Do you support a pre-emptive strike on North Korea ?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

In the end, North Korea would lose a war, the generals and military analysts say. The regime of Kim Jong Un would probably collapse.
But the Second Korean War could be deadly—producing tens of thousands of deaths just in Seoul, and possibly a million casualties in the South alone. It would almost certainly be devastating physically in both the North and South, military experts say.
...

U.S. air strikes against some North Korean targets might require flying not far from the border with China, Marks warned. And China would be just as concerned as the United States would be if another country came that close to U.S. borders. “North Korea is a subset of our relations with China,” Marks told me. “What impact would a war have? Devastation of Seoul, the unravelling of world order, and China on the other side with ‘enemy’ status. And if the United States and China are belligerents, everything is up for grabs.”

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-would-war-with-north-korea-look-like

This loose talk of war with North Korea is lunacy on steroids.

35 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes
	0 (0%)
	No
	35 (100%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Not Ruth]

1. No, no one should ever strike first

That includes North Korea

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. Does that mean I can pencil you in as a no ?

Thank you in advance.

[tymorial]

3. Never.

[exboyfil]

4. For attacks on U.S. soil

and less likely attacks on Japan, a boosted fission bomb placed on a ship going into a large port is my biggest concern.

A 250 kT yield weapon set off in the Port of San Francisco? A quarter million fatalities.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. If we respond to an attack on us or an ally it would not be a pre-emptive attack

and would be justified.

[Initech]

6. This talk of nuclear war is making me sick to my stomach.

Especially if an attack happened on the west coast, we'd all be fucked.

[sarisataka]

7. Any military option

Is guaranteed to result in millions of casualties, whether dead, wounded or displaced.

The article does not consider the option of engaging China in a solution. The more the NK situation spirals, the more I am convinced working with China is the only path to peaceful resolution.

[JustAnotherGen]

8. No - but

I rest easy knowing I'm not going to be responsible for this.

I've publicly stated (IRL) I didn't vote for Trump, Lance (NJ-7) and I'm against the Republican Party. His voters are JUST as responsible as he is, there is not unity on this, and I won't be bullied into going along to get along as so many did in Iraq.

[FLPanhandle]

9. With things as they are now, no.

However, if North Korea continues to escalate their threats and it appears they are actually planning on doing something, then, I would switch my vote to yes.

A lot of people would die in South Korea either way, so it would have to be a real threat and done as the only option to save the most people.

So, no and yes.

[Madam45for2923]

10. Questions like this normalize Donald.

[Rustyeye77]

11. If the choice is Living with his nukes or not,

nail the pos ass.

[sarisataka]

12. The question is

Can we protect Seoul, a city of over ten million people, from retaliation even if a decapitation strike was successful.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. Are we prepared for a ground war with China ?

The notion that China is going to sit on the sidelines while we attack their neighbor and ally in the absence of a casus belli is absurd.

[sarisataka]

19. Pre-emptive action

Without a Chinese buy in would be risking a regional/world war. Of course even if China agrees there is a high probability they would tip off NK as they benefit by playing both sides.

The question of protecting Seoul is only the most immediate consequence of any strike on NK. That would make compared to the risk to SK, Japan and the US all of which are within range of Chinese intervention.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. I take China at their word. War in their neighborhood is the last thing they want.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. Questions

How many casualties in a pre-emptive attack on North Korea is acceptable ?

Do you believe China will remain neutral if we attack their neighbor and ally ?

Are you willing to get in a ground war with China ?

What do you believe will be the effect on world markets if Seoul is flattened ?

What will our allies and adversaries do if we start a war that results in millions of casualties ?

Thank you in advance.

[Rustyeye77]

17. Answers

How many casualties in a pre-emptive attack on North Korea is acceptable ? ..none

Do you believe China will remain neutral if we attack their neighbor and ally ? ... I hope

Are you willing to get in a ground war with China ? ...no

What do you believe will be the effect on world markets if Seoul is flattened ? ... terrible

What will our allies and adversaries do if we start a war that results in millions of casualties ? don't know

===============================================================================
My turn

1. How many dead Americans on the west coast is acceptable to you?

2. How many nukes can NK sell to terrorists before its unacceptable to you?

3. How much nuclear fallout will happen if NK shoots one off?

4. What will happen to world markets if SEATTLE is flattened?

5. What provocation by NK would make you say we made a mistake ?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. My answers

1. How many dead Americans on the west coast is acceptable to you? ZERO

2. How many nukes can NK sell to terrorists before its unacceptable to you? NONE

3. How much nuclear fallout will happen if NK shoots one off? BEYOND MY KEN

4. What will happen to world markets if SEATTLE is flattened? TERRIBLE

5. What provocation by NK would make you say we made a mistake?

The moment they attack us or an ally we flatten them.

