The Briefing Room
General Category => World News => Topic started by: don-o on April 11, 2017, 10:45:52 pm
-
China rejects North Korean coal shipments, opts for US supplies instead
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/11/china-rejects-north-korean-coal-shipments-opts-for-us-supplies-instead.html
China has sent a flotilla of North Korean freighters loaded with coking coal back to their home ports, according to an exclusive Reuters report. Meanwhile, China has placed massive orders for the steel-making commodity from U.S. producers.
Information on the Thomson Reuters Eikon financial information and analytics platform revealed that 12 freighters were returning to North Korea.
Reuters attributed news of China’s rejecting North Korean coal to a trading source at Dandong Chengtai Trade Co., which is the biggest buyer of North Korea's coal.
The Dandong Chengtai said it had 600,000 tons of North Korean coal sitting at various ports and that there were 2 million tons stranded at Chinese ports to be sent back to North Korea, Reuters said.
The move reflects China’s public commitment on Feb. 26 to join other nations in punishing North Korea for its continued nuclear weapons and ballistic missile development program. China said in February it was suspending North Korean imports for the rest of this year.
China is North Korea's largest source of trade and aid and targeting coal imports are meant to deprive Pyongyang of an important source of foreign currency.
-
@LonestarDream
There's a step in the right direction. Plus the editorial in the Global Times that put Fat Boy on notice that an ass kicking was coming if he lit off another nuke.
-
China Suspends All Coal Imports From North Korea
By CHOE SANG-HUN FEB. 18, 2017
hmmmmmm
SEOUL, South Korea — China said on Saturday that it was suspending all imports of coal from North Korea as part of its effort to enact United Nations Security Council sanctions aimed at stopping the country’s nuclear weapons and ballistic-missile program.
The ban takes effect on Sunday and will last until the end of the year, the Chinese Commerce Ministry said in a brief statement posted on its website on Saturday. Chinese trade and aid have long been a vital economic crutch for North Korea, and the decision strips North Korea of one of its most important sources of foreign currency.
-
My guess Trump made China a deal they couldn't refuse.
-
China’s 'ban' on North Korean coal isn't the tough stance it seems
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/foreign-policy/321552-dont-be-fooled-chinas-ban-on-north-korean-coal-isnt-the
China announced on Feb. 18 that it would stop all coal imports from North Korea. Analysts greeted the news with optimism, suggesting it improves prospects for a U.S.-North Korea nuclear deal or was an attempt by Beijing to curry favor with the Trump administration.
China, however, should not be applauded for doing what it has already promised the international community, and ultimately must do more to address the threat of North Korea’s nuclear program and missiles.
China had issued a ban on North Korean coal imports in April 2016, but later exploited a loophole to let it import $858 million worth nonetheless. Then, in December 2016, Beijing exceeded the monthly U.N.-imposed cap on North Korea’s exports.
snip
--------------------------------------------------------------
istm that Trump strongly suggested that China stop cheating on its agreements.
Meet the new boss; NOT the same as the old boss.
-
My guess Trump made China a deal they couldn't refuse.
I hope there's no quid pro quo involving the South China Sea. That there is some bad chinese juju.
-
My guess Trump made China a deal they couldn't refuse.
My guess is that a 5000 year old culture is merely exploiting the current difficulties :whistle:
-
@don-o
Saw an interview with Trump today and he said something like this: "North Korea is doing bad things." Then, quoting Trump's actual words, he said, "I've sent an Armada of ships with submarines over there." Then, he said something like this, "If China doesn't help us, we will do it ourselves." That was a dumb thing to say - he ratcheted up the idea of actually starting a war, bragging about sending ships and submarines. The North Korea crazy man will likely drop a nuclear bomb because of this, just because he can. People are objects to him, killing them is nothing. I thought Trump would start a war but not this soon. I hope this doesn't happen.
-
I don't know that any quid pro quo is necessary.
China gains by stepping in.
Economic sanctions place them as a first tier powerhouse, economically.
Threats of military action in the event the DPRK doesn't step into line place them on par with the US in that sense, and give them major power status, if not on par with the US in this instance, which improves their hegemony in the region.
The Chinese gain 'face', The US loses none, only fatboy in the DPRk loses. He either backs down or or gets more sanctions and possibly military action against him. Loss of export trade with China will hurt.
-
I hope there's no quid pro quo involving the South China Sea. That there is some bad chinese juju.
My guess is this...
No high tariffs if you help us out with Fat Boy from NK..
-
I don't know that any quid pro quo is necessary.
China gains by stepping in.
Economic sanctions place them as a first tier powerhouse, economically.
Threats of military action in the event the DPRK doesn't step into line place them on par with the US in that sense, and give them major power status, if not on par with the US in this instance, which improves their hegemony in the region.
The Chinese gain 'face', The US loses none, only fatboy in the DPRk loses. He either backs down or or gets more sanctions and possibly military action against him. Loss of export trade with China will hurt.
If China does invade, my guess is that the DPRK Army won't do a damn thing.
-
If China does invade, my guess is that the DPRK Army won't do a damn thing.
If it wasn't for the Chinese Army, Korea would have been reunited, and my brother might have been born a year or so earlier.
-
If it wasn't for the Chinese Army, Korea would have been reunited, and my brother might have been born a year or so earlier.
Had MacAurthur stopped on the original boundary I think NK would have been gone by now. I agree, pretty soon the Chinese are going to get sick of Fat boy.
-
@don-o
Saw an interview with Trump today and he said something like this: "North Korea is doing bad things." Then, quoting Trump's actual words, he said, "I've sent an Armada of ships with submarines over there." Then, he said something like this, "If China doesn't help us, we will do it ourselves." That was a dumb thing to say - he ratcheted up the idea of actually starting a war, bragging about sending ships and submarines. The North Korea crazy man will likely drop a nuclear bomb because of this, just because he can. People are objects to him, killing them is nothing. I thought Trump would start a war but not this soon. I hope this doesn't happen.
