Could Trump Reignite the Korean War?

[Tony Stark]

NK has several missile issues.
1) Current range cannot hit USA mainland.
2) They don't have a small enough nuke for an ICBM.
3) Their guidance isn't that accurate.

Even if NK surmounts all those issue and launches a nuke at the US, they have to know it's suicide. They don't have enough firepower to dent our retaliation capabilities and if they hit the US mainland I think we would retaliate disproportionately.

Yeah, I really don't think there is any reason to believe that Kim is crazy. He's evil sure, but his goal is to stay in power not commit suicide by nuking America. He wants nukes for the same reason every other country that has them does: as a deterrent.

 

[Norman Alexander]

If Trump tried to reignite anything on the Korean peninsula, it would not be North Korea who would retaliate nor China. It would be South Korea, because they have the most to lose the fastest.

Plus I suspect all branches of the US military would not look kindly on what they would consider "patently ridiculous" if not "illegal" orders from the Trump desk in Mar-a-Lago. Certainly there would be questions asked and lengthy delays while "clarification" was sought...continually.

 

[Beerina]

Post Syria air strikes, that whackey Korean will stop his blustering.

We win, by speaking crazy talk AND carrying a big stick.

It's "drunken boxing", where you pretend you are furiously out of control in an attempt to lead your opponent to think you are out of control, and thus you will make a mistake that can be taken advantage of.

NK has been doing this for decades.

 

[Spindrift]

Yeah, I really don't think there is any reason to believe that Kim is crazy. He's evil sure, but his goal is to stay in power not commit suicide by nuking America. He wants nukes for the same reason every other country that has them does: as a deterrent.

I think Kim is totally nuts and if backed into a corner, he will use his nukes in whatever way he can. NK has always seemed to like pushing boundaries and at some point they may push too far.

 

[TraneWreck]

Yea but that was really only one guy Vasili Arkhipov. If he agreed with the captain they would have used nuclear torpedoes on the american fleet.

Right, it's simultaneously somewhat reassuring and completely terrifying: it shows that disaster can be averted, but that individuals and their decisions are essential.

We are now escalating our way to a showdown where we rely upon the knowledge and decision making skills of Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un. Two *********** ********ters playing chicken.

 

[TraneWreck]

It's "drunken boxing", where you pretend you are furiously out of control in an attempt to lead your opponent to think you are out of control, and thus you will make a mistake that can be taken advantage of.

NK has been doing this for decades.

Do you seriously believe this? I get it's fun to argue on the forums, but do you sincerely think there was strategy behind Trump's order to launch cruise missiles?

NK has never had a partner willing to respond with equal levels of stupidity. That includes the bellicose Bush administration who included them in the Axis of Evil (still stupid and funny to this day).

I have zero confidence that either side will see reason.

 

[TraneWreck]

Plus I suspect all branches of the US military would not look kindly on what they would consider "patently ridiculous" if not "illegal" orders from the Trump desk in Mar-a-Lago. Certainly there would be questions asked and lengthy delays while "clarification" was sought...continually.

There were and are serious questions about the constitutionality of the missile strike on Syria. The military didn't even hesitate to launch those badboys.

Maybe the significance of a bigger strike would give some folks in the Brass pause, but I don't share your confidence.

 

[Tony Stark]

I think Kim is totally nuts and if backed into a corner, he will use his nukes in whatever way he can. NK has always seemed to like pushing boundaries and at some point they may push too far.

He'll use them if the US tries to take him out or something. That's kinda the whole point of having them, to make the cost of taking him out too high. Perfectly rational, though it depends on the other side being rational too. Who knows with Trump.

 

[Spindrift]

He'll use them if the US tries to take him out or something. That's kinda the whole point of having them, to make the cost of taking him out too high. Perfectly rational, though it depends on the other side being rational too. Who knows with Trump.

Being crazy doesn't exclude one making seemingly rational decisions.

 

[TraneWreck]

Being crazy doesn't exclude one making seemingly rational decisions.

Also, if you sincerely believe the greatest military force in the history of the planet is about to attack, what behavior is rational?