[Rustyeye77]

28. Thank you.

I'm not your enemy....

I just don't want to wait to be the first attacked before we respond.

===========================================================================

Look, you're right...Losing Seattle and Portland is no great loss.... the Space needle is overrated anyway.

And other than good weed, what has Portland given us?

And at least Idaho will have its first seaport.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. So

So we start a war where millions will be killed, world markets will be thrown into turmoil, and get into a ground war with a nation of 1.4 billion people that is 8,000 miles away because we don't want North Korea to have nuclear weapons?

[Rustyeye77]

30. Works both ways

So we wait till that day when millions of Americans are killed..

AFTER the poorest country on the planet sells its nukes to terrorists

world markets will be thrown into turmoil

all because we didn't have the foresight to take action when we could have.

Yep, after the attack and millions of dead americans, morally and ethically we would be fine to respond.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. They could sell fissile material for a dirty bomb as we speak.

Should we start WW lll today ?

Should Trump get a declaration of war or just attack North Korea without Congressional approval ?

[Rustyeye77]

36. Good questions

I don't have all the answers.

I know your heart is in the right place.

We just see things differently.

[sarisataka]

45. The time to take out

NK nuclear facilities was about fifteen years ago. The ship sailed and will never return.

Essentially there are two options with four courses of action-

Diplomatic option
- continue negotiations- which has been completely ineffective at stopping NK nuclear program

- attempt to stop 100% of trade with NK to force them to offer concessions or collapse as the country starves. Recall it was a similar boycott that led Japan to take a chance and strike Pearl Harbor

Military option-
- Pre-emptive strike on nuclear facilities. Total success is doubtful due to lack of intelligence and underground protection. Almost assuredly would require first nuclear weapon use since WW2 for greatest chance of success.
-- would require concurrent strike on NK leadership in densly populated city to minimize nuclear or conventional retaliation on SK. Casualties likely to reach or exceed one million, even in limited conflict
--- nearly 100% chance of resuming war on Korean peninsula and can plausibly escalate beyond to a full nuclear exchange between major powers. Potentially multi-billion casualties

- wait for NK to blow a 250kt hole in a city, possibly in continental US, then counter strike with all previous risks still valid

[spanone]

32. enlist now.

[bluepen]

13. Undecided right now.

It would have to be an EXTREME last resort.

But I don't think Kim has any intention of firing off a nuke. I think he's using them as bargaining chips. We shall see.

[Orrex]

15. Only if it results in horrific carnage and massive civilian death & suffering

And if it manages to funnel a few hundred billion dollars to the usual cast of war profiteers, so much the better.

[Tobin S.]

18. It certainly will so I guess we should support it.

[JoeStuckInOH]

20. No, China has publically stated they will support whichever state is not the initiator !!

China has stated that whomever makes the first strike will NOT receive any support from China and they will align themselves with the aggrieved party. That's a pretty big deal to both sides.

China is about the only country over there really giving any NK any support as it is. If NK strikes first, then not only will they be cutting of their last economic lifeline, they will have to contend with hostilities from China on their other border. Also, China is the largest debt holder of the USA and one of two other superpowers. Given our current tensions with the other superpower (Russia) we would be foolish to willingly engage in open conflict with China. With China backing NK, the best outcome you could hopefor is a Vietnam style failure.

Anyone that supports an overt first strike on NK is a Moron.

[maryellen99]

21. The only ones who would cheer at the use of nukes are Trump supporters nt

[Rustyeye77]

22. wow

[Xolodno]

23. No.

We have pressure China and to a lesser extent Russia, on this. If that doesn't work. If we are serious about this, we'll have to negotiate with China and Russia and give them what they want for taking care of the problem...right now, we're not prepared for that.

North Korea will not start a war, they know if they do, its all over. But they will develop nuclear weapons to keep us at bay from attacking or fomenting an uprising. The problem is, they are not sure of where the red line is. Such as, at what point do we swallow our pride, negotiate with China, give them what they want and have the problem resolved.