@Victoria33
Trump is faced with cleaning up the many messes that characterize American foreign policy.
I do not see Trump launching a preemptive strike on the Norks. I can see him shooting down the next missile that the Fat Kid launches.
And I can see China getting dead serious about exercising their power. They have refocused their belligerent talk AT the Norks.
China Threatens To Bomb North Korea's Nuclear Facilities If It Crosses Beijing's "Bottom Line"
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,258085.msg1288599/topicseen.html#new
-
Interesting development. Sounds like a Trump deal - if the ChiComs keep the pressure on the NORKs, and buy the coal they need from the U.S. to boot, then the ChiComs get - what? That shoe has yet to drop, and shouldn't until there's tangible progress in getting rid of Fatboy.
My worry is that, deprived of its primary source of foreign currency, the NORKs could well be tempted to sell their nuke technology to the highest nefarious bidder.
-
Interesting development. Sounds like a Trump deal - if the ChiComs keep the pressure on the NORKs, and buy the coal they need from the U.S. to boot, then the ChiComs get - what? That shoe has yet to drop, and shouldn't until there's tangible progress in getting rid of Fatboy.
My worry is that, deprived of its primary source of foreign currency, the NORKs could well be tempted to sell their nuke technology to the highest nefarious bidder.
The Chicoms get to at least give the appearance they have the key to the executive washroom and know the secret handshake.
It's called "Face" and the concept is alive and well. It will make them a regional player for global security by policing their 'hood and not leaving it up to the US, and bumps them up to Major- if not Super-power status, at least in the region. By using economic sanctions and trade deals, they are an economic power as well.
It shows the world they have 'arrived', and aren't just a bunch of wannabes in a schoolyard spat over offshore rights. It puts them as hegemonic equals with the US in the region.
Those are somewhat intangible assets, but significant, nonetheless.
-
Interesting development. Sounds like a Trump deal - if the ChiComs keep the pressure on the NORKs, and buy the coal they need from the U.S. to boot, then the ChiComs get - what? That shoe has yet to drop, and shouldn't until there's tangible progress in getting rid of Fatboy.
My worry is that, deprived of its primary source of foreign currency, the NORKs could well be tempted to sell their nuke technology to the highest nefarious bidder.
i guess a known unknown is how much intel China has on the Norks. I would think it's quite extensive,
-
The Chicoms get to at least give the appearance they have the key to the executive washroom and know the secret handshake.
It's called "Face" and the concept is alive and well. It will make them a regional player for global security by policing their 'hood and not leaving it up to the US, and bumps them up to Major- if not Super-power status, at least in the region. By using economic sanctions and trade deals, they are an economic power as well.
It shows the world they have 'arrived', and aren't just a bunch of wannabes in a schoolyard spat over offshore rights. It puts them as hegemonic equals with the US in the region.
Those are somewhat intangible assets, but significant, nonetheless.
Very good observations and, imo, the same could be applied to Russia. A coherent American foreign policy needs to recognize the legitimate security interests of both those nations, including their border security.
And while it is right to pressure China, our own failure (RE: Iraq) was a tragic blunder and set a very bad example. We were good with Sadaam warring on Iran for ten years. We let him get away with a lot of nasty stuff.
Iraq chemical attacks against Iran
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_chemical_attacks_against_Iran
Then in the first Gulf War, we used half measures and have reaped the whirlwind since. An That war was supposed to have corrected the failing of Viet Nam. Events have proved that it did not.
@LonestarDream
-
@don-o
You said: "I do not see Trump launching a preemptive strike on the Norks. I can see him shooting down the next missile that the Fat Kid launches."
First, I appreciate you people on the thread being serious about this and not attacking each other with snarky barbs as we try to figure out what may happen in this area of the world.
Due to my background in all things psychological, I automatically evaluate the people involved in a situation. don-o, all the Fat Kid needs is a false reason to drop a nuclear bomb just because he has one/some. If Trump shot down a Fat Kid missile, Fat Kid would go ballistic and attack someone and I would bet he would use "the bomb".
But, I think he doesn't need Trump to shoot down a missile before he would use "the bomb". Just the fact the "Armada and submarines", as Trump called them, are there is enough to set off Fat Kid. He has already said if the US provokes North Korea, he will nuclear bomb the United States. He is the one who will decide what "provokes" means and that could well mean the Armada and submarines are off his coast. We are dealing with a crazy man (actually two since I think Trump is crazy). This is as close as we have been to all out war in a long time.
-
Very good observations and, imo, the same could be applied to Russia. A coherent American foreign policy needs to recognize the legitimate security interests of both those nations, including their border security.
And while it is right to pressure China, our own failure (RE: Iraq) was a tragic blunder and set a very bad example. We were good with Sadaam warring on Iran for ten years. We let him get away with a lot of nasty stuff.
Iraq chemical attacks against Iran
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_chemical_attacks_against_Iran
Then in the first Gulf War, we used half measures and have reaped the whirlwind since. An That war was supposed to have corrected the failing of Viet Nam. Events have proved that it did not.
@LonestarDream
The Liberal Media, who were having grey ponytailed orgasmic fantasies of being "relevant" like they were in the 60s, proclaimed Iraq to be "another Vietnam".
Then, just like their ideological forebearers, who lost the Vietnam war despite the military efforts and the ultimate sacrifice of over 58,000 Americans, they propagandized failure and finally managed to elect enough of their own to make their prophesies come true.
Deja vu, all over again.
Once again, the lives and limbs of American Troops were sacrificed on the altar of liberals proving they were 'right', without concern for the consequences for not only the troops on the ground and their families and loved ones, but the people of the nations affected.
Just like Vietnam. The same epithets, the same treatment.
