Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New Sanctions Imposed on North Korea as it Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 120 posts

Re: New Sanctions Imposed on North Korea as it Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack

#71

Post by SeanLuke »

iterationx wrote: post #64
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #3

Wow. More juvenile posturing, or the beginning of the end for North Korea? Depends on whether anyone takes them seriously. And with a growing nuclear capability, they can't be taken not-seriously. This is suicide for them.

Joel Skousen has an interesting analysis. North Korea attacks South Korea, the US defends South with tactical nukes. Then there is a nuclear strike on the US from Russia and China in retaliation, which might explain why the US gov is building super bunkers in the Ozarks .

> Joel Skousen has an interesting analysis.

A simple visit to his website, and wikipedia page, convinces me that Joel Skousen is about as non-authoritative a source as one can possibly get on this subject.

> Then there is a nuclear strike on the US from Russia and China in retaliation

This is a huge jump in logic without any explanation.

Re: New Sanctions Imposed on North Korea as it Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack

#72

Post by adventured »

enginous wrote: post #44

Interesting how the New York Times covers this more as a threat than a political move. The New York Times: "North Korea Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack" BBC News: "North Korea ramps up nuclear rhetoric as UN vote looms" ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21695887 )

Easier to trivialize when you're not the one being threatened with nuclear attack I think.

Re: New Sanctions Imposed on North Korea as it Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack

#73

Post by ctdonath »

pilgrim689 wrote: post #21
bayesianhorse wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nuclear strike isn't an immediate threat. They don't have the means to put the weapon where it actually hurts. The more serious threat is the artillery pointed at Soeul...

Couldn't Seoul protect itself like Isreal did with the Iron Dome?

Israel is protecting against at most a few rockets at a time. Shoot the rocket, and it disintegrates into relatively harmless pieces.

Seoul is under continuous threat of thousands of artillery guns, basically lobbing enough boulders to level the city (which contains 1/4 the population of South Korea) in about a half-hour. No modern technology is capable of stopping that kind of low-tech assault on that scale.

North Korea is akin to a drunk with a double-barreled shotgun and Tourette Syndrome: acts irrational, says disturbing things, can cause a lot of harm to one person, and will be put down fast once he does - but can't be stopped prior because attempting to will cause him to harm someone. The hope is to keep him just content enough, as long as it takes, that he'll give up or self-destruct on his own.

Re: New Sanctions Imposed on North Korea as it Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack

#74

Post by arethuza »

iSnow wrote: post #70
arethuza wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Soviets actually considered a first strike in November 1983 during the epic mix up that was the NATO Able Archer 83 exercise. The Soviets had always believed that the Americans wanted to attack them, perhaps understandably given that in the 1950s and early 1960s there were senior US military leaders who actually wanted to initiate a full nuclear war with the Soviets while the latter were still strategically weak.…

Not quite. Due to the tensions and an error in a Soviet early-warning system, it looked like the US had indeed launched a couple of rockets in a first strike. If not for Petrov's level-headed reaction, nuclear war might have started by error. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Soviet_nuclear_false_alarm...

That was a separate incident - just happened to be right before Able Archer.

Re: New Sanctions Imposed on North Korea as it Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack

#75

Post by uxp »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #35
bayesianhorse wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nuclear strike isn't an immediate threat. They don't have the means to put the weapon where it actually hurts. The more serious threat is the artillery pointed at Soeul...

A volkswagen beetle and about 5 gallons of gas would do the trick, no?

If there is one thing that marathoning Mythbusters on Netflix has taught me its that gasoline is a poor explosive for everything except looking pretty.

Re: New Sanctions Imposed on North Korea as it Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack

#76

Post by bdunbar »

pyre wrote: post #66
flyingbuttress wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Iron Dome" is an anti-missile system. Artillery shells are a lot harder to shoot down. Last I heard, the US military was working on a laser-based system to heat the shells mid-flight and cause them to detonate prematurely. I don't know if this technology is mature enough for actual use, or if it's likely to be deployed to SK.

How would non-explosive artillery shells detonate prematurely?

> non-explosive artillery shells

Artillery shells contain explosives in the nose.

Re: New Sanctions Imposed on North Korea as it Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack

#77

Post by CamperBob2 »

hackerboos wrote: post #36
duiker101 wrote: post #23

Will someone excuse my excessive ignorance and be so kind to explain me why the DPRK is so pissed with the US? Thanks

The Koreas are effectively a proxy war between the US and China.

True in 1952 but hardly true now. More recently China has indulged the Kims because they don't want tens of millions of refugees flooding over the border.

Kim Jong-Un may be about to find that his sponsor's patience is neither unconditional nor unlimited. The Chinese leaders are not stupid. They know they have a problem.

The best endgame for Kim is an offer of exile in China, at this point. That may be what he is fishing for here.

Re: New Sanctions Imposed on North Korea as it Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack

#78

Post by [deleted] »

SeanLuke wrote: post #71
iterationx wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Joel Skousen has an interesting analysis. North Korea attacks South Korea, the US defends South with tactical nukes. Then there is a nuclear strike on the US from Russia and China in retaliation, which might explain why the US gov is building super bunkers in the Ozarks .

> Joel Skousen has an interesting analysis. A simple visit to his website, and wikipedia page, convinces me that Joel Skousen is about as non-authoritative a source as one can possibly get on this subject. > Then there is a nuclear strike on the US from Russia and China in retaliation This is a huge jump in logic without any explanation.

[deleted]

Re: New Sanctions Imposed on North Korea as it Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack

#79

Post by iSnow »

adventured wrote: post #65
hackerboos wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Koreas are effectively a proxy war between the US and China.

Absolutely. China could dismantle North Korea in a heartbeat, by pulling all support at a minimum or telling the military junta it's over and if they want to survive at all they have to play ball. Kim would be served up on a platter the next day. North Korea is nothing but a way for China to poke the US constantly.

I wonder if this is true. Having a rogue dictator developing nukes in your backyard is not the thing most governments are comfortable with.

Beijing - Pyongyang is merely 800Km, after all.

Re: New Sanctions Imposed on North Korea as it Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack

#80

Post by gregPC »

On a slightly different note, this should show how much the Iraq war was a scam and a money grab. Iraq was 'rumored' to have WMD's, and Hussein had his moments of posturing, but never had proven tests of bombs, etc; and never blatantly said NYC would be ashes.
Post reply on HN