[bathroommonkey76]

26. I'd support an attack if they lobbed a missile and hit one of our allies.

n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. That wouldn't be a pre-emptive strike.

[bathroommonkey76]

34. Correct-

Like I said, "I'd support an attack if they lobbed a missile and hit one of our allies."

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. Every reasonable person would.

Reasonable people also want to do everything possible to ensure we never are in that position.

[bathroommonkey76]

38. Reasonable people also know that little Kim will continue to be a thorn

in the side of the United States for as long as he lives- He's 33 years old. His father lived to be 70. His grandfather lived to 82. So for the next 30 + years we as a nation will have to accept the fact that North Korea is a nuclear country, right?

[Rustyeye77]

43. THREAD WINNER !!!!!

[Lars39]

31. Where's the "Hell no!!!!!!!" option?

[wryter2000]

37. Someone said yes?

Joking I hope.

[oasis]

39. If we strike 1st, China says they will back North Korea. nt

[workinclasszero]

40. If we strike first we totally own every horror that comes after

I don't know what people are thinking with this insanity.

If we sneak attack/first strike it would have to be minimum a tactical nuke attack on the North Korean capital with simultaneous strikes on their military bases. Those could be conventional or nuke, who knows?

Hundreds of thousands of North Koreans and South Koreans will die in hours. A million man army will pour across the DMZ immediately.

We have 20 or 30 thousand military people there who will be targeted plus Seoul a city of 10 million just miles from the NK border.

I assume NK's evil dictator will use everything in his stockpile because he knows if captured he will be executed for crimes against humanity so no chance of surrender either.

NK has nerve agents like sarin and VX as well.

WHAT NORTH KOREA'S MILITARY LOOKS LIKE COMPARED TO THE U.S.
BY CRISTINA SILVA ON 4/25/17 AT 1:02 PM

Pyongyang controls a powerful standing army despite the nation's limited financial resources. North Korea’s armed forces counts 1.19 million service members and another 7.7 million reservists. The isolated nation of 25 million people is also home to 3,500 battle tanks, 72 submarines, 302 helicopters, 563 combat aircraft and 21,100 artillery pieces, making up one of the most powerful militaries in the world.
http://www.newsweek.com/what-north-koreas-military-looks-compared-us-589688

Are we ready for the consequences of an all out major war in Asia using nuclear and chemical weapons? Shit our government is trying to strip away every social program we have yet we are going all in on a trillion dollar plus nuclear war that we will start???

This will make the 10 year war in Vietnam look like a walk in the park. Get ready to invest your sons and daughters into the bloody maw of the MIC suckers. You can rest assured that Trump's and all rich republicans kids and grand-kids will escape any harm from this horrendous war!

If they attack us that's a different story we must defend ourselves. Of course that could be manufactured by an administration bent on war too. Wouldn't be the first time.

[Raster]

41. Not only NO, BUT HELL NO!!!

Diplomacy, diplomacy, diplomacy. Rinse, repeat.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

42. If Kim Jong Un, most of his family and a bunch of generals were to congregate in one place...

that might be worth taking a chance.

[KG]

44. Seoul is with conventional artillery range.

maybe the SKians might have a voice in the matter.

[Rustyeye77]

46. Screw Seattle and Portland !!

That's right... even if they wipe those 2 cities off the map, we should do nothing but be a pacifist pussycats.

Seattle wasn't the first city to invent coffee. And the fish market ? who cares !! It smells.

And Portland ? ...hey the Trailblazers left. And we can get good weed elsewhere.

Yep, lets be a bunch of snowflakes and never do anything..even with NUKES from a 33 year old psycho who told us he would pulverize us. .

Paper Tigers are so underrated.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

47. You figured us out

" Everyone here that thinks attacking NK with our military is a bad option loves the idea of NK with Nukes, shoot if we could give him some of ours we would.
Just because you only think there are two answers does not make it so.
Thanks!.


"


-Eko.




https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029604017#post31

[Rustyeye77]

48. Just having a little fun.

We're buds.

[Gore1FL]

49. *****Breaking***** Gore1FL is kicking thread for DSB.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

50. Here's another one. A kick and a recommendation would be much appreciated.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029603200

It never got any traction.

[Gore1FL]

51. I'll rec your Mueller Time thread, but I don't care about Kid Rock, Eminem and ICP. nt

[Gore1FL]

52. Turnabout is fair play

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029615889

Thanks!