British nuclear expert John Large told Yonhap News that should the U.S. launch a first strike on North Korea’s Yongbyon nuclear facility using even one nuclear warhead, it would result in at least 430,000 casualties from radioactive fallout.
He said that as North Korea moves to make its possession of nuclear weapons official and a crisis situation develops on the Korean Peninsula, U.S. options to resolve the nuclear issue are gradually getting narrower. He said the new U.S. “first strike policy” had put Koreans in danger.
He noted that in an an attack on North Korea, it would be difficult for the U.S. to deploy large number of troops, and North Korea’s military faciilities were located deep underground, so it was very likely that the U.S. would make use of bunker-buster warheads.
Quoting declassified U.S. government documents obtained by Hans M. Kristensen, a nuclear consultant for the anti-nuclear environmental protection group Natural Resources Defense Council, Large said that if the U.S. dropped one 400kt B61-11 earth-penetrating weapon (presumably on Yongbyon) with winds blowing southeast, radioactive fallout would cover one-third of South Korea and parts of Japan, leading to between 430,000 and 550,000 casualties, depending on how residents in affected areas were prepared.
I wonder if I’d get a day off for that.
He also noted that if the U.S. military were to drop a nuclear warhead on North Korea, it would choose a time when the winds were blowing toward South Korea, not toward China or Russia.
Dr. Kim Tae-woo, a nuclear specialist with the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses, said, “When you consider the complex international political factors, the decision itself to bomb the Yongbyon nuclear complex wouldn’t be an easy one for the U.S. to make, and what’s more, to attack a narrow, densely populated area like the Korean Peninsula using nuclear rather than conventional weapons isn’t realistic.”
Readers may also wish to reread these scenarios I posted in November.
UPDATE: Curzon over at Coming Anarchy argues why nuking North Korea might be the way to go. Personally, I’m not sure this is such a hot idea, probably in no small part due to the fact that I live a 10~15 minute walk from primary target No. 1 for a North Korean retaliatory strike.
96 Comments
US will drop a nuclear bomb when the winds are blowing toward S.Korea? What’s the logic in that? Has the alliance sunk so low that now the US wants to sacrifice S.Korea in favour of China and Russia?
That is right. Perhaps this will give those that claim NK should be nuked something more to think about. Nuclear warheads are quite a bit more potent than they were durring WW2 when they were droped on Japan. While I have no trouble imagining Bush deciding that leaders have to act ‘for the good of the country’ and authorize a preemptive strike of some kind, I do hope that someone would stop him from nuking the place. One thing I would like to have seen here is some sort of estimate of what type of fallout damage there would be with the use of conventional high explosive ordinance should the stockpile of nuclear material and their reactor take a direct hit.
Bullshit. We would never attack Yongbyon with conventional, let alone nuclear weapons. The pundits just need to calm down and stop reading Clancy.
James, are you saying what I have just said, is true? Are you saying US in fact would drop a bomb when the winds are blowing to the south? WTF??
Then again, I just read where that quote came from. It came from:
“Hans M. Kristensen, a nuclear consultant for the anti-nuclear environmental protection group Natural Resources Defense Council”
Sounds like he has an agenda or two to make such claims.
The US has declared a ‘new first strike policy’? I never heard anything about that. And I agree with Dr. Kim Tae-Woo that it isn’t realistic that the US will do this (at least I sure hope they won’t-though Clinton supposedly thought about it). At the same time, I take almost anything said by a representative from an environmental group as being propoganda first with truth usually running far behind, if at all.
Let’s just hope there wont be any fallout on Dokdo.
Don’t listen to environmentalists; they are f***ing idiots. I am a democrat. And, I have a master?€™s degree in chemistry and I am saying this:
“People, there is no global warming. There is no hole in the ozone. There is no direct link between mutant frogs and the imagined hole in the ozone layer”.
All lies, lies and more lies.
You can drop a nuke in YongByuen any time. I have seen many of these “politically-motivated” scientists make up data to bolster an illogical claim.
G’ ahead. Drop it. Kick KJI in the ass.
This debate is worthless because if the US was to attack the reactor they would do it with lots of guided conventional weapons. I can’t read Korean, so the article is pointless for me but dude (scientist type I am too lazy to scroll up and look for his name) could be referring to the radiation that would leak out from a detroyed reactor and not just that of a nuclear bomb.
Thats right, drop a nuke, come on. We can do better than that, why not a electro magnetic pluse, emp high altitude and that will shut down NK now and forever. No physical damage, and NK will be in the stone age till SK comes in and starts rebuilding, what a jobs program that would be! Great for the economy and great for NK. Lets go for it….
I doubt that it will happen. Bush would like to, go in and open a can of wup-ass but I don’t think he has figured out a way to pretend to sell it to the public both at home as well as overseaas. It would take a real bonehead to nuke that area of the world. Surely the effects would be worse than the testing that went on at Bikini or the Chernobyl disaster. Think of all the people that eat fish out of the oceans-five headed babys for sure. Think about what AO has done to all those people that were in Nam. Radioactivity is much much worse. I do not believe he would use a nuke.
Baduk: I’ll state for the record that I am not a result of the hole in the ozone layer.
Rich: The EMP idea is pretty cool, but I don’t know if it’s possible to target it correctly or not. It wouldn’t do to have the EMP also shut down all the LCD factories in South Korea.
First of all, Mr.Kristensen apparently has his own twisted agenda for thinking the U.S. would drop a nuke on the NORKs, period. And the part about “a time when the winds were blowing toward South Korea” is, to quote Mike Tyson, ludicrous.
If and when Bush decides to use the military option (and I’m a firm believer it’ll be used as a last resort, if at all), it won’t be with nukes, and neither will there be a deployment of large numbers of troops. Think about it.
