Possible war between USA and North Korea

[betsy]

I don't know which section is appropriate to post this.

 

They say nuclear war is more possible now than it's ever been.  There's allegedly panic-buying going on in Japan (which is understandable with them in that region).

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3407199/japan-nuclear-bomb-shelters-kim-jong-un-war-north-korea/

 

Does the likelihood of war concern you?   Should it concern Canadians?

 

How would it affect us, if ever this war breaks out?

Edited April 25, 2017 by betsy

[Michael Hardner]

Moved topic to 'the rest of the world'

[kactus]

45 minutes ago, betsy said:

I don't know which section is appropriate to post this.

 

They say nuclear war is more possible now than it's ever been.  There's allegedly panic-buying going on in Japan (which is understandable with them in that region).

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3407199/japan-nuclear-bomb-shelters-kim-jong-un-war-north-korea/

 

Does the likelihood of war concern you?   Should it concern Canadians?

 

How would it affect us, if ever this war breaks out?

War would be crazy if we have never learned from two world wars.....

Start storing tins in your cupboards....

[betsy]

1 hour ago, kactus said:

War would be crazy if we have never learned from two world wars.....

Start storing tins in your cupboards....

 

Unless NKorea fires a missile towards  the USA, and we send soldiers to combat, in what other ways are we in Canada - the citizens - going to be affected by it?

Edited April 25, 2017 by betsy

[kactus]

31 minutes ago, betsy said:

 

Unless NKorea fires a missile towards  the USA, and we send soldiers to combat, in what other ways are we in Canada - the citizens - going to be affected by it?

I already hinted how the previous world wars started by dragging other countries into the conflict.....

[betsy]

9 minutes ago, kactus said:

I already hinted how the previous world wars started by dragging other countries into the conflict.....

 

Never mind the hints.   I wasn't asking for clues, or hints.  Discuss! 

I didn't experience WW2.  How many among here even had their parents - and their grandparents -  experience it? 

Besides, that was how many decades ago? 

 

If you don't want to discuss it, then ignore my comments.  Your "hints"are noted.  Thank you. 

Edited April 25, 2017 by betsy

[Hydraboss]

Once the THAAD is up and running, the US will stop pussyfooting around with NK.  NK will fire something towards someone and the US will blow it out of the sky once it crosses out of NK airspace.  This will likely precipitate NK firing on SK with conventionals and/or sending troops across the south border.  The US will lose almost no troops; SK will lose many.  China starts screaming at everyone but really does nothing other than bolster their defences on the north border (it's only 11 bloody miles anyway).

Putin uses this whole mess as a distraction to try and grab some more territory.

Canada won't be involved other than the Lost Leader stammering some platitudes.

 

Just my thoughts.

[Wilber]

Lots of possibilities. Hydraboss's scenario is probably a best case.

For sure, our trade and markets would take a big hit for some time, whether we are directly affected by a war or not.

[Hydraboss]

Oil will go up (good for me).  Some markets will rise, others will fall.  Japan's index will go for shit.

Of course my scenario is best case.  There are a ton of not-quite-so-good cases that are possible - NK fires a nuke and the US shoots it down resulting in nasty crap in the environment.  NK fires the rest of their nukes (to no real effect) and the US unleashes hell on them turning several sites into new Walmart parking lots.  A bunch of UN do-gooders decide they don't like what the US has done (but won't sanction them of course).  Russia decides it's a good time to come unhinged and puts part of it's fleet in the same floating territory as the US.  At the same time Putin decides to put a ton of ground troops in Afghanistan as an irritant.  Syria gets pissed even more and decides to "declare war" on the States backed by Russia.  South Korea decides to move troops and artillery into the North to "preserve their own safety".  US jets start bombing runs in NK and Syria to prove they can.  Russia decides it's time the Ukraine returned to the fold and advances west there.  France wets itself.  Britain sends out a strongly worded communique.  Germany issues the statement "We've started two world wars, with some success.  We intend to stay out of this one."  Russia and the US don't fire a single round against each other, because that would be stupid.

Canada's Lost Leader stammering out some more platitudes and then declares theyself genderless.

[kactus]

2 hours ago, betsy said:

 

Never mind the hints.   I wasn't asking for clues, or hints.  Discuss! 

I didn't experience WW2.  How many among here even had their parents - and their grandparents -  experience it? 

Besides, that was how many decades ago? 

 

If you don't want to discuss it, then ignore my comments.  Your "hints"are noted.  Thank you. 

The events that led to both world wars are in the history books to remind us Betsie.