The real 'baby killers' (Liberals: 50,000,000 and counting, since Roe) continue to denigrate our troops. I'd better quit here, it really pisses me off. :nometalk:
Sorry about the tangent.
Russia and China have to be factored into the superpower matrix of the future, wither in concert or as separate entities. The two out of three vote there could go either way, or change in mid event, and the EU is not going to be a factor because of fragmentation and disunity, so that balancing factor will not be present. Former and present English Commonwealth nations might form a potential bloc, with global distribution (UK, CA, AU), but that will take a while to spool up to the same status, but despite being a welcome addition in terms of hegemony and military contribution, would not likely act as a perceived buffering superpower for a while, if such is desired ever. India may emerge as a major power as well. Two continents (aside from Antarctica) remain pretty much out of the Majors, but one has its own problems as well.
One thing of note, all the major powers either have a bone to pick with the developing Caliphate or will in the near future (EU comes to mind, when it finally wakes up), because the problem children of the world have provoked incidents and are becoming problems everywhere but South America so far.
-
And while it is right to pressure China, our own failure (RE: Iraq) was a tragic blunder and set a very bad example. We were good with Sadaam warring on Iran for ten years. We let him get away with a lot of nasty stuff.
@don-o
I remember that 10 year war and remember when Saddam used gas on Iranian soldiers.
-
snip
The real 'baby killers' (Liberals: 50,000,000 and counting, since Roe) continue to denigrate our troops. I'd better quit here, it really pisses me off. :nometalk:
Not my attention to get any danders up. And, speaking of Roe, when the Rescue Movement was smashed by the State, I have sometimes worried that our nation did pass the point of no return.
As far as First Iraq, Hussein should have been removed, put on trial, and executed for war crimes, And Iraq should have been partitioned; as Syria must be.
-
Some good analysis, credit to all so far!
Something to factor in to thinking:
Lil Kim is crazy. There is no doubt at all about that. The techs who actually launch the missiles are not.
It takes some digging, but there is a rather interesting correlation between how PO'd the rest of the world is with NK and NK launch failures. Not something I'd risk my life on completely, but it's a consideration nontheless.
-
@don-o
snip
But, I think he doesn't need Trump to shoot down a missile before he would use "the bomb". Just the fact the "Armada and submarines", as Trump called them, are there is enough to set off Fat Kid. He has already said if the US provokes North Korea, he will nuclear bomb the United States. He is the one who will decide what "provokes" means and that could well mean the Armada and submarines are off his coast. We are dealing with a crazy man (actually two since I think Trump is crazy). This is as close as we have been to all out war in a long time.
@Victoria33
If that be the case, should we continue sending stern letters?
It is becoming increasingly clear that Trump had a meeting of the minds with Xi, and the surprising move of the Carl Vinson convinced him that Trump was playing hard ball.
I put up a thread, for the purpose of getting perspective and bringing into clear focus, how big a mess obama created. Getting it cleaned up is going to be a close run thing, at best.
Re: The Cairo Speech (How quickly we forget)
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,258184.msg1289039.html#msg1289039
-
Not my attention to get any danders up. And, speaking of Roe, when the Rescue Movement was smashed by the State, I have sometimes worried that our nation did pass the point of no return.
As far as First Iraq, Hussein should have been removed, put on trial, and executed for war crimes, And Iraq should have been partitioned; as Syria must be.
Those partitions will have to occur on tribal lines to be stable, something the English Partition ignored. Instead (and perhaps intentionally) tribal factions were split by national boundaries ensuring internal conflict for individual nations, and a lack of focused tribal based cohesiveness, something which might prove advantageous for exploitative purposes, but which stinks in terms of national stability. It is the primary reason every Islamic nation in the region ends up with a SOB at the helm who can keep the factions in check, and internal conflict simmering constantly on the back burner, when it isn't boiling over.
Obama and Hillary (and Kerry) took advantage of that simmering internal friction to destabilize numerous governments in the Mediterranean region with finances and arms.
Recall, though in 2007 (still on 'W's watch):
Various Nonstandard Ammunition for Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, Afghanistan National Security Forces and the Government of Iraq. The US Army Sustainment Command (ASC) intends to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP), W52P1J-07-R-0104, to the Army Single Face to Industry Web(ASFI) at https://acquisition.army.mil/asfi/ on or about June 20, 2007 with a closing date of 30 days after issuance. This is a Foreign Military Sales RFP for FY 2007 Afghanistan and Iraq requirements.
Due to the importance of deliveries and the volume of ammunition required, the Government will award individual contracts for the three (3) requirements (1 for the Afghanistan requirements and 2 for the Iraq requirements). All three requirements shall all be firm-fixed price with 100% options. Options may be exercised within 3 months of contract award. Although offerors are restricted to a single Iraq award, it may be eligible for the Afghanistan award also. The materiel must be from new production or new surplus manufactured within last 20 years and serviceable without qualifications.