For some really chilling speculation about Korean peninsula conflict, check this out -
http://www.yhchang.com/OPERATION_NUKOREA.html
Well that was thoroughly depressing. I saw yhchang and figured it would be humorous. Live and learn. Of course, I also think the message is a bunch of crap, we wouldn’t attack NK without having a plan in place to deal with the artillery.
I quit about 3 minutes into the piece as it was a total piece… anyone watch the entire thing? Did it get any better?
An EMP wouldn’t work worth a damn. It isn’t that hard to protect your senistive and important electronics from one of those and I am sure the North Koreans have. Also not to make too much of a joke of this, but how much effect would killing all of the things that require electronics to run really do in the DPRK?
If a country makes nukes or even tests them, there isn’t a precedent for the US nuking the hell out of that country, and I doubt Congress would go along for the ride. The “red line” is probably getting caught selling nukes, and the evidence would have to be damn good after the Iraq WMD fiasco. Even so, a little radioactive dust wouldn’t be much worse than the hwangsa we’re breathing now….
Lord, no one is going to drop anything. Yonhap is just playing a red herring to stir up a furor over the US doing something nuclear which is not going to happen.
I like that mutant frog picture too. He looks so wise and benevolent; much better than KJI.
S. Korea never should have dismantled their own nuclear weapons program. Kick the U.S. out, stock up on nukes, and arms race the North into economic oblivion. Reagan would be so proud of their strategy, it’s the exact same thing he did!
Baduk - I can see someone arguing against global warming, but how can you deny the breakdown of the ozone layer? I’m not saying you should run around screaming about the impending doom of ozone depletion, but how can you deny the data? It’s a completely straight forward reaction mechanism!!
Baduk is saying that because he’s just shooting off at the mouth.
He is not an environmental chemist, is he?
I think he’s in his mid-life crisis and he’s re-discovering that it’s hip to be a rebel. Or at least it feels good to rebel.
Baduk, get off the ozone hole and come back to Earth!
What if Mr.John Bolton was in charge of all this?
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05.....olton.html
The transcripts provide by far the fullest accountings to date from Mr. Wolf, Mr. Foley and the former ambassador, Thomas Hubbard. Mr. Hubbard, who was ambassador to South Korea, told the panel that Mr. Bolton hung up on him during a visit there in early 2003, after Mr. Hubbard failed to secure a meeting between Mr. Bolton and Roh Moo Hyun, then president-elect of South Korea.
“Mr. Bolton himself got on the cellphone with me, and I explained the circumstances, and he said, ‘Well, why should I see you? You couldn’t get me a meeting with the president-elect,’ ” Mr. Hubbard said, according to the transcript.
“My immediate response was, you know, ‘You should see me because, you know, I represent the U.S. president in Korea,’ ” Mr. Hubbard said he had told Mr. Bolton. “Whereupon, he hung up.”
I’m with R. Elgin here
Lord, no one is going to drop anything. Yonhap is just playing a red herring to stir up a furor over the US doing something nuclear which is not going to happen.
It is worth remembering that Yonhap is a quasi-government news agency, making it a sometime mouthpiece for the People’s Participatory Government (components of which are arguably sometime mouthpieces for the DPRK). This is propaganda pure and simple. If Yonhap or its backers were spoiling for war, they could have found scientists to tell them that the fallout would be minimal. All too often (and WAY too often in South Korea), shoddy journalistic coverage is worse than none at all. I WOULD like to know accurate fallout and casualty data for a scenario in which a North Korean nuclear facility blew up or melted down (due to poor maintenance, shoddy safety work, etc).
JTB, you say that only an idiot would believe humans created a whole in the ozone layer and then you use a Hollywood movie to back up your claims that global warming does not exist. Oooooookay.
We’ll never know how many casualties there will be until we try it. In the name of science let’s launch. One MIRV’d Polaris missile should do the trick (no need to waste Tridents). Quick, before the mineshaft gap becomes too large.
james wrote:
Me? a kyopo? I am afraid I do not now nor do I ever believe that will be possible.
i know, but a couple days ago someone lumped you in with the mindless kyopo hive because they assumed you were koram or something.
I still maintain, though, that a shore on the Pacific doth not an Asian country make. Hawaii has a large cultural influence from Asia but that is about it.
i’m not saying the u.s. is an asian country, just that it has many legitimate interests in the region. the geography is only part of that.
u.s. isolationism would be bad for asia and bad for the u.s.
That is a statement I would agree with. Koram… on one side I am a little flattered and on the other side I wonder what I did to deserve it…
Kromozone,
“S. Korea never should have dismantled their own nuclear weapons program. Kick the U.S. out, stock up on nukes”
I suspect that SK did not dismantle the whole program. Pres. Chun was dumb but not that dumb. The program just went underground. I believe SK has some nukes, not much but some. And, you don’t have to kick anybody out. You can make nuke bombs right under the Yongsan Army Post and nobody will know about it.
Baduk - “It?€™s a completely straight forward reaction mechanism!!”
Well, earth atmosphere is more complex than the laboratory setting. There may be many reactions that we may not aware of. In addition to being bad with numbers, many of these scientists are hippies. Yes, they are anti-government nutcases proving only into data that can hurt the U.S. government. Other anti-American (French-German?) governments love to back them up. Then, the global warming theory or ozone theory become the truth and the worldwide anthem for enviro nuts.
If you think science is done in impartial manner, you have a lot to learn. Many scientists have hidden agenda beyond, of course making enough money to feed their family. Sometimes they behave like rock stars. They want to attract, shock and enslave the audience with their ChickenLittle warning.
And, I used to be an environmental chemist studying water purification.
And, I used to be an environmental chemist studying water purification.
Yeah, well my former professor Dr. Rowland was a researcher of atmospheric chemistry (the kind of environmental chemistry that deals with problems such as those of the ozone layer) and he would beg to differ with your opinion.
