Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First, that's not true. You don't understand the military objectives nor do you even understand the Law of Armed Conflict.
US bombing in North Korea was not designed with a primary goal of killing civilians, but of achieving specific military objectives. The Law of Armed Conflict does not require no civilian casualties in the pursuit of genuine military objectives.
Ah no, but the law of armed conflict does not allow unrestricted military action to achieve genuine military objects when civilian casualties are above collateral damages.
In other words, destroying a dam that is a source of power or protection for a military presence is one thing, know that destroying the dam will also kill many thousands of civilians is quite another.
If one accepts that anything goes so long as you are seeking to attack and eliminate genuine military interests, then expect others to do the same, it always works both ways.
Really, if you destroy my well, while I might not have the means to destroy yours, expect me to crap in it any chance I get.
The more time, effort and treasure we expend telling everyone else how to run their countries, the weaker we become. We get involved in every skirmish that seems to come up, make a lot of statements declaring this and that and then suddenly become very quiet and say "its their country" when things to into the crapper. Sooner or later, the chickens do come home to roost.
A nuclear North Korea is a product of our doing. We could have at many junctures, done a lot of things to see a different NK but failed every time to do more than bang fists on the table and demand things.
What happened in NK has been the blueprint for nearly every other diplomatic disaster since. Everyone else learned from the mistakes in NK except us.
In other words, destroying a dam that is a source of power or protection for a military presence is one thing, know that destroying the dam will also kill many thousands of civilians is quite another.
The requirement of the Law of Armed Conflict is that we reduce civilian casualties to the extent we can while still accomplishing the military goal. There is no requirement under the Law of Armed Conflict to abandon a military goal simply because it will cause civilian casualties, even in the thousands.
For instance, when I was involved with nuclear targeting in the early 80s, the LOAC required us to select Desired Ground Zeros that were "shaded" away from civilian concentrations as much as possible--but not so much that the weapon did not do the required damage to the military facility. With nuclear weapons, that still meant thousands of civilian casualties, but it met the requirements of the LOAC.
Quote:
A nuclear North Korea is a product of our doing. We could have at many junctures, done a lot of things to see a different NK but failed every time to do more than bang fists on the table and demand things.
What happened in NK has been the blueprint for nearly every other diplomatic disaster since. Everyone else learned from the mistakes in NK except us.
Germany and Japan prove you wrong. Even South Korea proves you wrong.
With all this crappola going about North Korea being Nuked etc is being posted by many that have never been there.
The north is nothing but a bunch of small mountains and lot of large hills....how do I know that?...I was stationed there (1952) and have pictures on my TV room wall of my bunker and the hills in the background and a picture of me doing my laundry in a pot of hot water over a fire and that same area is and has been NO MANS LAND since 1953 (DMZ) stalemate.
Everyone who has been there please raise your hand to be recognized.......I'm waiting.
As for the remark about tunnels and the potential shelling of Seoul....forget it....I've been there also and the land area is too FLAT for any tunnels.
I was in the Artillery and we were constantly shelling the opening of a tunnel dug from the opposite side of a hill. We closed it and they (Chinese) would work all night to reopen it just to fire a couple of Mortor rounds. We again closed it and they would reopen it. Word came down to cease fire at the opening and the Chinese stopped their Mortors shelling
The requirement of the Law of Armed Conflict is that we reduce civilian casualties to the extent we can while still accomplishing the military goal. There is no requirement under the Law of Armed Conflict to abandon a military goal simply because it will cause civilian casualties, even in the thousands.
For instance, when I was involved with nuclear targeting in the early 80s, the LOAC required us to select Desired Ground Zeros that were "shaded" away from civilian concentrations as much as possible--but not so much that the weapon did not do the required damage to the military facility. With nuclear weapons, that still meant thousands of civilian casualties, but it met the requirements of the LOAC.
Germany and Japan prove you wrong. Even South Korea proves you wrong.
Your interpretation of the law of armed conflict is wrong. I also seriously doubt you had anything to do with targeting anything, especially involving nuclear weapons as evidenced by your description of what LORAC is and how it functions (it is not the end all, say all and you'd know that).
Germany and Japan don't prove a thing.
South Korea and North Korea is a diplomatic disaster, saying they are anything but that only firther demonstrates the confusion you have/
With all this crappola going about North Korea being Nuked etc is being posted by many that have never been there.
The north is nothing but a bunch of small mountains and lot of large hills....how do I know that?...I was stationed there (1952) and have pictures on my TV room wall of my bunker and the hills in the background and a picture of me doing my laundry in a pot of hot water over a fire and that same area is and has been NO MANS LAND since 1953 (DMZ) stalemate.
