North Korea moves troops, light machine guns deep into DMZ

TIME TO MAKE $$$

Registered
Forum Member
Jul 24, 2001
11,493
0
0
50
TORONTO, CANADA
If anyone has not been paying attention in the last few days North Korea has turned up the heat big time. They have moved light machine guns with crews just a few hundred feet from the border of South Korea against the 1953 treaty that ended the war. North Korea has also prepared to start their nuclear reactors and is throwing the UN inspectors out of the country. China a few weeks ago sent them 20 tons of a chemical that is used to turn spent fuel rods into plutonium. Usually North Korea has about half of their 1.1 million man army on the border, but now they have most of it massed on the border with south Korea. Please tell me again how Saddam is more dangerous when N. Korea is showing clear signs of aggression?

Granted, I think NK is playing a game here so they could be offered $
 

TIME TO MAKE $$$

Registered
Forum Member
Jul 24, 2001
11,493
0
0
50
TORONTO, CANADA
bush-ww3-is-mine.jpg
 

Chopsticks

Fish Head
Forum Member
Feb 15, 2002
1,459
2
0
52
Arlington, TX (But a Missourian at heart)
Could this be a global scale "bluff?" It's hard to say. Or are they this prepared to basically go against the US and the allied nations of the UN? South Korea's dislike of the United States has no bearing on what would happen with a full scale assault from the North Koreans. This, in my opinion, puts the US facing conflict from 2 different angles. I could be mistaken, but aren't there over 30 thousand plus US troops stationed over there? I think the US has sent war ships towards Japan and has stated that they would shoot down any missles which happen to launch that way. Hopefully the US negotiations will result in a nuclear freeze (again) for the North Koreans and lift their embargo. Let's see how far this game of chicken will take us. No matter what the position or who controls the power, it always seems to lead to some sort of male cockfighting, one way or another.
 

ferdville

Registered User
Forum Member
Dec 24, 1999
3,165
5
0
78
So Cal
United States does have significant numbers of troops and equipment in that area. Pentagon higher ups have said that we could fight two wars (Iraq and North Korea) at the same time without compromising. Is this a good idea? I wouldn't think so.
 

Myron

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 14, 2001
764
0
0
Hamilton, Ontario
In quite a bit of irony, the country that I think could be the biggest factor in this whole thing is Russia. Once believed to be the country that was going to start WWIII with the U.S., may actually be the country that prevents it. I have no idea if they are allies or not, but they still have a lot of nukes.

I also don't trust Germany, Austria or France at all and that's especially true with Austria. The only one who may hate Israel and the Jews more than the Arabs is Jeorg Hader of Austria. I wouldn't put it past him to work in conjunction with Al Qaida in hopes of another holocaust against Israel.
 

SixFive

bonswa
Forum Member
Mar 12, 2001
18,903
346
83
54
BG, KY, USA
I surely don't trust China, and Russia still scares me as well.

I hate thinking of war with any of these countries, China, Iraq, Russia, North Korea... They have ALL shown that they have no regard for human life, even their own people. What Hitler and his henchmen did to the Jews was atrocious and beyond terrible and I am in no way belittling that, but a lot of people are not familiar with how brutal Stalin was to his own people or Mao to his. If I'm not mistaken, many more Russians and Chinese were killled by their own leaders than Jews in the holocaust.

How do u fight people like that? So what, the Americans just wiped out 50,000 of our troops today. Big deal, we have 20 million more in reserve! Scary!

How about Pakistan, India, and Indonesia? There's a shitload of people in those countries as well!

I'm not a pacifist by any means, just thinking out loud.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
In another thread on this subject I got banged on the head saying look out for NK. Few folks said no problem just nuke them. Ya Right. NK can wipe out half of Seoul SK in about a hour. They have about 300 artillary pices points at it always. Folks say taken those out with smart bombs. Ya right again there buried in rock hard bunkers in the mountains, and hills. We do a quick strike on there nuke plants and they will let it rip. How do we protect our over 35000 troops there from a nuke strke from NK into SK. We know they have at least two nukes. So that means 4 or 5. They also have rockets with 400 to 800 mile range. Bush with his we will fight both at once attitude better think again. NK does not give a shit. They know they cant win and dont care. There over 1.3 million man army gets all the food and care it needs. The rest of the population is left with little and most are dam near starving. Thats the way there leader wants it. That way no up rising can take place. Remember split you forces to much and you cause your self big trouble. I say time to get some our boys the hell out of there. The SK people not all but many have been asking we do just that. It's time to go and if were going to fight this with NK do it from Japan. Use air power only and missles. Save our troops first. NK is no threat to our main land at this time. For that matter neither is Iraq.
 