If you want to go bash global warming as a flawed theory go ahead (though the theory’s flaws do not necessarily negate the existence of global warming as much as they simply show how little we understand with crystal-clear clarity), but don’t go lumping the ozone hole with the global warming issue just because they both happen to take place above our heads.
Seriously, you’re sounding more and more like a nut job, and I’ll say that regardless of whose side of the issue you usually argue.
Yes, you can call me a nutjob. But I think like Pres. Bush and other Republicans. I guess you are a proponent of “Kyoto protocol (treaty?)”. The official position of the U.S. is not to follow this pinko environmental madness.
I am a democrat, but I salute the Republicans on this back boney stance.
Yes, you can call me a nutjob.
Okay. You’re a nutjob.
Now would you like me to call you a cab?
But I think like Pres. Bush and other Republicans.
Then what the hell do you repeatedly go on about being a Democrat for?
I guess you are a proponent of ?€œKyoto protocol (treaty?)?€?.
You guess so? Well, first of all, the Kyoto Protocol’s issues are about global warming, not ozone depletion. This is part of your problem, you’re treating the two issues like they’re interchangeable, which they are not.
The official position of the U.S. is not to follow this pinko environmental madness.
The official US position until very recently has been to do nothing until more research is done, but according to the Bush administration’s own recent research that Rush Limbaugh was railing against, there apparently is something to global warming.
The Republican opposition to Kyoto is that (a) the evidence is not all in, although the recent study undermines this argument; and (b) too much burden to change is placed on developed countries and too little on developing countries.
While I agree that developing nations should also pull their own weight, I think that the Bush administration tactic of doing nothing is considerably worse. If they would actually come up with a better solution instead of finding more sources for fossil fuels, I’d be supportive.
I am a democrat, but I salute the Republicans on this back boney stance.
Well when they got that spine installed, they forgot to attach the top part.
Somebody asked me for the proof. Here is one.
http://car.donga.com/board/boa....._work=view
In the interests of eliminating a few misconceptions:
Quote: “US will drop a nuclear bomb when the winds are blowing toward S.Korea? What?€™s the logic in that?”
It’s impossible to guarantee wind direction and speed at a potential target at any particular time. Indeed Murphy’s Law guarantees that the wind speed and direction will change abruptly and randomly. And if a nuclear weapon had to be used by the US on a target in DPRK it would be in a retaliatory situation, and then it would be a matter of such urgency that the wind direction and speed would be completely immaterial.
Quote: “Nuclear warheads are quite a bit more potent than they were during WW2…”
The Hiroshima bomb was 15 kilotons. Certainly there are a lot of bigger ones out there, but nukes are now also made considerably smaller. I think some may be as small as .1 kiloton (one tenth of a kiloton). Indeed, I think some nuclear warheads are designed so that they can have the yield adjusted by the aircrew or missile crew during the arming process just before delivery.
There is a proposal currently on the table for the US to design some new and smaller bunker buster nukes, in that the 400 kt one mentioned in the study is indeed way too big; I think this size was originally designed to go after hardened Soviet missile silos.
If you watched the Presidential debates last fall you might recall that Kerry brought up this subject; it was the one time I saw him get really emotional. He was absolutely opposed to this idea, in that he felt it would make “first use” of a nuclear weapon more likely, something of course that he was happy to attibute to a possible second Bush administration (just like the authors of this study are trying to use it as a political weapon against Bush).
This is nonsense of course, a nuke is a nuke in terms of the political ramifications of first use. People everywhere will be frightened out of their wits if one is ever used again, no matter what the size is. So the US might as well build ones more suitable to taking out deep buried targets with a minimum of “side effects”, while continuing to reduce the overall size of its complete nuclear arsenals as per current arms reduction efforts and treaties.
The other posters are right, this whole topic of a US first use is nonsense given an indefinite continuation of the current situation vs. NorK. Any number of things could go wrong, for example an aircraft pilot could be hit by AA fire just as he releases a weapon and it could go off target, landing in the PRC. Or the radioactive fallout could drift into PRC or into ROK.
Even in a retaliatory situation (DPRK has fired a nuke first, or has opened up with the fabled artillery/rocket barrage (25,000 rounds per minute) on Seoul) the US would use only the weapons needed to destroy the targets selected. If this could be done with conventional warheads they would be the first choice.
Small nuclear warheads might be needed to go after the deep underground complexes where nuclear capable missiles or aircraft might be stored, to collapse them or seal off the entrances. Probably several small ones would be used in preference to one huge one, which would indeed have the potential blast and fallout effects feared by this so-called study.
And why would the US attack a functional NorK nuclear reactor in a war situation? It’s not an immediate tactical military target as it represents only a long term threat.
If the DPRK emulated Saddam and moved their missiles and/or nuclear weapons into a populated area US would be faced with a dilemma. But this also would make no sense; if DPRK has started a massive war already US would be forced to attack such weapons regardless of where they are. If no war has yet started then they are just as safe hidden in underground complexes, indeed more so.
So the dilemma of a possible US “first use” of nukes presents itself only in three situations:
1) a massive NorK conventional artillery barrage on the South from across the DMZ. Especially if such a barrage were being made by thousands of individual artillery pieces firing from protected caves, supplemented by tactical rocket launchers on trucks darting out from caves to fire and then returning back into them quickly to reload.
The presence of US battalions of multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) and equivalent ROK systems, as well as conventional US and ROK artillery, is meant to present a conventional alternative to nukes — but such sytems would have to attack conventional NorK troops in the open.
The individual cave postions of the conventional NorK artillery tubes would be extremely hard to disable by conventional counterbattery fires. The truck-mounted NorK multiple rocket launchers are extremely vulnerable while out in the open (if you can target and hit them before they scuttle back into their caves).
The new ATACMS being procured by ROK will give it a conventional warhead method of attacking Pyongyang, presumably as a purely retaliatory measure for such a DPRK conventional artillery/rocket attack on Seoul.
http://asiansecurity.blog-city.com/, Tues 26 April 05, “South Korea’s Growing Missile Force”.