The following is a list of items that will be solicited:
AFGHANISTAN REQUIREMENTS LISTING ITEM, WEAPON SYSTEM, QTY
- 40MM SPONGE ROUND, MOSSBERG M590A1, 20,613
- 40MM 60 CAL STINGER, MOSSBERG M590A1, 20,505
- 40MM LIQUID FERRET-CS, MOSSBERG M590A1, 20,500
- STINGER RUBBER BALL GRENADE, N/A, 10,000
- OC/CS AEROSOL GRENADE, N/A, 10,000
- HC MILITARY STYLE SMOKE, N/A, 10,000
- MULTI-PORT PLUS FLASH BANG, N/A, 10,000
- MULTI-PORT PLUS 15 GRAM RELOAD, N/A, 10,000
- 12 GAUGE BEAN BAG, MOSSBERG M590A1, 800
- 12 GAUGE LAUNCHING ROUND (SPECIAL), MOSSBERG M590A1, 400
- 12 GAUGE RUBBER FIN STABILIZED, MOSSBERG M590A1, 950
- GRENADE RUBBER/STING BALL, MOSSBERG M590A1, 100
- GRENADE HAND NL M84, MOSSBERG M590A1, 100
- CANISTER GRENADE CS PYRO LOW FLAME, N/A, 97
- FLASH BANG, TRAINING FUSE & BODY, N/A, 50
- HC SMOKE WHITE FLAMELESS CANISTER, N/A, 6
- GRENADE STING BALL OC, N/A, 4
- LAUNCHING CUP 12 GAUGE CANISTER, MOSSBERG M590A1, 10
- LAUNCHING CUP 12 GAUGE STRING BALL, MOSSBERG M590A1, 10
- MK9 OC SPRAY CANISTER, N/A, 25
- MK4 STREAMER CANISTER OC, N/A, 75
- MK9 FOGGER OC, N/A, 20
- PISTOL GRIP CROWD CONTROL OC SPRAY, N/A, 5
- PG-7VM, 70.5MM STD HEAT, RPG-7 LAUNCHER, 576
- PG-7VL, 93MM STD HEAT, RPG-7 LAUNCHER, 216
- AMMO BELT W/CAN FOR 7.62X54MM (250 ROUND), PKM, 4,000
- AMMO BELT W/CAN FOR 12.7X108MM (50-70 ROUND), YAKB 1,000
- AMMO BELT FOR 30MM MACHINE GUN, GSH-30, 500
- LINKING MACHINE FOR 7.62X54MM, PKM MACHINE GUN, 40
- LINKING MACHINE FOR 12.7X108MM, YAKB, 20
- LINKING MACHINE FOR 30MM MACHINE GUN, GSH-30, 10
- SPG-9 PROPELLANT (ELECTRICALLY IGNITED, GROUND MOUNT), SPG-9, 10,000
IRAQ A REQUIREMENTS ITEM, WEAPON SYSTEM, QTY
- 12 GAUGE BREACHING ROUND, MOSSBERG SHOTGUN, 2,500
- 9MM BALL, GLOCK PISTOL, 24,000,000
- 7.62 X 39MM BALL, AK47 ASSAULT RIFLE, 55,200,000
- 7.62 X 54MM BALL W/ LINKS, PKM MACHINE GUN, 18,000,000
- OG-7V 40MM HE, RPG-7 GRENADE LAUNCHER, 20,000
- 7.62 X 54MM SNIPER, SVD SNIPER RIFLE, 2,500
- HC MILITARY STYLE SMOKE WHITE, N/A, 1,000
IRAQ B REQUIREMENTS ITEM, WEAPON SYSTEM, QTY
- 9MM BALL, GLOCK PISTOL, 16,000,000
- 7.62 X 39MM BALL, AK47 ASSAULT RIFLE, 36,800,000
- 7.62 X 54MM BALL W/ LINKS, PKM MACHINE GUN, 12,000,000
- The weapons in this synopsis are for reference purposes only, the intent of this procurement is to purchase the ammunition for the weapons listed above. Delivery and FOB terms shall be included in the solicitation. All contractors who provide goods/services to the Department of Defense (DOD) must be registered in the Central Contractors Register (CCR). If you are not registered in CCR, you cannot be awarded a DoD contract. The Internet site for registering in the C CR is http://www.ccr.gov/. You may also contact the CCR Registration Assistance Center at 1-888-227-2423, customer service, and request the registration form and assistance packet for completion. Direct any questions prior to the applicable closing date in writing to: Headquarters, US Army Sustainment Command, ATTN: AMSAS-ACA-R/Gerry Haan 1 Rock Island Arsenal, Rock Island, IL 61299-6500 telephone number (309) 782-5155.
http://www.fbo.gov/spg/USA/USAMC/DAAA09/W52P1J07R0104/Modification%2001.html (http://www.fbo.gov/spg/USA/USAMC/DAAA09/W52P1J07R0104/Modification%2001.html) (original link, now broke)
The price went up here, but did the ammo go there? It takes time to fill those contracts, and there is no guarantee it ended up in the hands it was intended for, especially with the change in management here.
Daddy Bush should have taken the high road and pushed for the elimination of Saddam, but instead went the easy route to build a coalition and simply clear Iraq out of Kuwait. The demolition of oil production sites during the Iraqi withdrawal could have rated as a crime against humanity; the case for removal of Saddam could have been made. It might even have overcome the "read my lips" optic enough for Americans to get behind him and reelect him, which would have possibly deprived us of the Clintons. (I'll leave that for the Alternate History writers, but it could be meat for that genre.)
We know Saddam was a nasty SOB, and that it ran in the family, but the Iranians weren't exactly saints either, taking 'developmentally disabled' kids and "radicalizing" them so they'd roll prone through minefields and clear pathways for following troops. Islamists at their very best.
While Saddam was a foil to the Shia' in Iran, he was useful, and it kept both off the Saudis backs, and away from Israel. When Saddam became a threat to Israel, the segments of his super cannon were intercepted in England, the design engineer woke up dead in the morning, and we found more reasons to attack and finally finish the job.
-
@Victoria33
If that be the case, should we continue sending stern letters? It is becoming increasingly clear that Trump had a meeting of the minds with Xi, and the surprising move of the Carl Vinson convinced him that Trump was playing hard ball. I put up a thread, for the purpose of getting perspective and bringing into clear focus, how big a mess obama created. Getting it cleaned up is going to be a close run thing, at best.
@don-o
It does no good to bring up what Obama did or did not do and/or what Bush did or did not do. The situation is what it is.
You said, "If that be the case, should we continue sending stern letters?"
You said that in regard to my saying just the presence of the "Armada and submarines" off North Korea would/could be why Fat Kid would set off a nuclear bomb.