Now....I thought it is clear that reading many news coming out about North Korea makes the situation in that region very volatile. It is very naive to think that NK would attack any other country including the US.

However, should the US decide to unilaterally attack NK unprovoked on behalf of her allies Japan and South Korea that may trigger a response and escalate the war involving regional powers China snd possibly Russia. Based on the events that let to both World Wars one doesn't have to go through that experience to understand the consequences of such a move....

Edited April 25, 2017 by kactus

[Wilber]

2 minutes ago, kactus said:

The events that led to both world wars are in the history books to remind us Betsie.

Now....I thought it is clear that reading many news coming out about North Korea makes the situation in that region very volatile. It is very naive to think that NK would attack any other country including the US.

However, should the US decide to unilaterally attack NK unprovoked on behalf of her allies Japan and South Korea that may trigger a response and escalate the war involving regional powers. Based on the events of World War II one doesn't have to go through that experience to understand the consequences of such a move....

SK and Japan are the last ones who would want to provoke a war in that region. They have the most to lose. They will not be encouraging the US to attack NK.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, kactus said:

However, should the US decide to unilaterally attack NK unprovoked on behalf of her allies Japan and South Korea that may trigger a response and escalate the war involving regional powers China snd possibly Russia. Based on the events that let to both World Wars one doesn't have to go through that experience to understand the consequences of such a move....

The attack in this scenario will not be on behalf of America's allies, it'll be due more to the tail wagging the dog i.e. Trump's need to distract and galvanize his base of support and distract public attention.

For that reason I'm not concerned at all and view another pointless stupid war as yet another opportunity to wake humanity up to the folly of allowing politicians so much power and allowing ourselves to be so easily duped.

Fool us once shame on them fool us multiple times and well, hit us with a shovel again...

[betsy]

3 hours ago, kactus said:

The events that led to both world wars are in the history books to remind us Betsie.

Now....I thought it is clear that reading many news coming out about North Korea makes the situation in that region very volatile. It is very naive to think that NK would attack any other country including the US.

However, should the US decide to unilaterally attack NK unprovoked on behalf of her allies Japan and South Korea that may trigger a response and escalate the war involving regional powers China snd possibly Russia. Based on the events that let to both World Wars one doesn't have to go through that experience to understand the consequences of such a move....

You don't find N Korea's previous behaviours, provocative?

[bush_cheney2004]

The U.S. did not start the previous world wars, but it sure as hell finished them.

Canada went to war to serve the interests of its British Empire.

[betsy]

3 hours ago, Hydraboss said:

Oil will go up (good for me).  Some markets will rise, others will fall.  Japan's index will go for shit.

Of course my scenario is best case.  There are a ton of not-quite-so-good cases that are possible - NK fires a nuke and the US shoots it down resulting in nasty crap in the environment.  NK fires the rest of their nukes (to no real effect) and the US unleashes hell on them turning several sites into new Walmart parking lots.  A bunch of UN do-gooders decide they don't like what the US has done (but won't sanction them of course).  Russia decides it's a good time to come unhinged and puts part of it's fleet in the same floating territory as the US.  At the same time Putin decides to put a ton of ground troops in Afghanistan as an irritant.  Syria gets pissed even more and decides to "declare war" on the States backed by Russia.  South Korea decides to move troops and artillery into the North to "preserve their own safety".  US jets start bombing runs in NK and Syria to prove they can.  Russia decides it's time the Ukraine returned to the fold and advances west there.  France wets itself.  Britain sends out a strongly worded communique.  Germany issues the statement "We've started two world wars, with some success.  We intend to stay out of this one."  Russia and the US don't fire a single round against each other, because that would be stupid.

Canada's Lost Leader stammering out some more platitudes and then declares theyself genderless.

 

Do you notice China sort of washing her hands on N Korea?  From what I heard, some editiorials in China are really hard on North Korea.  You suspect a deal has been struck between USA and China?

[Hydraboss]

I'm a little more pragmatic about China.  I doubt there is any "deal" per se, but they may be doing what is in their best interest so the US will continue to do business with them a la exports - and that means back off a bit and kick NK out of the protective umbrella provided by China (not entirely, but enough to maybe soften the resolve of Jong-un).

 

Completely off topic....now that I think about it, could one not describe Trump and Jong-un as this century's Fat Man and Little Boy??

[Charlie]

Fat Kim has been the leader of NK for years now. Before that we had Fat Kim's father. And world was just doing fine.

100 days in Trump presidency & we see a nuclear threat to the world.  

Who should we blame it for? What changed?