2) Same as #1 except DPRK uses chemical weapons. In this case a nuclear response would be almost mandatory, as the US no longer possesses the ability to reply with chemical weapons of its own.
3) A civil war or massive unrest in NorK, coupled with the sudden detection of NorK missiles with possible nuclear capabilities moving into firing position, presenting a dilemma to ROK and the US if they believed NorK was going to irrationally strike first.
Hopefully though in this situation the PRC would be forced to intervene and invade NorK to stabilize the situation, before it came to a possible irrational launch by DPRK.
Conclusion: This whole dilemma can be resolved (and removed from being a US responsibility) by the procurement of a couple dozen nukes by both ROK and Japan. They could emulate the NorK program, putting the warheads on short-range ballistic missiles and then hiding them in deep underground caves, to be only brought out for firing after a NorK attack in scenarios 1, 2, and 3.
Wouldn’t it be wonderfully ironic if they could be mounted on Soviet Scuds? I’m sure Russia could be easily persuaded to sell ROK and Japan its latest models and assist with the proper fitting of the nuclear warheads, in exchange for good hard currency. A few warheads could be saved for aircraft delivery as well; USAF could train ROK and Japanese air forces on low-level tactical delivery of nuclear weapons with latest US model aircraft (F15’s).
With such an invulnerable “second strike” capability by both ROK and Japan their need for US protection would be gone. Saves a lot of defense spending on conventional forces, plus the US could leave and save its own money too. Asia will be for the Asians again, o happy day.
This seems so simple and logical a solution that it’s bound to happen eventually (assuming we can avoid a war till then).
Baduk, that link, the first photo, thats funny. The rest are nice and entertaining. My son is being stationed in Korea, CRC, he got married before going, I advised him aganist it as Korean women are some hot chicks. I know, been married to one for 34 years now. Goodluck with arguing with the right wingers.
“Yes, you can call me a nutjob. But I think like Pres. Bush and other Republicans.”
Priceless…
paul h, you gave a very interesting informative round-up of firt-use and second-use of nukes. not sure about your conclusions, though.
paul h wrote:
Wouldn?€™t it be wonderfully ironic if they could be mounted on Soviet Scuds? I?€™m sure Russia could be easily persuaded to sell ROK and Japan its latest models and assist with the proper fitting of the nuclear warheads, in exchange for good hard currency.
is this the same russia that hasn’t even worked out a peace treaty with japan (because of sticky things like territorial disputes)?
and since this doesn’t all occur in a vacuum, what would china’s response be to japan (and korea) getting nukes? would they be the first to toast japan at the next meeting of the nuclear club? or would a nervous china now be convinced that building up the military to cold war ussr-level strength is an absolute necessary, which would make major conventional war a more dangeous possibility?
With such an invulnerable ?€œsecond strike?€? capability by both ROK and Japan their need for US protection would be gone. Saves a lot of defense spending on conventional forces, plus the US could leave and save its own money too. Asia will be for the Asians again, o happy day.
This seems so simple and logical a solution that it?€™s bound to happen eventually (assuming we can avoid a war till then).
that’s a big assumption, considering how the chinese would react to this.
also, how would this eliminate a need for major conventional forces? nukes may be good for deterring a major invasion by a known foe, but what about a minor incursion by an enemy that is unknown? who are you going to shoot your nukes at when operatives from an unknown country have simultaneously attacked five of your major cities from within?
i don’t know. this sounds like pie in the sky. i think you know a lot about weapons systems, but you are too eager to find a ’simple solution.’ this is what someone once told me about medical school: if it were easy, then everyone would do it. i think something like that applies here: if the solution were that simple, we’d have been trying it long ago.
asia will never be for asians only, not with a need for outside allies to balance hostile neighbors, and certainly not with an economically integrated world like ours. if you are hoping for a day when america can politically and military isolate itself from everyone more than a couple hundred miles away, then you must work for a day when america has virtually zero economic ties with anybody outside there.
and let’s not forget, the united states is just two miles from its closest asian neighbor. after mexico and canada, the closest country to the u.s.a. is russia. and with guam and the northern mariana islands where they are, the u.s.a. is essentially an asian country for whom asia is also for it.
Concluding that Guam (US territory) and Saipan (technicaly knows as the Confederation of the Northern Marianas Islands-a US protectorate), by virtue of their geographical position in the South Pacific puts the US in Asia is a bit of a stretch, don’t you think? The part of Russia that you refer to, while technically in Asia does not equate Russia culturally, economically or politically to an Asian country in the traditional sense. As for isolating its self from Canada and Mexico, the US is already trying to do this to a certain extent by requiring passports (or at least proposing to) at ALL border crossings including the Carribean when they have not be required in the past. On top of this, there are plenty of people who would love to have the fence along the southern US border extend from the Pacific to the Carribean to keep the people from Mexico out. That said I do agree with your other comments.
james wrote:
Concluding that Guam (US territory) and Saipan (technicaly knows as the Confederation of the Northern Marianas Islands-a US protectorate), by virtue of their geographical position in the South Pacific puts the US in Asia is a bit of a stretch, don?€™t you think? The part of Russia that you refer to, while technically in Asia does not equate Russia culturally, economically or politically to an Asian country in the traditional sense.
to those in that part of russia it does. and it is russia’s reason for being involved in these issues. vladivostokers probably have a greater stake in what happens in china, north korea, south korea, or japan than what happens in europe.
anyway, if australia is part of the ‘asia sphere,’ then so is the u.s.a. (besides, north korea can hit us in our closeby territories, so that counts for something). and hawaii, our 50th state, is considered culturally very much part of asia in some respects.
geographically speaking, the u.s.a. is just two countries over from north korea or china. you could literally walk from the united states to north korea and pass through only one other country, weather and immigration bureaucrats permitting.
bring along a good pair of skechers.
in conclusion: the usa is at least on the edge of asia, if not part of asia, just like it is with latin america.