TLove

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 11, 2002
940
0
0
DJV,

I think that's the whole point. North Korea doesn't give a shit. Thats why you take them out now. Believe me, I'm the first one to say Bomb the Shit out of them. But I have taken a few days to look at that stance and it scares the hell out of me....

Nukes are not the answer but if we need to use them. Use them...

If people are worried that North Korea is going to come over here and do damage to our soil that will not happen.

We have a military for one reason. To protect and keep peace. The US has gotten themselves into the "Big Daddy" syndrome. We need to police everyone. It's our own fault.

I love talking about politics. I don't want to go to War but if we have to, the Military and the President has my full endorsement.

This was by no means a dig at anyone, it's just an opinion.
 

ferdville

Registered User
Forum Member
Dec 24, 1999
3,165
5
0
78
So Cal
When russia (as we used to know it) disintegrated, much of their weaponry was sold to the highest bidder. I imagine they have some left, but I know a lot of what they had is in someone else's hands now. This entire situation is very scarey. The people we are dealing with don't think the way we do and Six Five is right on target in his evaluation of how these countries have already shown they deal with the lives of their people.
 

loophole

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 14, 1999
4,547
356
83
nc
a couple of weeks ago, i read a breaking news story about an american warship intercepting a north korean freighter filled with scud missiles off the coast of yemen. evidently, they were delivering them to terrorist elements in that region. yet with all the emphasis on the war on terrorism, and the focus on north korea, that story virtually disappeared from the national news. what's up with that?
 

UT-Longhorn

U.T. Texas Ex
Forum Member
Jul 13, 2002
6,461
16
0
49
Texas
Myron said:
In quite a bit of irony, the country that I think could be the biggest factor in this whole thing is Russia. Once believed to be the country that was going to start WWIII with the U.S., may actually be the country that prevents it. I have no idea if they are allies or not, but they still have a lot of nukes.

I also don't trust Germany, Austria or France at all and that's especially true with Austria. The only one who may hate Israel and the Jews more than the Arabs is Jeorg Hader of Austria. I wouldn't put it past him to work in conjunction with Al Qaida in hopes of another holocaust against Israel.

Russia is most DEFINATELY our enemy.......not an allie........they are a wolf in sheeps clothing........:nono:
 

bjfinste

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 14, 2001
5,462
18
0
AZ
loophole- I don't think they were being sold to terrorists, but to the government of one of those arab countries for defense purposes. After intercepting it, the US allowed it to continue which it wouldn't have done if it was going to terrorists. If I'm wrong on this, let me know, but that is what I remember reading.
 

loophole

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 14, 1999
4,547
356
83
nc
i understand that the yemeni gov't eventually claimed to have purchased the scuds after initially dening it. not sure that i'm buying it since the north korean ship was flying no flag, had its' name painted over, and was carrying the scuds in the hold concealed under bags of cement. and, i'm not really up on my ballistic missiles, but a scud is a medium range missile that would seem to have questionable defensive value where yemen is located. not sure i trust the players here. i wonder if we will be able to tell if these missiles end up in other places.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Follow up in USA today last week. We know where they are and whats up with them. We a-watchen-em close.
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
The reason why Iraq is more dangerous than North Korea is that Iraq has shown they are aggresive by invading & using what weapons they do have on their neighbors & the Kurds. They also had a plot to assinate a US president.Imagine what Saddam would do if he had the weaponry of North Korea.The US wants to prevent Iraq form becoming as powerful as NK. NK has not shown that they will invade another country.Also Iraq is surrounded by weak countries, while NK is surrounded by powerful countries.NK is a very poor country, they have very little food, & the US will ask other countries not to trade with NK & will intercept any ship going into NK. In other words they will isolate NK & try to starve them into changing.
 

loophole

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 14, 1999
4,547
356
83
nc
ar182, some counterpoints to your post:


1. i for one think that north korea is chomping at the bit to invade and absorb south korea. i think that's why they are pushing forward with their nuclear weapons program, to cause the u.s. to back troops out of south korea and avoid a nuclear confrontation.


2. the u.s. would never attempt to enforce a food embargo on a third world country, i think the iraq situation has shown us that. with pictures of starving babies on the six o'clock news, the u.s. would be fried in the court of world opinion.


3. if north korea would attempt to covertly smuggle scud missiles to yemen, what makes you think they wouldn't sell nuclear weapons to iraq, if they had them? they certainly need the cash and saddam certainly has plenty. and yesterday's events certainly gave us a reminder of how warm a place yemen is for the u.s.


i think were holding back on north korea because of geo w's obsession with saddam because, like you said, he plotted to kill his daddy. they don't like that kind of crap down in texas. also appears that the chinese are telling us to let them handle it. just some thoughts
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top