If Fat Kid did detonate a bomb we would be "responding" in an emergency/less coordinated way, rather than stopping his nukes on our timetable. My opinion is, we need to make a plan, and take out his nuclear capability according to the plan. We should have already done it years ago. We are going to have to do that as no other country is going to do that. In simple parlance, we need to "blow stuff up" so they can never make another nuke.
A case in point: Saddam had a nuclear plant. Without warning, Israel went there and blew it totally up. The deed was done and no country could do anything about it.
We can do the same thing - blow up North Korea's nuclear plants and the nuclear bombs he already has. No country could do anything about it and besides, it would be saving the lives of millions of people across the planet as Fat Kid WILL send those bombs, first to our country, then Israel and any other country Fat Kid doesn't like. He is sitting in the middle of numerous powder kegs, with a match in his hand, about to launch powder kegs when he feels like it.
Russia is not going to blow up the world - Fat Kid will one day when he doesn't like the noodles he just got for lunch. Our existence depends on what he had for lunch or because he got a knot in his boot strings. If we don't blow that place up, millions of Americans are going to die. He has already said, a few days ago, if we provoke him, he will blow us up.
Don't say the actual North Korean technicians who would be responsible for sending the bomb(s) wouldn't do it. Everyone in that whole country does what Fat Kid says, or they die right then. He has done that over and over - remember, "Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior".
I think we have normalcy bias at work with North Korea. Normalcy bias is, "if something has not happened in the past, it probably won't happen". That thinking keeps us thinking, "Oh, it won't happen". Fat Boy WILL kill us if we don't stop him.
I don't think we will bomb those plants/bombs. We are going to wait until it is too late because we fear other countries won't like us if we bomb those plants/bombs because some people will be killed if we do that. Those deaths would be caused by Fat Boy, not us, because he built those bombs and plans to kill us. We bombed Japan, twice, in order to save lives but some Japanese died. Those deaths were caused by Japan because they attacked us and we had to end that war.
-
@Victoria33
If we know the locations of Kim's facilities, (IIRC, they are underground), then making sure they stay that way should not be too difficult.
Didn't we have a nuclear bunker buster? Couldn't a warhead be made that would give a spectral output and daughter product analysis identical to the NK ones?
Oopsie. Must have had an accident in the labs...
Game, set, and match, and deniability, too--especially with more than one power telling Kim to cool it. A solid round of denials, and with the fallout matching Kim's warheads, it could have credibility (and still leave doubts).
-
This refusal of NK coal by the Chinamen is tangible proof of a coherent foreign policy by Donny. Whether it was the threats of tariffs or getting involved in their region, China is now working towards our goals for the first time in a long time. NK can't afford to lose out on any coal money and now they are stuck with these loaded ships.
-
This refusal of NK coal by the Chinamen is tangible proof of a coherent foreign policy by Donny. Whether it was the threats of tariffs or getting involved in their region, China is now working towards our goals for the first time in a long time. NK can't afford to lose out on any coal money and now they are stuck with these loaded ships.
Dear Leader had better hurry up and print up another edition of the official book of state approved tree bark recipes 'cause aside from a few other state sponsors of terrorism china is about their only customer.
-
This refusal of NK coal by the Chinamen is tangible proof of a coherent foreign policy by Donny. Whether it was the threats of tariffs or getting involved in their region, China is now working towards our goals for the first time in a long time. NK can't afford to lose out on any coal money and now they are stuck with these loaded ships.
Upthread I posted some links to the facts that China had previously agreed to limit coal from NK and let those limits slip. Plus there seems to be the matter of a shell game in their accounting of their other financial dealings.
-
@Victoria33
If we know the locations of Kim's facilities, (IIRC, they are underground), then making sure they stay that way should not be too difficult. Didn't we have a nuclear bunker buster? Couldn't a warhead be made that would give a spectral output and daughter product analysis identical to the NK ones? Oopsie. Must have had an accident in the labs... Game, set, and match, and deniability, too--especially with more than one power telling Kim to cool it. A solid round of denials, and with the fallout matching Kim's warheads, it could have credibility (and still leave doubts).
@Smokin Joe
It would depend on our delivery system. A plane, or planes, would nail us as the one who dropped whatever number of bombs we would have to deliver. I am fairly sure it would take a nuke to get that far underground and their facilities are likely spread out around the country, so likely more than one plane.
Now, we know that Trump said he sent an "Armada and submarine" - since we can't depend on his words to be truthful, it could be one submarine or more than one. We have nukes on some submarines. That would be the best way to deliver those bunker buster bombs if they could do it, or deliver the nuclear bombs if they were needed to do the job.
Hmm, I'm just seeing on CNN this message, "Tillerson wraps up meeting with Putin." Perhaps he DID meet with Putin.
-
This refusal of NK coal by the Chinamen is tangible proof of a coherent foreign policy by Donny. Whether it was the threats of tariffs or getting involved in their region, China is now working towards our goals for the first time in a long time. NK can't afford to lose out on any coal money and now they are stuck with these loaded ships.
@Frank Cannon
China started rejecting NK coal back in February.
-
Upthread I posted some links to the facts that China had previously agreed to limit coal from NK and let those limits slip. Plus there seems to be the matter of a shell game in their accounting of their other financial dealings.
@don-o
Yes, I read where they got the NK coal anyway, hiding the way they did it. However, now there are many tons of coal sitting in their harbors to go back to NK, and they did order coal from us.
-
@Frank Cannon
China started rejecting NK coal back in February.
Oh right. Sorry. We should credit the President back then. Thank you President Obama.
-
Oh right. Sorry. We should credit the President back then. Thank you President Obama.
Obama was still president in February? Those darned holdovers...
-
Obama was still president in February? Those darned holdovers...
That poster I responded to is always correct. She will tell you so because she is an expert on stuff. Important stuff. If she says Obama was President in February, he was President in February.