As for isolating its self from Canada and Mexico, the US is already trying to do this to a certain extent by requiring passports (or at least proposing to) at ALL border crossings including the Carribean when they have not be required in the past.
i know. i mentioned this my blog (marmot’s spam blogger won’t let me send the link, but do a word search for ‘terrible burden’).
anyway, i was talking about america economically isolating itself ‘from everyone more than a couple hundred miles away’, so canada, mexico, cuba, the bahamas, and the dominican republic and a lot of the caribbean still would fall under my theoretical isolationist sphere. asia, australia, europe, and africa would not. neither would south america.
and forget about antarctica! they can fend for themselves. bunch of penguin-shaggin earth firsters! who needs ‘em!
On top of this, there are plenty of people who would love to have the fence along the southern US border extend from the Pacific to the Carribean to keep the people from Mexico out.
i know. i think such people fantasize that we can just close ourselves off to all the issues and problems brewing in the world and that it won’t affect us adversely in any way. and while i respect and appreciate paul h’s knowledge of military stuff, i don’t agree with his conclusions on the i.r. side.
That said I do agree with your other comments.
that’s why people thought you were part of the kyopo hive. resistance to the norg is futile.
Me? a kyopo? I am afraid I do not now nor do I ever believe that will be possible. I still maintain, though, that a shore on the Pacific doth not an Asian country make. Hawaii has a large cultural influence from Asia but that is about it.
James,
I wouldn’t be too flattered. Your erratic and awkward prose style, coupled with an underlying emotionality in your writing, are the factors which led me to the same conclusion. I would be very surprised to learn that you are a native English speaker.
Wonder whose alter-ego this is?
Finally, I get a Korean flag next to my handle instead of a U.S. one! Don’t mind my comment. Just wanted to see the flag. ?…??…??…??…??…?
Aadam,
Not that it has anything to do with my opinions that I post on this blog but I am, in fact a native English speaker. I would be the first to admit that I do make comments that could be articulated better and my computer keyboard tends to stick creating unwanted typing errors. I do, however, find your inference to my postings being somehow of little or no value because of underlying emotions somewhat offensive. I would not go to the trouble of reading the postings on this blog, much less write anything myself if the subject matter discussed here if I was not at least mildly passionate about it. Straw man attacks based on the way I feel about something are uncalled for and contribute nothing to the conversation. Confucius said if the name fits, the words will flow. If what you are suggesting is a more scholastic forum then perhaps you should take that up with Marmot.
[...] r recalling this post that scrutinized South Koreas strategic status. I also liked Kromozones comment at the Marmots Hole [...]
Aadam,
Not that it has anything to do with my opinions that I post on this blog but I am, in fact a native English speaker. I would be the first to admit that in being in a rush to comment, some of my comments could be articulated better and my computer keyboard tends to stick creating unwanted typing and other errors. I do, however, find your inference to my postings being somehow of little or no value because of underlying emotions somewhat offensive. I would not go to the trouble of reading the postings on this blog, much less writing anything myself about the subject matter discussed here if I was not at least mildly passionate about it. Regardless of whether or not you agree with my opinions, straw man attacks based on the way I feel about something are uncalled for and contribute nothing to the conversation. Confucius said if the name fits, the words will flow. If what you are suggesting is a more scholastic forum then perhaps you should take that up with Marmot.
James,
Didn’t mean to attack you…really. You wondered why people might think something about you, I provided you with 2 possible reasons. Chill out. The “inference” you mention does not, in fact, exist.
If I really wanted to get into it, I’d point out that your reaction to a non-existent “inference” raises a counter-inference…namely, that I find the opinions of non-English speakers (or, not to put too fine a point on it, ethnic Koreans) to be ”of little or no value”. That would be an unsupported inference, and were it raised more blatantly, I might take offense at it.
To reiterate, chill out. And try to read more carefully. The world is more than attacks and defense.
Is there medical treatment now for multiple troll personality disorder?
james wrote:
Koram?€? on one side I am a little flattered and on the other side I wonder what I did to deserve it?€?
then ‘aaron aanderson’ wrote:
I wouldn?€™t be too flattered. Your erratic and awkward prose style, coupled with an underlying emotionality in your writing, are the factors which led me to the same conclusion. I would be very surprised to learn that you are a native English speaker.
so far no one has played the ‘name that kyopo’ contest, but i think we can see there are some serious flaws to the idea that someone can ’spot the kyopo’ if james is being lumped with korean americans.
it also shows that there are non-kyopos who write with emotion, have awkward or erratic prose style, and may even tend to take the nationalist korean view of things.
in other words, the stereotype and the insults that come from them, are pretty much unwarranted. i say to you the same thing i would say to the guy who runs that obnoxiously mean-spirited anti-’engrish teacher’ blog: you need to reexamine your own biases.
SO SUMI!!
Nora Sumi Park above scoffs at the idea that letting Japan and South Korea go nuclear might be a practical solution to the N. Korean nuclear crisis, saying
“that?€™s a big assumption, considering how the chinese would react to this.”
Exactly. The Chinese would not stand for it. And they’d have two ways to rectify it:
1. Go to war against Japan and South Korea
2. Convince N. Korea to relinquish its nukes, on the condition that Japan and S. Korea subsequently do likewise.
China, of course, will choose No. 2, so this does indeed seem the most logical and simple resolution.
Hopefully the Chinese will realize this and do No. 2 preemptively before/strong Japan and S. Korea join them in the nuke club.
ack. I shouldn’t even try to fiddle with html.
For that matter, Mr. Marmot, you should fix the typo in the title.
i wrote:
i?€™m not saying the u.s. is an asian country
but before that i wrote:
the u.s.a. is essentially an asian country for whom asia is also for it
bad nora! bad, inconsistent nora!
