The odds of war

#26
#26
rjd970 said:
That is patently false. NK's missile technology and nuclear capabilities did nothing but increase while Bush was in office, and in fact, accelerated. The over-the-top threats and rhetoric from that regime has, is, and will continue to be directed at the U.S.. This is independent of who is in the oval office and whether they are perceived weak, start wars, or call them an "axis of evil".
Click to expand...

If you have not noticed an increase in the rhetoric, not to mention the tone of the rhetoric then you haven't been paying attention. I do not recall Kim J I ever threatening to wipe us off the face of the map before Obama was in office.
 
#27
#27
rjd970 said:
Vary maybe, but they don't really change as far as frequency or tone. Their position will be to threaten the US no matter who is president.
Click to expand...

I believe we have already seen an increase in both frequency and tone.
 
#28
#28
Obama won't do anything about Iran or NK. He's only fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan because those were handed over to him and he doesn't want to be seen as snatching defeat from the jaws of victory (ok, victory in Afghanistan hasn't yet been achieved).

Should NK fire a Long Duck Dong toward Hawaii, he may authorize a cruise missile strike on a Korean War era airfield that's been abandoned since then, but nothing more.

Obama is weak and NK and Iran know that. Any comparison to JFK should stop at his lofty rhetoric. He's already proven he doesn't have the stones for confrontation.
 
#29
#29
It's a little hard to pinpoint the exact source of the rhetoric. It may be a bluff against Obama because of his "work with the world" mentality....maybe Il wants to push those buttons and put him in an uncomfortable position of having to play the hard ball that he said he wouldn't....or let him get away with it and not lose his rock star persona.

However, another source of the increased rhetoric could be increased confidence - not because of who the President is, but because of the improving state of his technology.

My thoughts are that we are seeing all these tests back-to-back because Il was saving up his incremental technology improvements, not to test Obama, but because he knew Bush was bat-**** crazy and he didn't want to mess with him. I think that it may be less testing Obama than it is wanting to test his technology (because that is they only way they will continue improving their weapons/missiles) and feeling that they have more wiggle room with Obama (until he proves otherwise).
 
#30
#30
KB5252 said:
If you have not noticed an increase in the rhetoric, not to mention the tone of the rhetoric then you haven't been paying attention. I do not recall Kim J I ever threatening to wipe us off the face of the map before Obama was in office.
Click to expand...

Bush never ordered one of his vessels followed either.

I have needed to keep myself up to date on NK at a basic level for my job over the last 5 years or so. What lil Kim is doing now is no different in tone or rehtoric than when Bush was in office. The situation is just getting more attention now because we are following a NK vessel, are on the heels of another missile launch, and we have a new president.

Go back and look at the tone and rhetoric, missile tests, and nuclear test coming out of NK from 2003 - 2008. It is virtually unchanged.

...and as TT pointed out, if I had to bet I would say these back-to-back missile test (even though the most recent one was a "satellite launch" officially from them) are more a function of advancing technology than who is president. Remember, this "satellite launch" made it further than anything else before it.
 
Last edited:
#31
#31
TennTradition said:
It's a little hard to pinpoint the exact source of the rhetoric. It may be a bluff against Obama because of his "work with the world" mentality....maybe Il wants to push those buttons and put him in an uncomfortable position of having to play the hard ball that he said he wouldn't....or let him get away with it and not lose his rock star persona.

However, another source of the increased rhetoric could be increased confidence - not because of who the President is, but because of the improving state of his technology.

My thoughts are that we are seeing all these tests back-to-back because Il was saving up his incremental technology improvements, not to test Obama, but because he knew Bush was bat-**** crazy and he didn't want to mess with him. I think that it may be less testing Obama than it is wanting to test his technology (because that is they only way they will continue improving their weapons/missiles) and feeling that they have more wiggle room with Obama (until he proves otherwise).
Click to expand...

Kim Jong tested his missiles while Bush was in office, the rhetoric was not to this level. I think you may be right to a degree, he is becoming more confident in his technology. The timing doesn't make sense unless there is a little bit of the Obama factor at work here though. It almost certainly does have something to do with Obama being in power, I believe you are right about Bush, Kim Jong might have thought he was a little batshat crazy, this instilled a healthy fear IMO. He doesn't seem to have that same fear of Obama.
 
#32
#32
KB5252 said:
Kim Jong tested his missiles while Bush was in office, the rhetoric was not to this level. I think you may be right to a degree, he is becoming more confident in his technology. The timing doesn't make sense unless there is a little bit of the Obama factor at work here though. It almost certainly does have something to do with Obama being in power, I believe you are right about Bush, Kim Jong might have thought he was a little batshat crazy, this instilled a healthy fear IMO. He doesn't seem to have that same fear of Obama.
Click to expand...