-
China had issued a ban on North Korean coal imports in April 2016, but later exploited a loophole to let it import $858 million worth nonetheless. Then, in December 2016, Beijing exceeded the monthly U.N.-imposed cap on North Korea’s exports.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/foreign-policy/321552-dont-be-fooled-chinas-ban-on-north-korean-coal-isnt-the
-
@don-o
Saw an interview with Trump today and he said something like this: "North Korea is doing bad things." Then, quoting Trump's actual words, he said, "I've sent an Armada of ships with submarines over there." Then, he said something like this, "If China doesn't help us, we will do it ourselves." That was a dumb thing to say - he ratcheted up the idea of actually starting a war, bragging about sending ships and submarines. The North Korea crazy man will likely drop a nuclear bomb because of this, just because he can. People are objects to him, killing them is nothing. I thought Trump would start a war but not this soon. I hope this doesn't happen.
On the flip side, Trump's words also pressure the Chinese to be more active, because they don't want to see things blow up over there either. And for all his titular power, Kim still must rely on his military for support. And they can be influenced by the Chinese.
If you really think Kim is that erratic/sensitive, and that is enough for him to launch nukes, then he's pretty much certain to do it within the next decade or so anyway. I'd rather bring things to a head before he's got that good ICBM, and when we can maximize our influence with the Chinese.
I don't think we can kick this can down the road any further.
-
On the flip side, Trump's words also pressure the Chinese to be more active, because they don't want to see things blow up over there either. And for all his titular power, Kim still must rely on his military for support. And they can be influenced by the Chinese.
If you really think Kim is that erratic/sensitive, and that is enough for him to launch nukes, then he's pretty much certain to do it within the next decade or so anyway. I'd rather bring things to a head before he's got that good ICBM, and when we can maximize our influence with the Chinese.
I don't think we can kick this can down the road any further.
I generally think it is high time to stop kicking cans, grab the bull by the tail, and face the situation.
-
Coal is NK's primary and almost only export of decent size (clothing is next on the list) and China is one of the few buyers.
http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/prk/
This is a starvation move on China's part. Probably more effective than dropping bombs.
-
My opinion is, we need to make a plan, and take out his nuclear capability according to the plan. We should have already done it years ago. We are going to have to do that as no other country is going to do that. In simple parlance, we need to "blow stuff up" so they can never make another nuke.
Case in point: Saddam had a nuclear plant. Without warning, Israel went there and blew it totally up. The deed was done and no country could do anything about it.
That was a completely different military situation. Iraq's reactor was very poorly defended and hardened, and Israel's attack caught everyone by surprise. The NK nuclear facilities, like the Iranian nuclear facilities, are dispersed and very well hardened. And NK's air defense net is orders of magnitude superior to what the Iraqis and Syrians had.
do the same thing - blow up North Korea's nuclear plants and the nuclear bombs he already has. No country could do anything about it and besides, it would be saving the lives of millions of people across the planet as Fat Kid WILL send those bombs, first to our country, then Israel and any other country Fat Kid doesn't like. He is sitting in the middle of numerous powder kegs, with a match in his hand, about to launch powder kegs when he feels like it.
If we bombed NK's nuclear reactors and weapons facilities, and were (very) lucky enough to actually succeed in erasing their nuclear potential (including knowing where they've stored already built nukes, etc., and getting those as well), the very next thing that would happen is that he'd send a million troops over the border into South Korea. Seoul would be hammered by a hundred thousand rounds of artillery. You'd have 100,000 dead ROK civilians in a week. Minimum. Casualties among the military would be huge as well.
I think we have normalcy bias at work with North Korea. Normalcy bias is, "if something has not happened in the past, it probably won't happen". That thinking keeps us thinking, "Oh, it won't happen". Fat Boy WILL kill us if we don't stop him.
With all due respect, I think you have a bias in favor of thinking that just because Israeli air raids in 80's stopped the Syrian and Iraqi programs, we can do the same thing today with North Korea. Unless we actually used nukes to do that (which I don't think the fallout-sucking Japanese, Chinese, and South Koreans, and even the rest of the world -- would like very much) -- we cannot possibly have any confidence we could actually eliminate their nukes. Cruise missiles simply aren't suitable, and we'd lose unholy numbers of planes flying into North Korea trying to hit those targets. And that's assuming the ROK's would be on board with letting us launch a first strike from their airfields in the first place. Especially given that the massive build-up in strike aircraft required to pull of those attacks would take weeks, and would obviously be considered by the Norks as a prelude to a first strike.
How do you think they'd respond to that build up?
Also, a bombing campaign of that magnitude is not instantaneous, and can't be done effectively as a "surprise". And as soon as it started, if the Norks had a nuke loaded up to fire off at Seoul, they'd likely fire it off. Millions of people incinerated as a direct consequence of a U.S. first strike.
The absolute best chance of successfully getting rid of the fat guy, and/or stopping their nuclear program, is in getting the Chinese to use the maximum leverage they have on the Nork military.
-
Coal is NK's primary and almost only export of decent size (clothing is next on the list) and China is one of the few buyers.
http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/prk/
This is a starvation move on China's part. Probably more effective than dropping bombs.
A serious economic sanction against the DPRK while giving the appearance of complying with UN sanctions and cutting a trade deal with the US?
Good PR deal for the Chinese.
-
A serious economic sanction against the DPRK while giving the appearance of complying with UN sanctions and cutting a trade deal with the US?
Good PR deal for the Chinese.
I'll happily accept a good PR deal for the Chinese if it helps deal with the problem in NK.
-
I'll happily accept a good PR deal for the Chinese if it helps deal with the problem in NK.
Yep. Got zero problem with them getting the credit, per Reagan's maxim.
-
I'll happily accept a good PR deal for the Chinese if it helps deal with the problem in NK.
