"We Must Bomb Iran Now"

[Nutso]

Ahh, John Bolton. A lot of tough talk, with so little to back it up.

"I confess I had no desire to die in a Southeast Asian rice paddy. I considered the war in Vietnam already lost." As written by John Bolton in his Yale 25th Reunion Book.

[Duskofdead]

Ahh, John Bolton. A lot of tough talk, with so little to back it up.

Small penis complex.

Oh, oops, that was supposed to stay in the thought bubble.

[sunnyside]

N Korea. Should have hit them.

No!
Unless you want to end up with millions dead, virtualy every major South Korean city in ruins, and the Asian economy wrecked, you cannot attack NK.
North Korea may not have nukes, but it does have thousands of hidden artilary emplacements hidden along the border. The vast majority are aimed at the Southern capital, Seoul. The moment war breaks out, Seoul is going to be a smoking wasteland from all the shells hitting it. If that happens, it takes the Asian economy down with it, along with millions of innocent civilians. It would be a bloodbath.

I didn't advocate war, just a single surgical strike. Likely they would have backed down under just the threat of a certain surgical strike. If they want to upgrade it to war they of course could, but I don't think Kim wants to spend a few weeks in some hole in the ground only to be pulled out an hung like Saddam.

Plus if you think they'd be willing to start a full war with artillary over that do you really think it's a good deal to let them have nukes?

Either way my guess with them is that the US was busy enough elsewhere and we probably considered this to be other peoples problems more than ours.

Iran, however, would be our problem whether we like it or not.

And regardless I think if we don't Israel will.

[Sionnach Glic]

Unless this surgical strike entails glassing the entire country with nukes, the situation I described would still happen. Most of the artilary emplacements are, IIRC, in unknown locations. There'd simple be no way any nation could take out enough of them to stop the Norks leveling Seoul.

And NK hasn't got any nukes, and has nowhere near the capacity to build any that are of any threat.

[sunnyside]

Look. The whole argument why they wouldn't just fire nukes left and right at whoever annoys them is that they'd fear their own destruction.

The same scenario plays out for leveling Seoul. It'd just be conventional weapons taking them down instead. Kim would be going down either way.

I don't think they'd be crazy enough to do either. Though maybe we could have been worried that they'd think we wouldn't bring the hammer down with our forces busy in Iraq.

But yes while they've demonstrated they do have working nukes they don't have missiles capable of hitting the US. Nor do they have a particulr motive to using a nuke nor are the likely to attempt a conventional land invasion or something of that nature they plan to get away with via their nukes. So they aren't likely to be the USes problem as much as, say, Chinas.

[Teaos]

Rational people fear being destroyed.

If NK's leader thinks he's about to be thrown out of office he will burn his country to the ground before hand it over.

[Sionnach Glic]

Look. The whole argument why they wouldn't just fire nukes left and right at whoever annoys them is that they'd fear their own destruction.

The same scenario plays out for leveling Seoul. It'd just be conventional weapons taking them down instead. Kim would be going down either way.

Correct. As nuts as Kim Jong Il may be, he isn't far gone enough to start lobbing shells at Japan or the South. That's why the last thing any country should do is attack him and push him into taking those actions.

I don't think they'd be crazy enough to do either. Though maybe we could have been worried that they'd think we wouldn't bring the hammer down with our forces busy in Iraq.

They're not crazy enough to think that. They know that attacking any country will lead to their total destruction. What they also know is that no one is willing to start that war with them, as they can cause massive amounts of death and chaos if a war was to break out.

But yes while they've demonstrated they do have working nukes they don't have missiles capable of hitting the US. Nor do they have a particulr motive to using a nuke nor are the likely to attempt a conventional land invasion or something of that nature they plan to get away with via their nukes. So they aren't likely to be the USes problem as much as, say, Chinas.

I doubt China's much of a problem, either. The USA has far too much of an economic tie to them for either side to declare war, and China would get absolutely destroyed in a war.

[sunnyside]

I doubt China's much of a problem, either. The USA has far too much of an economic tie to them for either side to declare war, and China would get absolutely destroyed in a war.

I meant that NK was more likely to have/be a problem for China than the US.

With the artillary it would really come down to a game of chicken I suppose. A surgical strike to disable nuclear development isn't starting a war unless the hit side decides they want to start a war.

So hitting NK would just be a single action if they didn't decide to end their nation by firing artillary.

Same deal with Iran.

[Teaos]

Unless that one strike pisses them off enough to storm over the boarder to SK.

[sunnyside]

Unless that one strike pisses them off enough to storm over the boarder to SK.

Well that's the game of chicken they'd be playing. Would Kim be willing to get himself killed for vengence?

[Sionnach Glic]

With the artillary it would really come down to a game of chicken I suppose. A surgical strike to disable nuclear development isn't starting a war unless the hit side decides they want to start a war.

You're saying that launching an attack on another country's military forces isn't an act of war? Sorry, but that's the very definition of declaring war. Do that, and say goodbye to South Korea.

[stitch626]

Do that, andsay World War III.

[Sionnach Glic]

I doubt it'd go that far, but there'd probably be civilian casualties in massive amounts, maybe even in the millions, when Seuol goes up in flames.

[sunnyside]

I doubt it'd go that far, but there'd probably be civilian casualties in massive amounts, maybe even in the millions, when Seuol goes up in flames.

Still again if he did that the hammer would be brought down on N Korea. If he'd blow up Seoul with conventional weapons if it means his doom why would he feel restrained from doing the same with a nuke if the mood took him.

[Teaos]

Its a risk no one would take.