SO SUMI!!
oh, i’ve never heard that one before. ^o)
Sumi: By any chance do you have a sister named TakemeforallI’mworth?
Actually, that’s the kind of litigiously-named girl I’m looking for.
my sisters are named griffith, ueno, and jurassic (she’s the oldest).
so far no one has played the ?€?name that kyopo?€™ contest,
While I would like to speculate in a “Name that troll contest,” I just don’t have the dedication and perseverance for jihad against my blog comment “enemies” to give it the effort it requires. So much for Asian work ethic
my sisters are named griffith, ueno, and jurassic (she?€™s the oldest).
Are they cute?
I was going to play “name that racist”, but there’s no way I could possibly hold a candle to Nora…she expertly deduced my inner seething racism with no more evidence than a few lines of type…well done, sweetheart. Let me save you the time and energy..the “inferences” in this post clearly reveal that I club baby seals for fun (but only the girls, because of course I’m a raging misogynist), blow up abortion clinics, and burn assorted religious symbols onto a variety of lawns in my hometown, which is also clearly a hotbed of hick racism and prejudice.
Look, if I want to connect the dots and make my own picture, I’d say this. The very idea that the US would drop a nuke on Yongbyon as a first-strike, making certain to “check the winds” in order to kill as many S. Koreans as possible, is so ridiculous that it really requires very little discussion. A lot of “Bush-haters”, regardless of their feelings on the matter, realize this. It doesn’t take a PhD in Meteorology to undestand that this concept is absurd, nor does it require much of a solid grounding in weapons systems to differentiate the ramifications of dropping a nuke (on anything) from those associated with conventional weaponry.
So, if the vastness of the evidence militates against buying into something, and yet you believe it, you are engaging in a WILLFUL credulity. You let your emotions get away with you, and now you believe in something which is, on its face, really stupid.
How did that happen? Well, normally that happens when you approach the world from a particularly strong bias…exactly what you have accused me of having, Nora.
I see it the other way. I think this story is so absurd on its face that you really have to have a lot of faith in your Anti-American bias to even consider that it might happen.
How do I get painted, then, as a racist and a troll? The funny part of the whole thing is that I was giving James’ comments a lot MORE credit when I thought that English was his second language. And I AM surprised to find out that it is not. Now I see his ramblings as the effluvium of a disorganized mind, rather than the earnest comments of someone translating his own thoughts.
Again, the very idea that the United States would behave in the manner presented in the article constitutes an utter abrogation of logic, in combination with an overarching racism that you couldn’t impute to me if you tried. (Sigh….)…which you’re about to do. And you’ll be wrong again.
As HK (to whom I’ve now been compared) might say…Later, bitches.
I’m not a racist, Nora, and I resent your calling me one
re: A. Anderson’s #57.
dude, you have lots of issues, don’t ya? stop digging.
i voted for bush once. didn’t make that mistake twice.
(i wrote in nixon.)
Aadam,
I would like to point out the fact that I did not call you a racist. I have no control over the conclusions drawn by others about you. As for the organization of my mind, I do not think that comment was warranted. I intentionally did not respond to your last post in the hopes that you would come to the conclusion that things were ?€?cool?€™. Continued attacks on me, however, cause me to reconsider this position.
It just so happens that while I am a native English speaker, I speak Korean both at home and at work and have done so for many, many years. If you have ever spent a long enough amount of time immersed in a foreign language than you know that it is possible to loose some of the polish that you once possessed in your native tongue. Add to this work, distractions, being tired and in a hurry and I think my articulation issues become much more understandable if not reasonably expected. While the Marmot enjoys having scholastic discussions take place, I think it is abundantly clear that there is plenty of room for less than serious postings as well. Accordingly, I have made comments in the past that are less than scholastic in nature. If the Marmot deems that the purpose of this blog is for purely scholastic discussion than I will comply as soon as he makes that announcement.
As for your argument that it is ridiculous to entertain the idea that the US would drop an atomic weapon on North Korea and that in preparation to do so it would consider the weather patterns and their expected impact on the fallout pattern, I happen to agree. I do not think, however, that it is particularly constructive to accuse those that post here of being anti-American unless they claim to be so. Disapproval of the current administration or belief that the current administration is not beyond committing acts that the individual considers to be wrong does not constitute being anti-American and shouldn?€™t be labeled as such.
Furthermore, while there are plenty of issues that I disagree with Nora on, I do find her postings to be stimulating and would appreciate it if you would offer everyone that posts here the dignity of refraining from calling names. If you disagree with an argument presented here than attack the argument but not the person. Surely your oratorical skills are up to such a simple task.
Good for you Nora.
James,
Allow me to apologize (and mean it) for the “disorganized mind” comment. Not cool, I agree. I’m really done with this…I wasn’t looking for a fight, and I didn’t really expect to get one.
I am aware that you didn’t call me a racist. That post was in response to Nora, with whom I still vehemently disagree…again, doesn’t matter.
And I was planning to leave things “cool” as well, which is how I prefer them, so if everybody’s cool with that, I’ll be cruising on…
P.S. Your last couple of posts, James, were well-thought out, mature, and in no way erratic. Sorry I said anything.
No worries Aadam. I do hope that you will come back to discuss issues pertaining to Korea. You have some valid points to make.
To what J. VanZanten said, amen.
Nora said: “…this sounds like pie in the sky. i think you know a lot about weapons systems, but you are too eager to find a ?€™simple solution.?€™ this is what someone once told me about medical school: if it were easy, then everyone would do it. i think something like that applies here: if the solution were that simple, we?€™d have been trying it long ago.”
It’s actually more of a classic management technique, maybe from business school. Politely if not colloquially phrased as “getting the problem off one’s back and onto the back of those who should have primary responsibility for it” (the problem in this case being the defense of ROK).
Why are there so many crazy neocons and right wing hawks in Corea? No war please.