Exactly. As long as they don't try to parley that into owning the whole ocean bottom west of Midway.
-
That poster I responded to is always correct. She will tell you so because she is an expert on stuff. Important stuff. If she says Obama was President in February, he was President in February.
@Frank Cannon
@mystery-ak
@Mod1
@Mod2
@MOD3
@MOD4
@MOD8
February is a month, Frank, not a president.
We are having intelligent conversation here, so butt out if you want to start your usual crap of attacking people.
-
Exactly. As long as they don't try to parley that into owning the whole ocean bottom west of Midway.
One of the challenges our side has always faced. China does not take short term, reactionary steps. They don't think news-cycle to news-cycle or election to election. They plan things out 50 years in advance with more moves than we can imagine. It is just their general mindset. We (on all political sides) tend to look at the short term, what is good for the current leader for the current news cycle to get us past the next bump.
-
@Frank Cannon
@mystery-ak
@Mod1
@Mod2
@MOD3
@MOD4
@MOD8
February is a month, Frank, not a president.
We are having intelligent conversation here, so butt out if you want to start your usual crap of attacking people.
What was insulting about my comment? Please elaborate in detail. Enthrall me with your acumen.
-
@Maj. Bill Martin
You said, "With all due respect, I think you have a bias in favor of thinking that just because Israeli air raids in 80's stopped the Syrian and Iraqi programs, we can do the same thing today with North Korea."
No, I merely mentioned the Israeli attack as a matter of history, in that they didn't wait until Saddam had bombs ready to go, plus because they didn't publicize what they were going to do, it was over and done. I do remember when they took out Syria's facility, too.
-
This is a starvation move on China's part. Probably more effective than dropping bombs.
Very good point. Trying to take care of Kim militarily is not going to end well for anyone. Especially South Koreans.
-
I generally think it is high time to stop kicking cans, grab the bull by the tail, and face the situation.
@Smokin Joe
I agree with you. It appears to me, as I said, we will be forced into it by an emergency situation by the crazy NK leader, which is why I think it is better if we control when it happens and how it happens. Those plants and bombs have to go.
-
On the flip side, Trump's words also pressure the Chinese to be more active, because they don't want to see things blow up over there either. And for all his titular power, Kim still must rely on his military for support. And they can be influenced by the Chinese.
If you really think Kim is that erratic/sensitive, and that is enough for him to launch nukes, then he's pretty much certain to do it within the next decade or so anyway. I'd rather bring things to a head before he's got that good ICBM, and when we can maximize our influence with the Chinese.
I don't think we can kick this can down the road any further.
No we can't kick it anymore, the can is coming apart from years of kicking it down the road land there aren't any more cans.
-
The Chinese may actually go in, take out the lil' fat boy along with the rest of his family, install a new government (dominated by them), and dismantle the nukes.
I wouldn't be surprised if their intelligence re NKorea's internal workings are far better than ours, and I also wouldn't be surprised if they have a few "moles" within striking distance of Kim.
This is their big chance to become a major player on the world stage. If they can pull this off, no one will be able to say that China is not the foremost nation striking a blow for peace in the nascent twenty-first century.
If they install a Chinese-run government to come to the relief of the struggling NKorean people, that, too can only advance their resume.
The U.S. forces will stand by, idle for the most (all?) part.
I could be wrong.
Questions:
If the Chinese annexed NKorea, running it governing it as a part of their own country, would South Korea become less or more safe?
If the Chinese did this, would the United States become less or more safe?
-
The Chinese may actually go in, take out the lil' fat boy along with the rest of his family, install a new government (dominated by them), and dismantle the nukes.
I wouldn't be surprised if their intelligence re NKorea's internal workings are far better than ours, and I also wouldn't be surprised if they have a few "moles" within striking distance of Kim.
This is their big chance to become a major player on the world stage. If they can pull this off, no one will be able to say that China is not the foremost nation striking a blow for peace in the nascent twenty-first century.
If they install a Chinese-run government to come to the relief of the struggling NKorean people, that, too can only advance their resume.
The U.S. forces will stand by, idle for the most (all?) part.
I could be wrong.
Questions:
If the Chinese annexed NKorea, running it governing it as a part of their own country, would South Korea become less or more safe?
If the Chinese did this, would the United States become less or more safe?
I will assume the Chinese would be more safe. Everyone else would be up to them. After all, Pyongyang would be part of Korea if it hadn't been for Chicom intervention.
What would definitely happen is an increase in "Face" for the Chinese, elevating them to status of worldcop in the region, and placing them on par with the US there. That's an intangible that cannot be ignored. I'm still not sure they would want to annex N Korea, the place is a mess, rather set up a puppet government and trade for what they need, while exerting economic hegemony to go along with the military shadow cast.
By controlling relative prosperity for the new and improved DPRK through trade, they would retain a buffer state and still come off as 'the good guys' as far as the North Koreans were concerned.
-
@Maj. Bill Martin
You said, "With all due respect, I think you have a bias in favor of thinking that just because Israeli air raids in 80's stopped the Syrian and Iraqi programs, we can do the same thing today with North Korea."
No, I merely mentioned the Israeli attack as a matter of history, in that they didn't wait until Saddam had bombs ready to go, plus because they didn't publicize what they were going to do, it was over and done. I do remember when they took out Syria's facility, too.
That doesn't address the point about why you believe military strikes are likely to succeed. What do you envision us actually doing to knock those things out? Drop nukes, or conventional air strikes? And saying "I'm not sure because I'm not a military expert, but I'm sure there's something" doesn't answer the question. It assumes there really is a "something" that actually can be relied upon to do the job without giving him ample opportunity (and obviously motive) to start an all-out war.
And even before actually getting to that point, I assume that this is one of those actions where you'd insist that the President get the permission of Congress first. How do you think NK will respond if they see that Congress is about to authorize a first strike on them?
