20,000 Koreans dissappear from Gulag

[Raz]

oh yeah
nukes
those dastardly things

[MessengerOfDreams]

This post by Venexis was thumbed up by: 2

CedarBranch (October 17th, 2013, 4:37 pm) • MessengerOfDreams (October 17th, 2013, 3:39 pm)

[Kirby859]

"Easier" is a pretty subjective term here. Hitler at least had a plan, and stuck to it. If my history is correct, he even wrote a book outlining his entire scheme years beforehand. World War 2 was a proper war in which both sides had solid strategies, strategies that were more or less consistent with their military and could therefore be extrapolated based on information like geography, weather, or troop deployment- and then countered by the opposing army.

North Korea, comparatively, is like a child expecting to get his own way regardless of the cost. Only instead Kim has a shiny button capable of utterly blowing the ♥♥♥♥ out of over a third of the world with relative ease should anyone make a move at him.

There would be no mutual respect for any army we send at them, as North Korea believes they are unbeatable. As a result of this, there will be no respected "war traditions" like there was observed during WWII. All we can be sure of is that should we try to intervene there will be a tantrum followed by widespread death. Will it be our soldiers, or NK's own people, or a neutral country? There's very few people capable of answering that, and none of them would be fighting with us. I wouldn't define that as easy at all.

You are probably referring to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mein_Kampf

Why are there even ratings for that book?

[Harmless]

Uuuugh my head hurts. Partially from thinking for a solution for neutralizing North Korean threat and tyranny.

Maybe research a defense mechanism to the problem? Like, Anti-Missiles/Nukes? I think really accurate interceptors would be possible if they could be established on warships or as stationary land defense.

[darthbrowser]

respected "war traditions" like there was observed during WWII.

I believe you are only considering the treatment of Western forces.

The Nazis made every required consolidation to wage a war with which was literally termed a genocidal war against the Soviets, for example, death squads were attached to every military unit on the Ostfront, and the Germans ran Eastern Prisoner of War camps as extermination camps, eliminating 3.5-4 million Soviet prisoners.

In turn, when the Soviets occupied Germany, war rape occurred as a matter of policy, with upwards of two million women raped, often by gangs at gunpoint. By contrast, only about 11,000 war rapes occurred at the hands of Western forces.

"War traditions" may have been adhered to in the West, but the largest front of the war featured no such guidelines.

On topic, I shall restate what I said earlier in the thread: Any attempt, successfully or not, to remove the dynasty of the DPRK would result in immediate nuclear retaliation. The DPRK is not concerned with the fact that such a maneuver is suicide.

[Venexis]

Indeed I was. I was aware that such treatment had been extended to Western forces, and (mistakenly) drew the assumption that it was common throughout. Research is good.

Maybe research a defense mechanism to the problem? Like, Anti-Missiles/Nukes? I think really accurate interceptors would be possible if they could be established on warships or as stationary land defense.

The thing about nukes is there isn't really any way to effectively deal with them. If you let it hit, it potentially blows up in a heavily populated city. There's a huge explosion that obliterates anything within a radius of a couple miles, and moderate to light damage several miles after that. And then there's the radiation and fallout, which might remain localized, or could be carried a substantial distance along wind currents.

If you send a missile to detonate it in the air, you could probably negate most of the physical damage from the blast, but then you're left with a floating cloud of nuclear fallout that is completely at the mercy of the wind. Whereas a ground detonation would be expected to have a fairly small fallout range, an airborne detonation could easily rain radioactive particles over a large portion of a country. Perhaps multiple countries. It would likely be much easier to evacuate a city than half a nation, although the safest bet would be to avoid throwing nuclear weapons around the planet to begin with.

[darthbrowser]

Keep in mind that the targets of any North Korean nuclear attack would most likely be South Korea and Japan, due to limited ICBM ranges. Neither country has anywhere near the military technology or research spending the United States does, and lack any form of reliable nuclear interception. Note that United States, although still maintaining anti-missile sites against Russia, has not created any to defend the aforementioned countries against North Korea, nor have they provided the required technology to any Asian countries.

If North Korea strikes, massive damage is inevitable.

[Harmless]

Well then, that sucks.

Erm... all evacuate North Korea??