.S. invade. 911 was not an act committed by Iraqi citizens nor the Iraqi government. The Iraqi economy was completely crippled. War was not an option nor the ability to sustain war on part of the Iraqi's. There were no WMD and the evidence purported was completely ficticious.

Now lets look at the flip-side. The gas agents used by Saddam were sold to him by the U.S. Halliburton, the CIA, and top brass had been planning an invasion to take Iraqi oil fields for over ten years. Iraq is an OPEC member and is why oil prices are so high - punishment for seizing an OPEC state. Iraq is the perfect playground for fighting a Jihad war against Iran and anyone who wants to pick up an Ak. This is a flawed American Enterprise Institute conception for dealing with the Jihad issue. This does not eliminate terror - it does the complete opposite. It gives young boys experience in warfare and creates a mass struggle against a defined enemy.

That doesnt matter..we are still at war with them..and our troops are getting slaughtered everyday when we can just bomb them out..

Originally posted by vincere7

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
we are wasting precious time and money and lives digging out these insurgents.. .

The reason being is we have alreay taken what we were after - oil. Once the fields are secure enough for the U.S. to leave we'll leave only to return under "Engagement Under American Economic Interests."

ofcourse, everyone against the war in Iraq always says all that we were after was oil.. im not going to argue with you about it because ive aruged with people in person about it and im not in the mood to type the argument to it anymore..if some one else wants to tango with you about it, they can..

Originally posted by vincere7

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
why did we atom bomb Japan and not invade.. because the casuatulties on both sides would have been over 1 million.

Ridiculous. Shows you know just as much about historical engagement as your present opinions. Japan was finished, a net boycott surrounding the Island would've been sufficient.

again..another person set in his ways..nothing will change your mind about this... Japan had not surrendered and even though its navy was destroyed its will to fight was not. It is a fact that Truman met with his military advisers and the invasion plans had estimated casulties of over 200+ deaths..and we dont even know if they would have surrendered then... the bombs were to open Japans eyes that they lost... a naval blockade is hardly comparable..at worst it could have starved the country to death...and then maybe we would have invaded on top of that..more dead...

Originally posted by vincere7

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
well this is the same scenario as that, only we invaded, we didn’t drop the "proverbial A bomb".

We were never at war with Iraq. We are liberating them (of their commodities).

we were NEVER at war with Iraq? what is wrong with you? what have our soldiers been doing in there for all these months..? what do you think is going on? all the beheadings...remember the Saddam statue fell? its all over the news 24/7. what do you call it? a playdate with the arabs?

Originally posted by vincere7

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
these are the same liberal b@$t@rd5 that run visiting the terrorist prisoners. the ones who protested the prisoner abuse scandal in Iraq when our boys where getting decapitated only a few miles away in those cities. that SHOULD HAVE BEEN BOMBED.

You forget that the likes of William Casey are the ones who setup Mujahedin in business. Who gave them stinger missles, which we attempted to buy back at $50,000 each, once we figured it was a bad idea after all. We trained, equipped, and supported numerous terrorist groups around the world - only to have them turn on us like sick dogs. It's called a flawed policy of letting your evil minded children play with matches in foreign countries under secret directives that only the kids know about.

You don't bomb civilian populations with 1000lb bombs becuase there are a few bad guys. You certainly wouldn't bomb detroit becasue there are a thousand crack dealers would you?

what does any of that have to do with the liberals? and we are not at war with detroit the last time i checked... and crack dealers arent beheading people and running amock..they are dealing crack..and shooting each other sometimes.. and the ones who are caught are arrested..what do crack dealers have to do with terrorists..

Originally posted by vincere7

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
im going off on a tangent about them because it will be their fault when this country gets screwed over..

The fault lies with the institution who equips terrorists and allows them to train for Jihad (Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Syria,) and with the government entities that support their initiatives (white house).

i was talking about the liberals here..ruining this country-but you have a point about those Saudis and syrians..thats where all the Terrorists in Iraq are coming from..Syria..

Originally posted by vincere7

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
now its for this same reason that a ground war in NK wont happen, and if it does.. it will be completely differnt..we will be bombing everything to crap... because that’s how a war is fought... unfortunately much better men realized this back in the 40s.....

No, a ground war in Korea would be suicidal and a draft would hardly be sufficient. The much better men in the 40's waged war because they had to not because of corporate, emotional, or contractor interests.

regardless of what you think about the "corporate, emotional, or contractor interests." of the Iraq war.. a war in Korea would be entirely different..and it wouldnt be suicidal..it would most likely be fought much differently then Iraq..

Originally posted by vincere7

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
but this could only happen if the leaders re-attached their balls and didn’t worry about the media and liberal sc u m that will let this country fall apart..
.....

The media is ran by the government. Write your congressman.

not sure where you live..but the media is not run by the govt here..regardless of what many think.

Originally posted by vincere7

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
also, if NK brings SK into a conflict with the USA, it will bring in the U.N and the rest of the "world" which means they will be obligated to send troops and the USA wont be alone.......

The USA is alone. Once Russian and the EU finish signing their security and economic initiatives they will be coming for the U.S. The have already started devaluing our dollar at a frenzied pace. The EU is our enemy and will do everything to bring us under their control. You think the Russians have forgot how we bankrupt them in Afghanistan and collapsed their economy? You don't know any Russians do you? They will never forget and they will seek revenge at every turn. Putin is old school GRU who lived out the downfall of his mother land. Notice he was one of the first to pledge joint support against terrorism after 911. Stay close to your friends but closer to your enemies. Too simple.

the US is not alone.. just becuase some of our allies disagreed with us over Iraq..does not mean they would not come to our aid..especially over this lunatic who would jump on nuking everyone...no matter what, Europe always sticks with us. Russia probably wouldnt get involved in a ground conflict regardless.. we arent best friends with them to begin with.. But NATO would be required to go in. Most of the E.U is in NATO..

Originally posted by vincere7

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
I bet the wimps who don’t want us to put a stop to the NKs will be singing a different tune when Kimmy gets ICBMs that can reach any of their countries as well.........

Ol' Kimmy is interested in economic trade with "those" countires, not warfare.

Crazy Kim wants economic aid from US and hes threatened to use nukes if we messed with his nuclear ambitions.. there is no reason to believe he wouldnt do the same thing to some other country..

Originally posted by vincere7

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
and by the way... we already have Special Forces there...its common sense

Common sense is a virtue that is surely lacking in this day and age.

i dont have to resond to this one because American Mad Man already did..so there you have it..and dont keep quoting stuff. it takes to long to respond doing this..