 

[Charlie]

13 hours ago, Hydraboss said:

Oil will go up (good for me).  Some markets will rise, others will fall.  Japan's index will go for shit.

Of course my scenario is best case.  There are a ton of not-quite-so-good cases that are possible - NK fires a nuke and the US shoots it down resulting in nasty crap in the environment.  NK fires the rest of their nukes (to no real effect) and the US unleashes hell on them turning several sites into new Walmart parking lots.  A bunch of UN do-gooders decide they don't like what the US has done (but won't sanction them of course).  Russia decides it's a good time to come unhinged and puts part of it's fleet in the same floating territory as the US.  At the same time Putin decides to put a ton of ground troops in Afghanistan as an irritant.  Syria gets pissed even more and decides to "declare war" on the States backed by Russia.  South Korea decides to move troops and artillery into the North to "preserve their own safety".  US jets start bombing runs in NK and Syria to prove they can.  Russia decides it's time the Ukraine returned to the fold and advances west there.  France wets itself.  Britain sends out a strongly worded communique.  Germany issues the statement "We've started two world wars, with some success.  We intend to stay out of this one."  Russia and the US don't fire a single round against each other, because that would be stupid.

Canada's Lost Leader stammering out some more platitudes and then declares theyself genderless.

I usually hate this kind of strategic analysis. What worries me more is that Trump perhaps thinks like that too. As if world is a video game and we are all part of Civilization V being played on an Xbox.  Lives of millions of South Koreans, North Koreans, Syrians, Afghans, Russians have no value. It's just a number. and all we would lose in above scenario is a game of strategic chess. 

[GostHacked]

16 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

The U.S. did not start the previous world wars, but it sure as hell finished them.

Canada went to war to serve the interests of its British Empire.

Now if your dolts can only finish the decades long war on terror.

[Hydraboss]

11 hours ago, Charlie said:

I usually hate this kind of strategic analysis. What worries me more is that Trump perhaps thinks like that too. As if world is a video game and we are all part of Civilization V being played on an Xbox.  Lives of millions of South Koreans, North Koreans, Syrians, Afghans, Russians have no value. It's just a number. and all we would lose in above scenario is a game of strategic chess. 

Then please feel free to point out where it's wrong.  I'm sure it is but I'd like to know you're version of potential happenings.  Where did I say I was in favor of these actions?

[xul]

On 25/04/2017 at 0:31 PM, Hydraboss said:

Oil will go up (good for me). 

Oil would go up if the war broke out among those oil producers in the Middle East.

Almost all parties which would be involved or affected by the war against DPRK, like US, Japan, SK, China...are oil consumers. The oil price would go down if the perspective of their economic growth was affected by the war.

Only the price of LG OLED TV in Best Buy would go up...if anybody plans to upgrade his home theatre, be sure to do it before the war begins. 

[Omni]

They keep saying that NK may well now, or soon have, a missile that could put a nuke into Seattle. I don't live far from Seattle and I wonder just how good Kim's aim is. 

[xul]

13 hours ago, GostHacked said:

Now if your dolts can only finish the decades long war on terror.

I hate to draw BC back from his..sorry, I have just noticed BC is a female....her glorious WW2 war dreams. But I have to mention that, in recent years, US used to "finish" the wars it started by this way:

 

Edited April 27, 2017 by xul

[Wilber]

28 minutes ago, xul said:

Oil would go up if the war broke out among those oil producers in the Middle East.

Almost all parties which would be involved or affected by the war against DPRK, like US, Japan, SK, China...are oil consumers. The oil price would go down if the perspective of their economic growth was affected by the war.

Only the price of LG OLED TV in Best Buy would go up...if anybody plans to upgrade his home theatre, be sure to do it before the war begins. 

I tend to agree, a war would likely decrease demand without affecting production. Been putting it off but guess I should buy that new phone.

[eyeball]

On 4/25/2017 at 1:14 PM, Hydraboss said:

I'm a little more pragmatic about China.  I doubt there is any "deal" per se, but they may be doing what is in their best interest so the US will continue to do business with them a la exports - and that means back off a bit and kick NK out of the protective umbrella provided by China (not entirely, but enough to maybe soften the resolve of Jong-un).

This is exactly the sort of foreign military policy that should be emulated in much of the ME and surrounding regions.  Leave it up to those countries neighbouring the world's hotspots to cool things down. The minute they think they're on their own the sooner they'll step up and act in their own interest. By all means we should be there in a humanitarian capacity but as far as being a distant police force...we couldn't shoot straight to save our own lives never mind the conflicted interests we usually end intervening on behalf of.