CNN: Report: N. Korea fires on S. Korea, injuring at least 16

[Kilmer17]

As if that were the only question.

Ask the people of Seoul what they think about the thousands of entrenched NK artillery tubes directly pointed at Seoul, the second largest metropolitan area in the entire world. Ask them if they want the USA to fire the first shot to bring those artillery shells (and maybe a couple of nukes) down onto the 20 million civilians living there.

I know you like to play Devil's Advocate, but there is a reason that Nixon, and Ford, and Carter, and Reagan, and Bush I, and Clinton, and Bush II, and Obama, have all not "showed some stones" like you want them to.

It wouldnt be the first shot, it would be a retaliation to NKs first strike. That's the problem. NK CONTINUES to escalate and attack. And everytime they are allowed to do so without response it emboldens them and they ramp it up even more.

More people will die at the hands of NK and we'll continue to allow it because we're afraid it could be worse the next time, and then the next time it IS worse and we still dont do anything because we then fear the NEXT next time.

[Larry]

Just a thought, if we're looking at options.

Remember, a while back, an NK sub sank a SK naval vessel?

I wonder how many of those NK subs we could take out, if we wanted to. Without firing a single shot at the NK mainland, or even having anything they can actually point at.

I'm not one of the ones usually yelling to start a war, any war, right now. But I have to admit that there really aren't all that many provocations that are more provoking than a deliberate, sustained, artillery barrage of some other country's territory.

And taking out those subs is a military target, and one that we'd really like to have off the table if things escalate.

[Predicto]

It wouldnt be the first shot, it would be a retaliation to NKs first strike. That's the problem. NK CONTINUES to escalate and attack. And everytime they are allowed to do so without response it emboldens them and they ramp it up even more.

More people will die at the hands of NK and we'll continue to allow it because we're afraid it could be worse the next time, and then the next time it IS worse and we still dont do anything because we then fear the NEXT next time.

2 people died the other day. 20 million civilians live in range of hundreds of thousands of artillery tubes buried in mountainsides on the NK border. You are awfully brave to make the calculation that THIS is the time to go for it.

I suspect that this is because those artillery shells can't reach Florida.

[Larry]

I suspect that this is because those artillery shells can't reach Florida.

But, the way things have been going, 10 years from now, they might be able to.

[JMS]

jms, the impasse occurred as a result of NK flaunting the agreement...unless you wish to ignore how quickly they developed a bomb

Des ,I agree It's not our fight, yet.

The impase started when Bush took office and first labeled north Korea part of the axis of evil, then secondly proclaimed the United states was justified in taking pre-emptive action against the members of the Axis of evil.

That following numerous personal retorical attacks against the North Korean leader; along with stating we wold not build them the light water nuclear reactors agreed to by Bill Clinton lead to North Korea telling Ambasador James Kelly in 2002 that they had reopenned their enrichment reactor and were pulling out of the nuclear arms proliferation treaty.

Yes let's do. How quickly did the United Stated develop the first atomic bomb? Three years 1942-1945....

How long did it take N Korea already having a nuclear reactor in place built in the late 1980's early 1990's? Start the Clock Oct 2002 when North Korea tells US ambasador James Kelly they are enriching uranium.

Stop the clock 25 May 2009 when they tested their first nuke..

Seven years? Under the Bush Jr Administration who's policy was to ignore them, no negotiations, regime change... Briliant.

[nonniey]

Actually you didn't. North Korea got the bomb during the George W. Bush administration largely due to his incompetence. The impass with N. Korea's plans to develop a nuclear bomb occured at the end of the George H W Bush administration. Tensions increased and threatenned to spiral out of control at the very tail end of Bush Sr.'s term in office. Bill took over and he worked out a deal (negotiated by Bill Richardson) involving South Korea, Japan and ourselves that N. Korea would stop their nuke development in exchange for aid. That esentially ended the crisis for eight years.

George Bush Jr. reniged on that deal early in his first term, A Bush administration official first responded to a question at a press conference that they would not live up to the Clinton pledge to Build North Korea light water nuclear reactors; then when North Korea protested and tried to raise pressure on us; Bush declaired we would stop the oil and financial aid that was also was part of the Clinton deal. Then George Bush Jr. did nothing with N. Korea for years as they reopenned their nuclear research and produced and tested their first bomb. Remember the days when George said he woudln't even talk to N. Korea? Then AFTER N. Korea developed their first bomb and tested it, George agreed to ecentially the same deal Clinton had agreed too in the 1990's; only now N. Korea had the bomb.