He certainly tested his technology during Bush's tenure...it was 8 years, he wasn't just going to wait. But, I don't think that there is any way that he would test a nuke, then a missile, then a long-range missile in just a few months with Bush around...he didn't want to give him that much of an excuse. We'll see how Obama responds and see if Il develops a healthy concern for him, too.......who can we invade this time to show we're nuts....Sweden?
 
#33
#33
TennTradition said:
He certainly tested his technology during Bush's tenure...it was 8 years, he wasn't just going to wait. But, I don't think that there is any way that he would test a nuke, then a missile, then a long-range missile in just a few months with Bush around...
Click to expand...


Why not? What would Bush have done differently than Obama in this situation?

Answer: Nothing.
 
#34
#34
lawgator1 said:
Why not? What would Bush have done differently than Obama in this situation?

Answer: Nothing.
Click to expand...

Il is pretty irrational, so I could be wrong - but I think that his actions speak otherwise. Bush presented an unknown to people like Il....and I think that this unknown caused more pause than Obama's unknown. Like I said, Obama may yet give them a reason to pause...we'll see.
 
#35
#35
TennTradition said:
Il is pretty irrational, so I could be wrong - but I think that his actions speak otherwise. Bush presented an unknown to people like Il....and I think that this unknown caused more pause than Obama's unknown. Like I said, Obama may yet give them a reason to pause...we'll see.
Click to expand...


Until it comes down to the recommendation to actually start shooting, I have got to think that Obama (like most presidents) goes along with what the military folks recommend to him. And in terms of North Korea in particular, even when its time to say shoot, my guess is that the range of situations where he would say no versus when Bush would say yes is exceptionally narrow.
 
#36
#36
TennTradition said:
Il is pretty irrational, so I could be wrong - but I think that his actions speak otherwise. Bush presented an unknown to people like Il....and I think that this unknown caused more pause than Obama's unknown. Like I said, Obama may yet give them a reason to pause...we'll see.
Click to expand...

Agree with this. With Crazy "Regime Change" George, KJI didn't know if he'd be "removed" or not (not likely but there was higher uncertainty). Under Barack "the non-meddler" Obama, KJI can get more aggressive with less uncertainty.
 
#38
#38
lawgator1 said:
Until it comes down to the recommendation to actually start shooting, I have got to think that Obama (like most presidents) goes along with what the military folks recommend to him. And in terms of North Korea in particular, even when its time to say shoot, my guess is that the range of situations where he would say no versus when Bush would say yes is exceptionally narrow.
Click to expand...

The military folks have a spectrum of options on the table, evaluated and ready to go. They can offer the President information about their estimates of success for each option....but how to respond to instances like these is at least as much a matter of policy as it is a matter of militarily available options (huge understatement). Obama can certainly factor in the military's assessment of various options' potential for success, but they aren't going to recommend a response without understanding first what the operating policy is - which is Obama's call.
 
#40
#40
I just saw this on the news. I figure it goes well with this thread.

N.Korea warns of 'Fire Shower of Nuclear' attack.
North Korea condemned a recent U.S. pledge to provide nuclear defense of South Korea, saying Thursday that the move boosts its justification to have atomic bombs and invites a potential "fire shower of nuclear retaliation."
The commentary in Pyongyang's main Rodong Sinmun newspaper was the North's latest reaction to last week's summit between President Barack Obama and South Korean President Lee Myung-bak. The allies issued a joint statement committing the U.S. to defend the South with nuclear weapons.
It also came as an American destroyer trailed a North Korean ship suspected of shipping weapons in violation of a U.N. resolution punishing Pyongyang's May 25 nuclear test, and as anticipation mounted that the North might test-fire short- or mid-range missiles in the coming days.
Click to expand...


 
#46
#46
lawgator1 said:
Did I not read that he agreed to defend South Korea from attack?
Click to expand...

defending "from" an attack indicates a willingness to launch a preemptive strike. Obama doesn't have the stones to initiate such action, he will maintain a reactive posture no matter what NK does.
 
#49
#49
JTrainDavis said:
Having served on the Korean border for 16 months, i can say with 100% certainty that the RoKA would have no problem dealing with the NKPA, at all.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

All I can say is one of the coolest guys I've ever met was a RoK Marine.

They train with the US Marines on a regular basis. Saw a group of them at 29 Palms when I was there also. Saw a larger group training with us and also some Japanese Special Forces. I can only think it was in the possibility of a NK situation as 3MEF is a quick reaction force to deal with NK.

Also... they can drink like no one's business.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top