NEWS: N. Korea Won't Rule Out Pre-Emptive Attack

North Korea has refused to rule out a pre-emptive strike on the United States or its allies. "The United States should be aware that the choice of a pre-emptive attack is not only theirs," announced the North Korean state run news agency adding "To stand against force with force is our unswerving method of response."



I dont know, it seems the precedent of pre-emptive warfare has been set and now the consequences are being seen.

When the bullying tactics of the last 5 years used by Washington against Pyongyang fail in their efforts for regime change this is what happens. You have a nuclear equiped nation being rail roaded into accepting demands that it will not accept. North Korea has the clear threat of a pre-emptive strike against it so its not exactly brain surgery to realise they'd consider striking before they are struck.

Diplomacy will not work with the North Koreans whilst the treat of a nuclear pre-emptive strike looms over them. Thats not how they work and the whole purpose of their nuclear program is to guarantee their countries saftey.

The United States government will not sign a non-aggression pact with the North Koreans. That in and of itself would have avoided this looming confrontation as they have said in the past that they would relinquish all their nuclear weapons and capabilities in exchange for a U.S non-aggression pact.

"It is in the East Asian region, including the Korean Peninsula, where the U.S. moves for vicious attacks and war ... are carried out most seriously," Minju Joson said. "It is our nuclear deterrent that basically guarantees peace and stability."

He's right, this U.S administration likes to play hardball. The only thing they understand is force or the threat of force, diplomacy does not factor into their international relations. Ask Colin Powell.

Boggles the mind that they will not sign that bit of paper

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Or we could just wait till the whole country starves to death.

Lil Kim wont be around much longer NO country in the region wants that Madman to have Nukes, not just America.

I read about this, this morning, and it really bugs me. What buged me more was the reason I was on this morning trying to find out what was going on was that there were 2 stealths flying over this morning. A sight I havent seen since the day before opperation annaconda. stressed me out a bit.

Why let them make you worry?

Do you really think NK would do something that stupid.

.......ok maybe Kim really is that stupid. But 1. Unless you live in Hawaii, there's not much evidence you have to seriously worry and 2. If lil Kim did try something, in a couple days you wouldn't have to worry about him any more as he'd more than likely be a thing of the past by then.

Well, if I were North Korea, I certainly would, because a pre-emptive strike would end all debate and the US would be busy flattening Il's hair. But then, I'm not an insane dictator

1. Unless you live in Hawaii, there's not much evidence you have to seriously worry

I haven't done much research into the technological capabilities of NK's military; do they have any long range missles capable of hitting the west coast? Do they have any other means of getting the missles in range (ie subs, planes, etc.) I know we'd be able to track a plane, but would we be able to catch it in time?

Another possible scenario is that he might go for one of our allies that are closer to home, or hit one of our military installations in the area. If he launched even a small nuke at Seoul, that'd be an astronomical death toll. There's also Tokyo in the region, as well as northen Australia (might be in range, don't know for sure.) I don't think he'd have to hit the US directly in order to get a point across. But still, even hitting Honolulu would take out over 300K. That's not a number to take very lightly.

2. If lil Kim did try something, in a couple days you wouldn't have to worry about him any more as he'd more than likely be a thing of the past by then.

No offense, but I don't think that would matter much to those caught in a blast or directly affected. I know the fact that Kim would be out of commission would do little to make me feel better if I lost a relative, and it would have absolutely no affect if I were killed. Then again, if we could somehow gaurantee that any attack he made would fail, it might actually be worth it to have that as reason to get him out of there and not have to worry about him any more.

I haven't done much research into the technological capabilities of NK's military; do they have any long range missles capable of hitting the west coast? Do they have any other means of getting the missles in range (ie subs, planes, etc.) I know we'd be able to track a plane, but would we be able to catch it in time?

Actually there's not much evidence they can send anything (by any means) that far past Japan and certainly not much evidence that they can send nukes that far (just as there's not much evidence they even have nukes - if they do, it's 5 at the most)
We think they can but there's not a whole lot of evidence to support it.

Another possible scenario is that he might go for one of our allies that are closer to home, or hit one of our military installations in the area.

This is the real concern. The article however talked about strikes on the US itself.

No offense, but I don't think that would matter much to those caught in a blast or directly affected. I know the fact that Kim would be out of commission would do little to make me feel better if I lost a relative, and it would have absolutely no affect if I were killed.

True. But just how crazy is Kim? I'm sure (or I hope) he knows any attack would be the end of him. Is that a big enough deterent?

Could you blame Kim? When you have a tyrant like Bush breathing down your neck you will do whatever it takes to defend yourself. We'd do a preemptive strike against him so why would it be illogical for him to do the same? He probably figures he is gone one way or another so there is no loss for him to strike first. It is like the way we here treat sex crimes. You might as well kill the victim because the punishment is really no different. Kim has basically the same justification. He figures he is gone one way or another. So might as well get in a good shot first.

Originally posted by MCory1
Then again, if we could somehow gaurantee that any attack he made would fail, it might actually be worth it to have that as reason to get him out of there and not have to worry about him any more.

How about sign the non-aggression pact with the North Koreans. Do you really need to run the risk of nuclear war to keep an invasion/attack on the table? Hell, you can break the treaty or walk away from it if need be

Kim Jong Il is not crazy, eccentric maybe, but not crazy. He is more than capable of rational thought as atested to by Madeline Albright and her negotiatiors that met with him in Pyongyang.

The United States has no moral leg to stand on when it comes to North Korea saying it wont rule out a pre-emptive strike. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

As for any attack the North Koreans could pull off. I think an attack on the U.S troops stationed at the DMZ and on Seoul are givens. Maybe a nuclear attack on American bases in Japan.

With 26,000 odd U.S troops stationed in South Korea, a nuclear attack or even a pure artillery barrage on their barracks would all but wipe out any lightning invasion of North Korea. I dont think the United States would be in any position to field yet another army in that part of the World at this time.

This would severly limit any U.S response and a pure air war could prove costly. Look at Vietnam, the U.S Air Force had a nice technological upper hand but that didnt stop it from sustaining losses.

Interesting developments indeed.

[edit on 24/5/05 by subz]

The differnce Indy is that the US would not Pre-empt with a nuke, we would use cruise missiles and stealth bombers and take out all known nuclear facilities and missile silos, and other various high value military targets. While NK could not hope to use conventional means for a pre-emptive strike...They dont have any operational missiles capable of hitting the US, but one currently in testing could reach the the west coast. and in the missiles its payload would have to be nuclear, it would be a big waste to launch it that far only to have a conventional bomb hit a building. It would send a strong message to Washington..."Dont # with us". However I doubt it would have the effect that NK would want, they would want it to be more of a warning shot, making sure we keep our distance, but more then likely the US would either launch a massive air/land/sea operation to devistate North Korea, or we would nuke them with a sub.

I remember reading more than 25 years ago in a mainstream news article that a nuclear war would not begin with the super powers, at that time USA, Soviet Union and China, but by a small incidental country who's back was up against the wall.

Seems to me with the NK populous starving, with little or inferior medical facilities, parts for cars and machinery beyond reach their backs are definitly aginast the wall. They have no incentive to cooperate. Did we not learn that sanctions, meant to cause the people to rebel do not work because in most societyies rebellion is not an option so the people suffer and die. Sanctions are not only ineffective but immoral and usually are a prelude to aggression.

Richard of Danbury

as posted by subz
He's right, this U.S administration likes to play hardball. The only thing they understand is force or the threat of force, diplomacy does not factor into their international relations. Ask Colin Powell.

Ahh yes, ask one of the heroes of the 2nd Gulf War and a veteren from the Vietnam War...the same one that came up with the Powell Doctrine.

The problem here is that the current actions and responses to the North Koreans and their demanded guarentees of a non-aggression agreement, along with countless other unmentioned guarentees, are and have not been restricted to this current administration. These policies, in their varying forms and degrees, have been ongoing and enforced since the Korean War, for which the North Koreans to this day, preach, teach, and assert was not their doing and that they did not attack first, but were attacked.

No guarentee of a non-aggression agreement anytime soon, as it should be.





seekerof

[edit on 25-5-2005 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
.......ok maybe Kim really is that stupid. But 1. Unless you live in Hawaii, there's not much evidence you have to seriously worry and 2. If lil Kim did try something, in a couple days you wouldn't have to worry about him any more as he'd more than likely be a thing of the past by then.

This is the worst example of NIMBY (not in my back yard) I've seen in quite awhile. You can actually act like having thousands, maybe millions of people in Hawaii killed would be like no big deal just because the U.S. would get even a couple days later? Sucks to think like you do.

And Indy, you can actually make excuses for Kim's behavior? Sucks to think like you do, too.

Well i guess what goes around really does come around....Kim is hilarious ,certainly has a set of balls ill give him that much, otherwise, he appears to be as delusional as the great Dubya himself.

Now the ball is in the US court again?

In the case of North Korea, the ball has always been in the North Korean court.

If Kim has any "balls", he will simply keep talking his ill-advised rhetoric, because the moment he steps into the nuclear arena and decides to "pre-emptive strike" anything other than his own backyard, North Korea, along with Kim, will become a nuclear waste site.






seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
Ahh yes, ask one of the heroes of the 2nd Gulf War and a veteren from the Vietnam War...the same one that came up with the Powell Doctrine.

Colin Powel is a well known dove. It goes without saying that those who know and have experienced the horrors of war are the last ones to advocate it.

Originally posted by Seekerof
No guarentee of a non-aggression agreement anytime soon, as it should be.

Can you elaborate on that? I fail to see why the U.S would risk nuclear war by not assuring a nation that they will not invade. Does the United States actually want to invade North Korea?

Originally posted by Seekerof
In the case of North Korea, the ball has always been in the North Korean court.

I think the ball is in everyones court here. No one benefits from nuclear war.

Originally posted by Seekerof
If Kim has any "balls", he will simply keep talking his ill-advised rhetoric, because the moment he steps into the nuclear arena and decides to "pre-emptive strike" anything other than his own backyard, North Korea, along with Kim, will become a nuclear waste site.

He has stepped into the nuclear arena. North Korea is not like Iran, they have nuclear weapons and have acknowledged that they do. They did this back in April 2003. Legally they have every right to do what they did, they are a sovereign nation with just as much right to break from any treaty as the United States enjoys.

Its the United States who has taken issue with North Korea's nuclear weapons. So the onus should of been on the United States to give incentives to the North Koreans to not go nuclear. They were doing this under Clinton but the Bush administration views it differently.

They think the North Koreans have no right to acquire nuclear weapons. That is not justified by anything, just their opinion. There is no legal reason why the North Koreans cannot withdraw from the NPT and make nuclear weapons. The United States should of excercised their will by giving the North Koreans reasons not to go nuclear, and they have not done so.

I think you need to understand NK signed the NPT, which states they would NOT develop nukes. The US already had them long before this treaty existed. NK just backed out of it and said it had developed nukes. anyway, what NK means by pre-emptive strkes on america or it's allies, they are really threatening japan. The only country they have the capability to hit. What NK doesnt seem to realize is they japanese probably have nukes too.
they bought up soviet plutonium in the early 90's where did it go?

I think you need to understand that the North Koreans have every right to withdraw from the Nuclear Noproliferation Treaty.

Article X

1. Each Party shall in exercising its national sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country.

NPT from the State Department Website

If the United States wants to stop a nation from "exercising its national sovereignty" it would want to provide some kind of incentive dont you think?

Wouldn't you think NK would just strap a couple nukes to a few fishing boats and send them out.. why worry about the range of the nukes.. when you can bring the nukes w/in range of the target.

Originally posted by MCory1
Do they have any other means of getting the missles in range (ie subs, planes, etc.)

I could see them using an innocent looking civilian cargo ship to carry a missile within range of a west coast city and launch it from there.