world

N Korea vows more 'gift packages' of missile tests for U.S.

38 Comments
By FOSTER KLUG

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.


38 Comments
Login to comment

As Kestrel says, Saddam climbed on his white horse aiming to the be leader of the Middle East, and openly challenged the US. He had the backing of Russia.

Colonel Gadaffi did roughly the same thing in Africa and he too got the shock of his life. He had the backing of Russia.

What makes Kim think he is any different? What lessons has he learned from them? What does he think he is doing right that they did wrong?

Keep asking for a smack in the face and what do you get?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Remember, Kim is surrounded by yes men and "adoring" public. After years in power ( not to mention, in kims case, growing up in these circumstances) dictators tend to lose touch with reality - saddam hussein and his invasion of kuwait, eg.

Hes used to "success" and hes used to the west backing down and retreating from escalation.

Its a bad recipe and bodes very ill for the future.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

China and Russia keep their dog hungry, the dog at the trades' entrance.

The dog does not bark at them. Why not?

How can the US, S Korea and Japan stop the dog barking at them?

Options 1, 2, and 3.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A war with NK would end in seconds... They can't even feed their people and they aren't smart enough to even hit a target

It would not end in seconds. It would end with millions of lives lost. How can people be so flippant about this?

nice to see so many NK sympathizers, they could use a friend!

Any sympathisers in particular? Do you think a rational approach to this crises is somehow akin to supporting the regime?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

We should own it, we pay for the thing.

And might is right. Right?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

nice to see so many NK sympathizers, they could use a friend!

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

He is a bit like an Asian Donald in the nonsense he spouts. and hitting Alaska doesn't sound like much more of a threat.

Other than being insanely rich, fat, and having an atrocious hairstyle, he is very different from Trump.

Trump starts with big talk to lower the bargaining table, but tends to fold eventually. Kim shoots first and says "I got more where that came from."

Trump has an ego that makes Kanye West look modest. Kim actually suffers from extreme paranoia and lack of self esteem, thus he compensates with showmanship (as said by a former aide).

Alaska is home to the largest USAF/Army joint base in the US, HAARP, and key missle bases. I don't think Kim is targeting Alaska for the moose and salmon.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Certainly a gift to US arms makers.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Just keep moving more defensive arms into the area. China will have to respond.

So you're not a Superlib after all.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Just keep moving more defensive arms into the area. China will have to respond.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If the US does a preemptive Nuclear Strike upon the North - what's the likely response going to be from the Rest of the World, and what will the Fall-out situation be like here in Japan ? (Ignoring SK as this is "JapanToday")

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ThePBot "when it comes to North Korea, then there'd be war right now. There's still peace, and that's the option."

Yes, the sentiment is good, but peace was never declared.

The Korean War never officially ended, and north of the borderline at least, they are still very conscious of that fact. We are actually under a very long but temporary armistice/truce, which either side could break without a declaration of war, since both sides are still officially 'at war'.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, tomorrow is going to be interesting. Technically since the North & South Korea are still at War, either side can attack each other without any form of declaration of War (not that it really matters). A pre-emptive strike given the N. Korean stance, seems to the only solution - perhaps even whilst all eyes are on the G20 meeting, something will happen, since G20 will presumably just slap further pointless sanctions upon N.K.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China has to be involved in any non catastrophic solution, yet they have failed. I dont know what else we have.

If China, or any other country for that matter, really have failed in any non-catastrophic solution when it comes to North Korea, then there'd be war right now. There's still peace, and that's the option. North Korea can saber rattle all they want, they won't do a major attack against anyone if unprovoked. Maybe we should all start getting used to the idea of North Korea having ICBMs and continue to live peacefully.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A war with NK would end in seconds

That's what they said about Iraq.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

@smithinjapan A war with NK would end in seconds... They can't even feed their people and they aren't smart enough to even hit a target

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Shooting down the missiles sounds like a good idea but American interceptors are not reliable enough to guarantee success. Any failure on the part of the US would serve to bolster the DPRK's confidence while providing a propaganda coup.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

This isn't going to end well. NK needs to be surrounded by so much fire power that any future missiles launched in any direction are shot down soon after launch.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

There is no "good" way out of this situation.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

DPRK has repeatedly and openly threatened to turn Tokyo and Washington into a sea of fire. They well know that the world will not stop them, and they have sworn to walk this road to the end.

It must be very expensive to keep shooting off these missiles. Freud would have had a field-day with the NK mindset. Penis envy?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

China has to be involved in any non catastrophic solution, yet they have failed.

Have they even tried? And why would/should they?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

yeah, I like to bring solutions with my problems but I dont have one for this.

China has to be involved in any non catastrophic solution, yet they have failed. I dont know what else we have.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

According to North Korea watchers such as Prof Lankov, is “a significant improvement in living standards” and economic vibrancy, most evident in the flourishing number of restaurants and markets. Known as jangmadang, these markets — both official and unofficial — have proliferated rapidly in recent years and are now increasingly the norm for purchasing consumer goods.