The deal involved annual food and economic aid, along with free oil for a period of time and technical assistance to modernize N. Korea's energy grid. When the grid was deamed sufficiently modern we along with Japan and South Korea were to build (and pay for) some light water nuclear reactors ( unsuitable for weapons production) and end the free oil. That deal was still in place when Bush Jr left office.

The terms of that deal are the motivation for this crisis. N. Korea depends upon the food, money, and oil from that agreement. Last weekend we found out that N. Korea had cheated on that deal and built a second enrichment plant. This is North Korea's way of saying they want to re-open negotiations.

I see you were very liberal in asjusting my quote. You said thanks George W. Bush I fixed it saying Thanks William J Clinton via jimmy carter. (You changed my words to N Korea got the bomb under Carter and Clinton) Can you see the difference. The issue was the 1994 agreement brokered through Carter for the North Koreans to stop their nuclear program in exchange for goodies. Problem was the North Koreans never stopped their program so Bush ended the goodies.

Bottomline between 1994 and 2002 the North Koreans developed their first nuclear weapons. They didn't restart their program under Bush as you state as they had never stopped it in the first place (Just shifted it to another location).

[Larry]

deleted post.

[JMS]

We can't analyze one item in a long line of events and assume that the NK reaction to that item caused this blah blah blah. We don't really understand what motivates that regime or why they react the way they do. I'm not sure Kim himself understands.

This is visionaries thread, and he doesn't want it to go down this road... So this will be my last posting on who was responsible for N. Korea developing nukes...

• Bush incorrectly lumped North Korea into the axis of evil.
  
• Bush insulted the parinoid twerp who runs their country as a personal cult figure, repeatedly.
  
• Cheney proclaimed we don't negotiate with evil we defeat it.. ( we weren't negotiating with N. Korea and we already called them evil).
  
• Bush stated at West Points graduation, stated we had the right to pre-emptively invade them.
  
• Bush reniged on our treaty with them first in denying them the light water reactors;
  

All that occured prior to 2002 when they reopenned their nuclear reactor and pulled out of the International non proliferation treaty.

Then N. Korea re-opens reactor and tells our visiting ambasidor they have done so..... and

• Bush stops the oil, food and financial aid.
  
• Then we ignored them for seven years while they built their bomb and we refuse to negotiate or even talk to them; we just keep calling them evil, keep alluding to imminent invasion, and bad mouth the Europeans who are trying to work out a compromise.
  

Then after they test their first nuclear bomb... We agree to the same deal Clinton had with them before any of this mess began.

[Predicto]

Both of you two should just let it go.

Arguments can be made to blame either President, but all of those arguments require you to ignore any information that doesn't fit your narrative, and to presume that the President has magic powers that he just didn't bother to use.

Let's live in the now.

[JMS]

I see you were very liberal in asjusting my quote.

I interpreted your quote as best I could. I'm sorry if I missed your original intent.

Bottomline between 1994 and 2002 the North Koreans developed their first nuclear weapons. They didn't restart their program under Bush as you state as they had never stopped it in the first place (Just shifted it to another location).

North Korea reopenned their closed nuclear reactor in Oct 2002 telling US State Department envoy James Kelly they had done so.

They produced and tested their first bomb in May of 2009.

We know they had stoped their nuclear program in 1994 because that agreement called for international arms inspectors to ceil and monitor the facility. Those inspectors were deported in 2002 when their reactor was re-openned.

[JMS]

Both of you two should just let it go.

Arguments can be made to blame either President, but all of those arguments require you to ignore any information that doesn't fit your narrative, and to presume that the President has magic powers that he just didn't bother to use.

Let's live in the now.

Those who don't understand history are condemned to repeat it.

[Hubbs]

Just a thought, if we're looking at options.

Remember, a while back, an NK sub sank a SK naval vessel?

I wonder how many of those NK subs we could take out, if we wanted to. Without firing a single shot at the NK mainland, or even having anything they can actually point at.

All of them.

The submarine technology gap is absolutely enormous. If we sent just a few of our subs into the area, we could eliminate every single NK sub, or at least every single NK sub that wasn't in port. They light up like Christmas trees to our sonar technology. I would guess that we haven't because NK wouldn't need hard evidence to come to the conclusion that we had sunk their subs, and that might spark an all-out war.

[Larry]

All of them.

The submarine technology gap is absolutely enormous. If we sent just a few of our subs into the area, we could eliminate every single NK sub, or at least every single NK sub that wasn't in port. They light up like Christmas trees to our sonar technology. I would guess that we haven't because NK wouldn't need hard evidence to come to the conclusion that we had sunk their subs, and that might spark an all-out war.

