www.ditl.org

Well, they don't have a plan per say. More like they just want to see it happen.

Deepcrush wrote:Well, they don't have a plan per say. More like they just want to see it happen.

A lot of my friends would like to see NK, and most of the middle east turn into glass. Doesn't mean it's going to happen.

Why are we talking to these people at all, again, let alone sending them stuff? I really don't understand that.

Because people who I work for don't like having to deal with protesters outside all fucking day yelling about how the evil USA should be feeding the world with all of its wealth.

Though once on my way to work. A protester stopped me and asked "Why do you work here with so many people in need around the world?" I asked him why he was here blocking me from my morning coffee instead of somewhere around the world helping those people in need. He (and a few of his friends) didn't take that so well. Made me glad that the police were around.

Deepcrush wrote:...how the evil USA should be feeding the world with all of its wealth.

Hey, that would be great if any of that aid actually got to those people. We certainly shouldn't be in the business of handing food over to extremely oppressive governments.

Deepcrush wrote:Though once on my way to work. A protester stopped me and asked "Why do you work here with so many people in need around the world?" I asked him why he was here blocking me from my morning coffee instead of somewhere around the world helping those people in need. He (and a few of his friends) didn't take that so well. Made me glad that the police were around.

Sheeple don't care for logic, Deep.

The problem with cutting off aid to them is that it would result in the deaths of millions of innocent brainwashed civilians. You think the leadership is going to starve? Not until long after every ounce of food on the country is gone, and by that point there's be many millions dead.

That's one of the reasons we keep sending them aid, that and the fact that they're one of the few third world countries that is an actual problem. If they wanted to, they could level Seoul with artilery before anyone could even react, and they have an extremely large military supported by a brainwashed populace. Sure, they'd be wiped out in a real war if shooting began, but not before millions of civilians on both sides of the North/South border are dead, most cities in the northern regions of South Korea are levelled and thousands of US/Japanese/Chinese troops are dead. And as if that wasn't bad enough, losing Seoul would cause the economies in that region to plumet like a dead albatross.

Simply put, keeping them happy is far easier than just sitting back and letting them starve.

The best way of dealing with the situation is just to wait. Soon enough, Kim Jong Il will die. Then there'll be one hell of a power struggle as the surviving leaders fight it out for the throne. There'll be a massive civil war with heavy casualties, but by the time it's over Nork won't be anywhere near the problem it is now.

When Kim dies I think we're gonna end up with Burma 2.0. Several Generals running the country, but this time a country with real power and a real threat.

Nah. More like seven mini-Norks fighting against each other to gain total control or in a loose alliance. In either case, there's going to be a lot of blood shed in the opening stages, and that'll seriously hamper NorK's ability to threaten SoK.

Hey, that would be great if any of that aid actually got to those people. We certainly shouldn't be in the business of handing food over to extremely oppressive governments.

I couldn't care less about those people to be honest. Our own country has enough trouble inside it's borders.

Sheeple don't care for logic, Deep.

Where ever I go, I seem to piss those people off. Even online!

Rochey wrote:The problem with cutting off aid to them is that it would result in the deaths of millions of innocent brainwashed civilians. You think the leadership is going to starve? Not until long after every ounce of food on the country is gone, and by that point there's be many millions dead.

That's one of the reasons we keep sending them aid, that and the fact that they're one of the few third world countries that is an actual problem. If they wanted to, they could level Seoul with artilery before anyone could even react, and they have an extremely large military supported by a brainwashed populace. Sure, they'd be wiped out in a real war if shooting began, but not before millions of civilians on both sides of the North/South border are dead, most cities in the northern regions of South Korea are levelled and thousands of US/Japanese/Chinese troops are dead. And as if that wasn't bad enough, losing Seoul would cause the economies in that region to plumet like a dead albatross.

Simply put, keeping them happy is far easier than just sitting back and letting them starve.

The best way of dealing with the situation is just to wait. Soon enough, Kim Jong Il will die. Then there'll be one hell of a power struggle as the surviving leaders fight it out for the throne. There'll be a massive civil war with heavy casualties, but by the time it's over Nork won't be anywhere near the problem it is now.

This would be a fine idea if it hadn't happened before and the only thing the Norks did was sit and die. They've come across this problem several times before. Never once have they tried to invade ROK because of it. The best bet as I see it. Let them die. Then they have three choices. Civil War, change hearts or just die. All three work for me.

Well, one of the girls who works in my office's husband is Army military intelligence ( ). According to her, (and thus him) it was just another satellite.

Deep wrote:This would be a fine idea if it hadn't happened before and the only thing the Norks did was sit and die. They've come across this problem several times before. Never once have they tried to invade ROK because of it. The best bet as I see it. Let them die. Then they have three choices. Civil War, change hearts or just die. All three work for me

I see what you're saying. Thing is, they were never pushed into such a situation before. It's always been them rattling their sabres for a while, and everyone else agreeing to just give them what they want to shut them up. Never has NorK been in a situation where everything was cut off from them. Sure, you could just sit back and starve them out. But if Kim Jong Il feels that he's going to die from starvation anyway, then he may just decide to level Seoul for the hell of it, to teach us all a lesson.

Of course, it's equaly possible that that wouldn't happen if your scenario came through. But I'm not willing to gamble to lives of many millions of innocent Koreans in the hope that North Korea will collapse peacefully.

Well, one of the girls who works in my office's husband is Army military intelligence ( ). According to her, (and thus him) it was just another satellite

The Norks claimed that they were just launching a satalite. Personaly, I call BS. I think this was a military rocket test.

I see what you're saying. Thing is, they were never pushed into such a situation before. It's always been them rattling their sabres for a while, and everyone else agreeing to just give them what they want to shut them up. Never has NorK been in a situation where everything was cut off from them. Sure, you could just sit back and starve them out. But if Kim Jong Il feels that he's going to die from starvation anyway, then he may just decide to level Seoul for the hell of it, to teach us all a lesson.

If we see them prep for a missile strike. Alpha and knock out their launch sites, or atleast the bulk of them. Some would survive of course though most would be ash. After that a few armored divisions supported by ROK-AF and our own air units out of Japan and South Korea would be a solid block. The PRC wouldn't risk a spill over or risk NCB warheads to be launched due to the risk of a miss fire. North Korea is just to blocked in right now.

Of course, it's equaly possible that that wouldn't happen if your scenario came through. But I'm not willing to gamble to lives of many millions of innocent Koreans in the hope that North Korea will collapse peacefully.

I never said it would be peaceful. Though most of the death toll would be rested on the North Korean population. ROK would take some heat for sure but it would be limited. Plus it would remove a constant thorn and help bring peace to that region.

Over all, the gains by far out weigh the costs.

Rochey wrote:

Well, one of the girls who works in my office's husband is Army military intelligence ( ). According to her, (and thus him) it was just another satellite

The Norks claimed that they were just launching a satalite. Personaly, I call BS. I think this was a military rocket test.

Agreed.

If we see them prep for a missile strike. Alpha and knock out their launch sites, or atleast the bulk of them. Some would survive of course though most would be ash. After that a few armored divisions supported by ROK-AF and our own air units out of Japan and South Korea would be a solid block. The PRC wouldn't risk a spill over or risk NCB warheads to be launched due to the risk of a miss fire. North Korea is just to blocked in right now.

The problem isn't them firing missiles. The problem is the shitload of artillary they have hidden in the mountains, the locations of which are mostly unknown to the US. Any Nork attack would be pre-empted by them rolling the big guns out of their caves and levelling everything within range, including Seoul. There's simply no way for the US to prevent this from happening, short of nuking the entire region before the war even starts.