-
That doesn't address the point about why you military strikes are likely to succeed. What do you envision us actually doing to knock those things out? Drop nukes, or conventional air strikes? And saying "I'm not sure because I'm not a military expert, but I'm sure there's something" doesn't answer the question. It assumes there really is a "something" that actually can be relied upon to do the job without giving him ample opportunity (and obviously motive) to start an all-out war.
And even before actually getting to that point, I assume that this is one of those actions where you'd insist that the President get the permission of Congress first. How do you think NK will respond if they see that Congress is about to authorize a first strike on them?
Any overt action would have to be swift (one shot), decisive, and deniable. Elimination of nuclear facilities with what appeared to be an accident, which would involve serious ground penetration, accuracy, and a tailor made device to give off the right spectral GR readings and daughter product profile.... Otherwise, there'd be hell to pay.
Likely a peaceful solution is the best.
Let the Chinese put Kim on a short leash, or put him down (he has plenty of folks who wouldn't cry over that.) They don't need that crap on their doorstep, either.
Maybe there is someone who would be a better leader with just a little help, and they can start a new dynasty, if that's what they want.
-
I hope there's no quid pro quo involving the South China Sea. That there is some bad chinese juju.
I hope the quid pro quo is saving their ass from Japan 70+ years ago.
-
@don-o
Saw an interview with Trump today and he said something like this: "North Korea is doing bad things." Then, quoting Trump's actual words, he said, "I've sent an Armada of ships with submarines over there." Then, he said something like this, "If China doesn't help us, we will do it ourselves." That was a dumb thing to say - he ratcheted up the idea of actually starting a war, bragging about sending ships and submarines. The North Korea crazy man will likely drop a nuclear bomb because of this, just because he can. People are objects to him, killing them is nothing. I thought Trump would start a war but not this soon. I hope this doesn't happen.
you know he "can"? This may be just bluffing all the way.
And you say Trump is starting the war? Where have you been these years when NK has said they wish to obliterate us?
Me saying I will kill you means I have started the war, and You are taking action due to my imminent and declared threat.
-
That doesn't address the point about why you believe military strikes are likely to succeed. What do you envision us actually doing to knock those things out? Drop nukes, or conventional air strikes? And saying "I'm not sure because I'm not a military expert, but I'm sure there's something" doesn't answer the question. It assumes there really is a "something" that actually can be relied upon to do the job without giving him ample opportunity (and obviously motive) to start an all-out war.
And even before actually getting to that point, I assume that this is one of those actions where you'd insist that the President get the permission of Congress first. How do you think NK will respond if they see that Congress is about to authorize a first strike on them?
Bombing their facilities is likely to be only partially successful, and hence encourage Fatboy to resort to desperate measures. ("If you ain't got nothing, you've got nothing to lose.") The great unknown, it seems to me, is whether our cyberwarfare capabilities are advanced enough to shut down the country and prevent the NORKs from effectively retaliating.
-
No we can't kick it anymore, the can is coming apart from years of kicking it down the road land there aren't any more cans.
yet you say in a prior post "It does no good to bring up what Obama did or did not do and/or what Bush did or did not do. The situation is what it is. "
Hilarious. You choose not to recall history so it will not be repeated yet then bemoan the fact that there are no more cans to kick down the road.
One MUST confront the facts on how we got here so we learn from history. The recipe you adopt is a recipe to lose repeatedly.
-
Bombing their facilities is likely to be only partially successful, and hence encourage Fatboy to resort to desperate measures. ("If you ain't got nothing, you've got nothing to lose.") The great unknown, it seems to me, is whether our cyberwarfare capabilities are advanced enough to shut down the country and prevent the NORKs from effectively retaliating.
Maybe hack in and cause them to have an 'accident' that will cause the facility to become too contaminated for future use?
-
yet you say in a prior post "It does no good to bring up what Obama did or did not do and/or what Bush did or did not do. The situation is what it is. "
Hilarious. You choose not to recall history so it will not be repeated yet then bemoan the fact that there are no more cans to kick down the road.
One MUST confront the facts on how we got here so we learn from history. The recipe you adopt is a recipe to lose repeatedly.
Maybe we could send them another basketball player?
The reality is that this problem is a leftover from the '50s. and became one because we decided not to deal with one in the '40s (Mao). If Mao hadn't been running China, If we'd stopped the Chicoms at the Yalu, If...If...If... but we didn't and that's how we got here.
Will the survivors of Seattle say If...If...If..? Or will we (with or without) Chinese help do something about the situation?
Maybe letting the Chinese take the lead on this is a good idea, and likely they can exert pressure we can't because they are a trading partner.
-
Come on baby light his fire.
(http://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1415386/interview.gif)
-
Maybe hack in and cause them to have an 'accident' that will cause the facility to become too contaminated for future use?
Their cyber-systems are far more closed than were the Iranian systems. And I'm quite sure that if we were able to do what you suggest, we'd have already done it. Further, even if we could, that wouldn't do anything about the nukes he's already built. No reason to think we wouldn't have stuxnetted North Korea as we did Iran if it would have been possible to do so. Perhaps we even tried.
The other issue is that if the premise of this is that he's so unbalanced that anything could set him to firing nukes, I'd suggest that cyber-sabotage would likely do the trick.
-
Any overt action would have to be swift (one shot), decisive, and deniable.
That option does not exist except in Tom Cruise movies, and perhaps if we had multiple Avengers on our side. Iron Man and Thor would might be enough. We might need a Hulk too, though.
Let the Chinese put Kim on a short leash, or put him down (he has plenty of folks who wouldn't cry over that.) They don't need that crap on their doorstep, either. Maybe there is someone who would be a better leader with just a little help, and they can start a new dynasty, if that's what they want.
Agreed. I think that is the most plausible option not likely to result in very large numbers of dead people.