That isn't at all what I've heard about those things.

From what I've heard, when running on diesels, on the surface, we can literally detect them from orbit.

But when submerged, on batteries, they're literally quieter than many of ours.

The catch is that while submerged, on batteries, they have a very limited range. Like, 30 miles or so. (Insert reference to electric cars, here.)

The result is that, as a strategic platform, or for the purposes of trying to stalk American carrier groups, or to deny large oceans, they're utterly useless. But that in those tiny fractions of missions where they can operate at short range from a fixed base of operations, that they can be really effective.

Such missions include the area near NK. (And the Persian Gulf, which is why the Iranians have some.)

[Hubbs]

That isn't at all what I've heard about those things.

From what I've heard, when running on diesels, on the surface, we can literally detect them from orbit.

But when submerged, on batteries, they're literally quieter than many of ours.

The catch is that while submerged, on batteries, they have a very limited range. Like, 30 miles or so. (Insert reference to electric cars, here.)

The result is that, as a strategic platform, or for the purposes of trying to stalk American carrier groups, or to deny large oceans, they're utterly useless. But that in those tiny fractions of missions where they can operate at short range from a fixed base of operations, that they can be really effective.

Such missions include the area near NK. (And the Persian Gulf, which is why the Iranians have some.)

Oh, submerged diesel subs that aren't moving are the quietest MFers on the planet. No question there. You can't find them.

Unless you use active sonar - which you can even drop in buoy form from helicopters.

[PeterMP]

Oh, submerged diesel subs that aren't moving are the quietest MFers on the planet. No question there. You can't find them.

Unless you use active sonar - which you can even drop in buoy form from helicopters.

But that's true for any sub.

[Switchgear]

Then AFTER N. Korea developed their first bomb and tested it, George agreed to ecentially the same deal Clinton had agreed too in the 1990's; only now N. Korea had the bomb.

How long did it take N Korea already having a nuclear reactor in place built in the late 1980's early 1990's? Start the Clock Oct 2002 when North Korea tells US ambasador James Kelly they are enriching uranium.

Stop the clock 25 May 2009 when they tested their first nuke..

Seven years? Under the Bush Jr Administration who's policy was to ignore them, no negotiations, regime change... Briliant.

Darn that George W Bush, making deals with North Korea after he was out of office.

[Larry]

Darn that George W Bush, making deals with North Korea after he was out of office.

Uh, a request.

1) Go check your dates, again.

2) Please, don't come back and tell us about it.

[Thiebear]

there are some myopic people in this thread..

What was Bush going to do.

What was Clinton going to do.

What was Bush2 going to do.

What was President Obama going to do.

The work of the 6 countries was the closest thing to real and it wasn't.

China and the United Nations are at fault.

China is one of the Security Council Heavy Weights?

China has the Largest Military

China is in that area and prop the N Koreans up.

Where is the United Nations on forcing this again?

Last thing we need is a DMZ with checkpoints that is manned by US troops with Palestinian rockets coming in by the dozens.

[Switchgear]

Uh, a request.

1) Go check your dates, again.

2) Please, don't come back and tell us about it.

Obama was inaugurated January 20, 2009, correct? That comes before 25 May 2009, if I'm not mistaken.

I'm not saying this is Obama's fault, I just found JMS's timeline to be flawed.

[Mickalino]

As if that were the only question.

Ask the people of Seoul what they think about the thousands of entrenched NK artillery tubes directly pointed at Seoul, the second largest metropolitan area in the entire world. Ask them if they want the USA to fire the first shot to bring those artillery shells (and maybe a couple of nukes) down onto the 20 million civilians living there.

.

And if we do nothing, NK will eventually have the potential to kill millions and millions more.

[Larry]

Obama was inaugurated January 20, 2009, correct? That comes before 25 May 2009, if I'm not mistaken.

I'm not saying this is Obama's fault, I just found JMS's timeline to be flawed.

I really wanted to let this whole Blame Game thing drop. But I feel like I owe it to you to say that you're right.

[JMS]

Darn that George W Bush, making deals with North Korea after he was out of office.

October 9, 2006

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_North_Korean_nuclear_test

[Larry]

Please, drop it.

[Mickalino]

Please, drop it.

Exactly, Larry. That's exactly what we should do.

Drop it....on NK

[Bang]

I sincerely hope this doesn't escalate further, if for no other reason then we have men and women in harm's way, and specifically for those of us who have children stationed there or heading there. King Gibbs, I read your thread a few weeks back and I felt nervous for you, even if i had nothing to add to the discussion.

Those of you who have family in the region, I hope beyond hope that they stay safe.

~Bang