Coreans don’t fight Coreans, we need peaceful reunification not nuclelar war.
Bardok,
Yes you are a Korean liberal democrat chemist who wants to nuke Corea and I am mother Teresa reborn.
There’s no such thing as Corea. But please Marmot, throw more meat in the shark tank before everyone turns on each other. Without fresh offerings, we have Kyopo witchhunts, internecine attacks and Nora is on the verge of skipping any middlemen and simply responding to her own posts!
All this over a very shoddy report by Yonhap!
Bardok,
Yes you are a Korean liberal democrat chemist who wants to nuke Corea and I am mother Teresa reborn.
welcome back, terry. how was your trip? did you meet the pope?
is god really a buddhist?
Without fresh offerings, we have Kyopo witchhunts, internecine attacks and Nora is on the verge of skipping any middlemen and simply responding to her own posts!
i don’t have much use for middlemen.
middlewomen?
I love these “discussions” but the real reason I’m commenting is to see if my bass gravatar shows up as advertised.
Hot damn, it did!
Sorry for the interruption.
LOL.
?¼œiAnd I was planning to leave things ?€œcool?€? as well, which is how I prefer them, so if everybody?€™s cool with that, I?€™ll be cruising on?€?
Not likely. I’m sure he’ll be back under a new or recycled name, or continue with the one he’s using presently elsewhere.
Jesus, leave it alone.
slim, please tell me that picture isn’t you.
ps perhaps mr marmot is losing interest in this board.
jyc, you’ve mentioned a few times (and in a few threads on this blog) that you think people are using more than one nick. So, who do you think is doing it?
Agreed. At least within the context of this thread, jyc has been intimating that I am using other identities.
You’re sniffing down the wrong trail, hound-dog.
And I wonder who it is you think I am?
I think it’s sorta unfair to say that Yonhap is being irresponsible reporting this news, because, let’s face it, if I type in “North Korea” on Google News search site, and I hit this news, is Google irresponsible? For people like us who scrounge around the net for any piece of NK related news, any news is news that we want to read. If Yonhap failed to report what Bush administration has been saying, which is “we won’t invade NK,” then suredly Yonhap is biased. But if the general Korean public refuses to believe the Bush statement, you can accuse the general Korean public for bias, but you can’t say that Yonhap is the one to blame.
But, seriously, if United States felt no choice but to use bunker busters on DPRK, does it really take a rocket scientist to figure out that US probably does not want the fallout to land on China, Russia, or Japan, who are indeed, very powerful economically and militarily. Since China is to Korea’s west, Russia to the North and Japan to the East, it makes sense that should US feel the NEED to drop the big-one, it will hope that the wind blows southwards (or better yet, don’t blow at all). Using nukes can trigger WWIII, and since Russia and China are nuclear powers, and jittery about US military presence, the fallguy will probably be SK, since Koreans will be pissed off at the use of nukes regardless of where the FO lands.
I mean, I agree with most of you, this scenario will probably never see the light of day, since US can always sue for peace with DPRK and abandon SK. And of the crappy choices Washington has, this seems better than bunker busters.
As to whether or not Yonhap is irresponsible in their reporting, you mention the possibility that they are and you mention the possibility that the general population is as well but you do not look at the population that perhaps Bush has lost credibility in their eyes thus creating a rational bias. In this case, I think that given the somewhat anti-American position the Roh administration has assumed and the fact that Yonhap is the national news service it is reasonable to assume that this type of reporting has much more propaganda value than any potential news value.
Looks like the shizzle be hittin’ the fan: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05.....r=homepage
Money shot: “The North Koreans have learned how to use irrationality as a bargaining tool,” a senior American official said Thursday evening. “We can’t tell what they are doing.” Sounds like a lot of the comments on this board, bwahahhahah!
S korea should build nuclear weapons right now to defend threate posing from both North Korea and also nuclear weapon that could be dropped on North by U.S. which will kill milions of Skorea.
Since U.S. will sacrifice millions of Skoreans to invade Nkorea we should build nuke and launch it before U.S. can when wind is blowing toward China.
If we are going to die anyway we are not going to die alone.
Korean government finally turning to the right direction?
http://english.chosun.com/w21d.....60021.html
The best solution is to make Japan a bad guy. The U.S. and SK pretend to be peacemakers while Japan piles up harsh words on NK. Then, one day without warning Japanese airplanes bomb the heck out of suspected NK nuclear sites (with conventional bombs, of course), just like Israelies did to Iranian nuke facility.
NK may shoot some RhoDongs to Japan and Japan may see limited destruction. However, NK navy is almost non-existent and these missile attacks will be short-lived. And, there are some pro-NK JKs and Japan can use them as “human shields” around important facilities.
To appologize for what they did during the last century, Japan can take some damage for the benefit of Korea and the U.S.
I see Japan as the tie breaker.
baduk
due to the constitutional limitation now, though some politicians are trying to amend, it is far much more than realistic that japanese bomb squads flying even over to dokudo…
Whoa baduk,you’re kidding right? Beyond the fact that Japan would have to change its constitution to do what you propose, no country is likely to want to take even a few missile strikes, especially is the north does have biological or chemical weapons they are likely to load them up on the missile. Besides the moment Japan attacks Korea all Koreans, inlcuding the southerners will turn on Japan and they will become enemy number one. Plus it doesn’t matter who attacks, Japan, the US, or South Korea, a full out war is likely to start.
No, I don’t think a full-scale war will happen. As I wrote, NK has very weak Navy. And, China may curb NK from shooting missiles at Japan. China has been helping NK, and when NK turns into a real “rogue nation” then China looks bad.
After Israel did a surprise attack on Iran, Iran just took it.
The same thing can happen here. NK may just sit tight. And, may just show pictures of dead bodies and denounce Japan, but may not do anything. China may stop NK from doing anything!
NK will have no justification to attack SK because SK hates Japane as well. And, it is not the U.S. who attacked NK.
