ARRSE is supported by the advertisements on it, so if you use an adblocker please consider helping us by starting an Ad-Free subscription.

N Korean nuclear strike could cause chaos in US

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by DesktopCommando, Mar 26, 2013.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. The Agreed Framework only covered dismantling specific nuclear sites and did not cover missiles at all. I think you're getting mixed up with the Six Party Talks which took place years later and had a much broader scope.
     
  2. Nope, not getting mixed up with things at all, I just choose to look at ALL factors instead of saying that the US simply reneged on the deal, that it's all the fault of the US
     
  3. As noted in the previous but one post, the reason that "ALL factors" weren't being looked at was because the US wanted a very narrow focus on dismantling certain nuclear facilities instead of broader negotiations.
     
  4. So that means it's ok for DPRK to ignore the terms of an agreement it signed up to? That's somehow the fault of the US?

    Astounding.
     
  5. Here's the text of the Agreed Framework. http://www.nti.org/media/pdfs/aptagframe.pdf
    • The DPRK were to freeze construction of their graphite moderated reactors, which they did.
    • Fuel from the 5MW reactor was to be stored safely in North Korea during the construction of the new light water reactors, which it was (this was paid for by the US).
    • They were to remain a party to the NPT which they did (they suspended their withdrawal).
    • The DPRK were not required to become fully compliant with IAEA inspections until after significant portions of the new light water reactors were completed. The latter never occurred, so the North Koreans weren't going to give the Americans a freebie on the former.
    Time lines for the different phases of the treaty were tied to completion stages for the light water reactors, not to fixed dates. Construction on those never got very far, so most of the terms of the agreement never came into effect.

    There's nothing in there about missiles or other peripheral issues.

    If you want to argue that the agreement was too narrowly focused, well let's recall that it was the US who wanted a very narrow one.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. Reported in the Oz press, but from a US source.

    '... as US author and journalist Fred Kaplan points out... '
     
  7. They were known to be breaking the terms as far back as 1998 regarding enriched uranium, they were known to be continuing research into getting their hands on nukes which is a breach of being part of the NPT, and lobbing a missile over someone who was actually going to help pay for these new reactors was never going to end well.

    The US "reneged" on nothing, the appeasement was being ignored from Day One yet that's somehow the fault of the US...
     
  8. Agreed Framework - Wikipedia
    OR https://www.nti.org/media/pdfs/aptagframe.pdf
    Page 3, Part III 2) . "The DPRK will consistently take steps to implement the North-South Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula."

    In full, Part III:
    As can be seen, and unlike Kaplan's assertion, the failure was not wholly down to the US.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. North Korea says Trump has 'lit the wick of war' - Russia's TASS agency
    Reuters reporting TASS about the US lighting the wick of war according to Ri (NK ForMin):
    I'm more interested in the following personally, not even that they can achieve a real balance of power (behave), but that talks will never include the nukes:
    North Koreans demand US be punished by 'hail of fire' for aggressive policy — top diplomat
    What TASS say:
    I can't see any up to date statement on here yet other than some wibble about the US deploying nukes in S Korea:
    Rodong Sinmun
     
  10. TASS quoting the DPRK Foreign Minister, nothing to see here, move along citizen. ;)
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. If/when Russia/Putin cares to make any sensible comment on the actual situation on the ground in NK, that will indeed be news.

    Until then, as said above, move on citizens, nothing of value here.

    In the meantime the fat kid's tantrums have put a crimp in his tuck shop's procurement activities.
    Sanctions on North Korea Inc. Hit Kim’s Secretive ‘Office 39’

    The pariah state has for years been boosting the country’s economy in various illegal ways some of which netted them billions while driving up the cost of Insurance premiums to customers worldwide.
    Ex-North Korea diplomat: Pyongyang makes a fortune in insurance fraud

    It had been reported some years ago.
    Global Insurance Fraud By North Korea Outlined

    If this situation can be bought under control it will not be before time.

    Unfortunately when countries go rogue, bringing them under control has historically been at massive cost in lives and human suffering. This will be no different.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017
  12. breadbombs

    breadbombs On ROPs

    Royal United Services Institute (RUSI). This report looks at how a war in the Korean Peninsula could start and what might happen should it break out. Preparing for War in Korea
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. So if there are two wars will that make it WW4 ?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  14. Possibly.

    If there are any historians around after it to chronical/name it. (or indeed to admire the spectacular sunsets due to particular matter in the atmosphere.)
     
  15. 'particulate'