Everyone who has been there please raise your hand to be recognized.......I'm waiting.
As for the remark about tunnels and the potential shelling of Seoul....forget it....I've been there also and the land area is too FLAT for any tunnels.
I was in the Artillery and we were constantly shelling the opening of a tunnel dug from the opposite side of a hill. We closed it and they (Chinese) would work all night to reopen it just to fire a couple of Mortor rounds. We again closed it and they would reopen it. Word came down to cease fire at the opening and the Chinese stopped their Mortors shelling
I was stationed in Korea in the 50's, 7th Infantry Div. 127th Signal battalion, and what Steve Bagu said is virtually true. North Korea then was like civilization was 300 years ago and today it's not any different. South Korea on the other hand has pulled itself up by the bootstraps and has developed itself into a very modern nation.
Your interpretation of the law of armed conflict is wrong. I also seriously doubt you had anything to do with targeting anything, especially involving nuclear weapons as evidenced by your description of what LORAC is and how it functions (it is not the end all, say all and you'd know that).
Well, I did, and I know what we did with it when we developed DGZs. The targeteers and weaponeers determined the level of overpressure necessary to do the requisite damage to the target, what weapon to use, and how far the DGZ could be from the target to expend the necessary overpressure on the target.
Our Law of Armed Conflict considerations were to determine the distances of civilian concentrations around the target, the general prevailing winds, and where to place the DGZ so that it was as far from civilian concentrations as possible, yet no farther from the target than the targeteers had determined, and not upwind of civilian concentrations.
As much as was possible. But abandoning the target was never necessary
With all this crappola going about North Korea being Nuked etc is being posted by many that have never been there.
The north is nothing but a bunch of small mountains and lot of large hills....how do I know that?...I was stationed there (1952) and have pictures on my TV room wall of my bunker and the hills in the background and a picture of me doing my laundry in a pot of hot water over a fire and that same area is and has been NO MANS LAND since 1953 (DMZ) stalemate.
Everyone who has been there please raise your hand to be recognized.......I'm waiting.
As for the remark about tunnels and the potential shelling of Seoul....forget it....I've been there also and the land area is too FLAT for any tunnels.
I was in the Artillery and we were constantly shelling the opening of a tunnel dug from the opposite side of a hill. We closed it and they (Chinese) would work all night to reopen it just to fire a couple of Mortor rounds. We again closed it and they would reopen it. Word came down to cease fire at the opening and the Chinese stopped their Mortors shelling
You may want to Google for "DPRK HARTS" and "DPRK DMZ tunnels" and see what you get. The DPRK was extremely busy in the 70s with help from the Soviets.
However, as I said, since Soviet assistance dropped after the early 80s and the DPRK has been mostly on its own. Their army is hollow and can't sustain any real invasion of the south.
However, as I said, since Soviet assistance dropped after the early 80s and the DPRK has been mostly on its own. Their army is hollow and can't sustain any real invasion of the south.
No way they can, Ralph. They probably couldn't even sustain enough food/water for their military for 100 days.
And you have to wonder if the people who have been repressed for so long really know the truth of what life is like outside of NK. I've read that they can get access to bootleg movies and some radio stations so the NK's must have somewhat of an idea that their existence isn't the only type that's out there.
There is an uproar. The problem is that there is nothing we can do about it. Bombing the hell out of them would just kill the same citizens they are killing, and they could retaliate with nukes. Land invasion is impossible because their only land border is China. They'd see an invasion from South Korea coming right at them. And an amphibious assault would cost a hundred thousand of casualties. No way in hell.
I agree. There isn't much we can do about the situation and the UN is a joke. As many have stated China is
supporting the regime but even they have dramatically cut off support for the puppet master..
Rodman should be have his passport revoked and sent over there to live..Let em get a good taste of NK..
and how they operate. Starving their own citizens, labor camps etc.. People spying on each other for a bowl of rice..
The little man and Army control the country and there isn't much the citizens can do, except to try and escape.
Just wan to add, my uncle survived the battle of Pork Chop Hill..and he never wanted to talk about it and NEVER ate rice again..He was a Pow from the war...he died on his last day of retirement from the post office, on his last delivery on the steps.Heart attack. He walked his beat. He never talked about the war stuff...but took pride in protecting the locals he delivered too, and one was the Wahlberg family. He would come over at Christmas time and show us the trunk of his car loaded with fan mail..My uncle Billy, a good man who despised NK, and for good reason. RIP uncle Bill..
Last edited by brienzi; 02-23-2014 at 11:27 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Great 