I know it is a long shot. But, sometimes a long shot does work out. And, who is better than Japan when it comes to “surprise attack”? Tora, Tora, and Tora.
baduk, please get your facts correct. Israel attacked Iraq not Iran. Comparing Iraq in 81 to North Korea now is silly. Among many differences, one was that at that time the US was supporting Iraq which is a large reason the Iraqis did not strike back. So what the North doesn’t have a navy, one does not need a navy to start a war. In event of any military event, China will have next no control over the North. The North doen’t really listen to China right now, why do you think they would listen to them if they were attacked? Your idea is well beyond long shot and the first consideration one would take before considering any action is what is most likely to work. I think anyone would say the current action, which is not much, has a far higher chance to work then a preemptive Japanese strike.
I am not even getting into any of the details regarding whether any country even knows where the North Korean bombs are or all of the nuclear sites. The chances are even if someone attacked North Korea they would miss some.
Nathaniel,
“The North doen?€™t really listen to China right now, why do you think they would listen to them if they were attacked?”
- I do not think anybody know the relationship between NK and China well enough to make this statement. I am one of the view that Hu holds strong sway of KJI. I think these two are in the master-slave mode.
China probably does not want war and they can stop NK. Hu can call Kim and tell him “Do nothing!”. I think Kim will listen. If he does not, one of his pro-Chinese faction will assassinate him.
“The chances are even if someone attacked North Korea they would miss some.”
- If we get the most it then we could push NK nuke program back by a decade. If we don’t get much, then NK would have no reason to start a war. We win either way.
The Japanese attack will show NK the power of free countries and may even speed the regime change in NK.
I think it is a win-win situation.
You can’t push back the North Korean nuke program by a decade because it is a finished program. So what if you take out their production facilities, they still have some bombs they can use. “If we don’t get much, then NK would have no reason to start a war” That is just silly, they would have a legit reason to start a war as soon as they were attacked. “The Japanese attack will show the NK the power of free countries and may even speed regime change in NK” You must be living in some sort of dream world. Attacks by outside forces generally solidify support for the current leader as the people rally around them, especially if that outside power is a historical enemy as Japan is.
You may believe China and North Korea have a master slave relationship, but you likely would be the only one. Within the last 3 months I have heard talks by a journalist, a NGO worker, and a former analyst for the CIA, all of whom have had numerous dealings with China and North Korea. All of them say that Chinese diplomats have admitted off the recrod they have little control over North Korea and would prefer if they were no longer allies. I trust them a little more then I trust you who has consitenly shown to have way out there ideas that do not seemed to be grounded in any sort of reality.
China’s main interest in this, right or wrong, is to see NK transform gradually, since a sudden crisis would create a flood of refugees and potentially destabilize the situation in China’s northeastern provinces. They may also wish to see NKunder any form of governmentas a buffer state between them and the US. That is all. Beyond that, I don’t think they have any vested interest in whether it’s the current or another regime that’s running the place. It’s just a questionfor themof preventing a chaotic situation that they can’t control.
Likewise for South Korea’s motives in promoting the Sunshine Policythe idea is to manage a gradual transformation of the country, since there appears to be a great fear of the humanitarian and economic crisis that would unfold with a sudden collapse. (And yes, there’s already a humanitarian crisis in the North, but there are those who would evidently prefer to see it contained there and not spilling over the North’s bordersagain, questionable though this position may be.)
Despite all that, a sudden collapse may yet occur. Certainly, the amount of information coming out of (and presumably getting into) the North seems to have gone up dramatically in the last year or so. More and more reports seem to be coming out of China about people crossing back and forth more or less freely over the China-NK border, videos and DVDs getting into the North, people making cellphone calls from inside the North, and so on; and with the increased mobility inside the country (evidently) due to (a) market reforms and (b) a collapse in internal travel controls (see Andrei Lankov’s many informative articles in the Korea Times, for example), news from the northern parts of NKwhere there is much more contact with Chinais probably spreading to other parts of the country far from the border. There seems to be a dynamic at work in the North that is already well underway, and may precipitate a turn of events far more dramatic and sudden than China or the South would wish to see; hence the steps that various governments are taking to plan for the contingency of a sudden collapse. (I’m sure even SK is making such plans, despite the recently published story about their not wishing to make joint plans with the US.)
Who knows what the future will bring?
Nathaniel and Curious
You guys are just repeating what is printed on the newspapers. That is what China wants you to believe.
The Chinese has been consistently spending 10% of their GNP in purchasing weapon systems. They already have enough nuclear capability to fight the U.S. if necessary.
However, they have been supplying NK with oil despite the heavy objections from the U.S. and the world community. Everybody knows oil is the most important material for modern warfare. Why China is doing this?
I believe KJI is the puppet of the Chinese communist party. If you ask for the evidence, I only give the historical fact that China rescued Kim’s regime from the total collapse during the Korean War. And, the recent hurried trip by KJI to China on Hu?€™s prompt that was followed by the explosion at YongChun. And, the SinYuiJu city debacle.
I only have circumstantial evidences. If you were Chairman Hu, would you let this fact slip out to the press? And, reveal the fact that he started the NK nuke crisis in the first place? I don’t think so! The communication between Hu and KJI would be top secret among top secrets to both governments. Unless you are a part of the inner circle within these two governments, you would have no idea.
So stop regurgitating stupid newscasters. They have no idea about the real forces that move history.
I believe that China’s aim goes beyond driving out the U.S. forces from SK. It wants to eat up SK and use Korean troops against Japan.
When the last U.S. troops leave Korea, SK will automatically belong to China’s sphere of influence. The unification will come in the form of NK’s communist party ruling entire Korea.
China trust KJI to be loyal. Hu will appoint KJI to be the ruler of Korea.
Korean people will have to listen to Chairman Hu through KJI. No more talk about being the “balancer”, but just to be happy being alive and