Jong-un is clearly a madman, but we're acting to constrain his available choices, making him all the more dangerous. Let us not forget that 80-90% of this country thought it was rational and correct to invade Iraq based on an assumption that they had weapons they could potentially pass to terrorists who could potentially get them to the us via rowboat, or some nonsense.

The threat to NK is real. How would we behave if we were similarly threatened?

 

[ponderingturtle]

It's "drunken boxing", where you pretend you are furiously out of control in an attempt to lead your opponent to think you are out of control, and thus you will make a mistake that can be taken advantage of.

NK has been doing this for decades.

Sure the problem is that they spend all day hearing about how invincible they are, so how do you know if he can even get a remotely objective view of what is really happening?

 

[rustypouch]

Short answer: yes.

Tweet from today: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/851767718248361986?

"North Korea is looking for trouble. If China decides to help, that would be great. If not, we will solve the problem without them! U.S.A."

 

[Belz...]

Korea's been looking for trouble for decades. Just let them stew. No need to poke the insane dictator to see what happens.

 

[seayakin]

It seems the most prudent thing would be to wait. I don't know if prudent is in Trump's vocabulary.

MSN

North Korean elites have turned their backs on leader Kim Jong Un and dissent is on the rise, according to a recent defector who was formerly a Pyongyang's deputy ambassador to the U.K.

This defector has indicated that change needs to come from the elites and others in North Korea. The question is, can they do it before being purged.

New York Times

The best way to force change in the isolated North, he continued, is to disseminate outside information there to help ordinary citizens eventually rebel. South Korean TV dramas and movies smuggled from China are already popular in the North, he said.

 

[CORed]

There were nuclear missiles 90 miles off our coast housed in a hostile country with the backing of a superpower, and war was forestalled. Nothing is inevitable.

Now, if Trump had been president then....

Even with JFK, we came too damn close. I understand that JFK intended to invade Cuba if negotiations failed, and Russia intended to use tactical nukes if American troops invaded.

Once that happened, it's hard to imagine any scenario other than total nuclear war.

 

[Tony Stark]

Even with JFK, we came too damn close. I understand that JFK intended to invade Cuba if negotiations failed, and Russia intended to use tactical nukes if American troops invaded.

Once that happened, it's hard to imagine any scenario other than total nuclear war.

People like Curtis LeMay didn't even want to bother with negotiations. They thought JFK was weak for not immediately bombing the **** out of Cuba. Good thing he didn't listen to them.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Even in the best case, a new Korean war would be a nightmare for the next 50years at the least: compared to what would need to happen between NK and SK, the difference between West and East in the German reunification was barely noticeable.

 

[dudalb]

Also, if you sincerely believe the greatest military force in the history of the planet is about to attack, what behavior is rational?

Jong-un is clearly a madman, but we're acting to constrain his available choices, making him all the more dangerous. Let us not forget that 80-90% of this country thought it was rational and correct to invade Iraq based on an assumption that they had weapons they could potentially pass to terrorists who could potentially get them to the us via rowboat, or some nonsense.

The threat to NK is real. How would we behave if we were similarly threatened?

I despise Trump, but when you begin to support North Korea you have just lost me.

 

[TraneWreck]

I despise Trump, but when you begin to support North Korea you have just lost me.

?

How is that "support" for North Korea?

The point is that "sane" nations, like us, make really terrible decisions when we're scared. Knowing that, how do you think North Korea is going to behave when they're afraid.

And unlike Iraq to the US, the US is absolutely a threat to North Korea.

Trump people seem to have this view of the world where all you need to do is get in some country's face and pound your chest and they will back down. I'm suggesting that may not yield optimal outcomes when tried with North Korea.

 

[blutoski]

Well, those nightmares are hardly going to become more mellow with age, are they.

If you were trying to convince Trump to take preemptive action, you might just about have him convinced.

Well, hopefully not.

Their strategy seems to be deterrent rather than aggressive.

A pre-emptive action from a foreign aggressor such as the USA would be the only scenario where they're actually used.