According to a survey of more than 1,000 defectors by the Korea Development Institute, a state-run think-tank in Seoul, more than 85 per cent of North Koreans now use these markets for food, compared with 6 per cent who rely on state rations.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Well this very interesting. Is the MSM up to their old warmongering tricks?

If North Korea really is achieving per capita annual GDP growth rates of 9% as claimed by the Hyundai Research Institute, and if salaries really have grown 250-1,200% over the last 10 years, then North Korea has the fastest growing economy in the industrialised world, and its people are seeing the fastest growth in real incomes in the world.

and

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

If the US thinks that putting pressure on North Korea directly is going to work, then they are gravely mistaken. Unfortunately the only way for any sort of change to come about is to use North Koreas only ally, China. But the chances of that happening are slim, as China does not like to be leaned upon and will not take to well the idea that it is doing the US's bidding in a region it thinks is its own.

Likewise China fears regime change in North Korea as if the Kim dynasty fell they worry that mass amounts of refugees will swarm its land boarder and also that it would allow for a potential NATO friendly government to amass on its doorstep. 

soloution? Well I'm not sure there is one? A military one would undoubtalbly be catastrophic and would see not just the South pulled into the fray but also any surrounding neighbours where the US has forces or bases, and there is no guarente that any war in that region would go the way the US would want it. Yes the US has 80,000 troops in the area and a battle group but I belive North Korea has over a million troops at its disposal with everyone of them all hard core to the regime. Trump can throw everything he has at them that but you cant win against those numbers.  By the time the first troop respond to any Northern aggression they will be Seoul and if it was reversed by the time the forst American troops crossed the parallel the North would have no qualms in using its nuclear arsenal to repel them.

A diplomatic comprise would be favoured but its been tired before and failed, Kim has no issues with letting his people starve so he can play Dictator so using food as leverage is futile and he's already shown to ignore any economic sanctions put against him. Its a right mess!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Because they own the UN.

We should own it, we pay for the thing.

The top 10 providers of assessed contributions to United Nations Peacekeeping operations for 2016 are:

United States (28.57%)

China (10.29%)

Japan (9.68%)

Germany (6.39%)

France (6.31%)

United Kingdom (5.80%)

Russian Federation (4.01%)

Italy (3.75%)

Anyway why sanction the USA? Nearly every country in the world somehow thinks NKorea is only a USA problem and not a world problem because they dont want to or cant do anything about it.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

why the UN doesn't sanction America?

Because they own the UN.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Tillerson time to move aside, Mad dog your in!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

hitting Alaska doesn't sound like much more of a threat

it would wipe out the HAARP system giving a joined force of Russia and China the ability to take command of the world. it would destroy USAs energy and food security. canada would be a little angry as the wind blows over their country. NK also has subs. sea to land sub systems. just one nuke on LA would throw the US into depression.

also what about Miniteman III missile tests from Vandenberg Air Force Base? why the UN doesn't sanction America?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

We're due for another War, human-kind just can't survive without being self-destructive.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Dango Bong: The idea is to DE-escalate the situation. What you are proposing would 100% certainly start war. And you probably think that's a good thing, but millions of lives would be lost, including American lives, and Japanese.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Given the US's history of attacking and bombing those they disagree with, fat Kim is being entirely rational in developing ICBMs.

Remember how they used to talk about nuclear weapons being a deterrent? The ability to reduce San Francisco and other US cities to rubble would certainly be a big deterrent to the US launching a bombing campaign against North Korea. Mutually assured destruction.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Does that include stopping all foreign aid from the US and UK?

Absolutely, they should earn it

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Time to show NK some real force.

Surround their sea borders with ships and check all imports before they go in.

Does that include stopping all foreign aid from the US and UK?

https://www.voanews.com/a/united-states-humanitarian-aid-goes-to-north-korea/3692811.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/18/uk-gave-4-million-foreign-aid-north-korea-past-six-years/

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Simple Don,t let anything in or out Including Missiles Can be Electronically intercepted and turned back if the governments tried to research this.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Time to show NK some real force.

Surround their sea borders with ships and check all imports before they go in.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Trump tweets:

Does this guy have anything better to do with his life? 

Riiight. Maybe if we encourage a free press in NK, perhaps with a cable news station (let's call it KNN), Kim could fill his time angrily twittering about it. /snark

This is a problem - but Kim as well faces a race against time. More aggressive propaganda efforts, particularly by defectors living in the South, might help. Kim absolutely hates that and will ferociously saber-rattle, but he will not do anything rash because that would mean his instant obliteration.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

He is a bit like an Asian Donald in the nonsense he spouts.  and hitting Alaska doesn't sound like much more of a threat.  And Tillerson calling him a threat to world peace is a bit OTT - who exactly is he going to invade or bomb?   sure, it would be better if he sat at home quietly starving his country while living in luxury with his cronies.  But this showboating doesn't feel like a threat to world peace just yet, unless Donald or Abe or SK keep poking him with their sharp stick.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites