So let's have a change of pace from all this doom and gloom

>>34849412
>what do we think will come of this
One of 3 possibilities:
1. It's not a ruse but the normal dickwaving and an unarmed missile splashes down in the Pacific and pisses off the US a little more but not enough to do anything militarily
2. It's a ruse and actually a NK first strike, and SK loses a couple tens of thousands of people before the combined might of half the world wipes NK off the face of the planet
3. They follow tradition and it blows up on the launch pad and the world laughs

>>34849412
I very much doubt the DRPK is that god damn suicidal to nuke another country first. I can really only see them using nukes defensively/revenge, or if Kim feels that his regime is in absolute free-fall and he just wants to launch to try to consolidate power/just fuck over all the people who were against him.

I doubt we will see the DPRK use their nukes soon.

I CAN however see them launching a conventional warhead as an act of aggression just to stir the pot, and the President keeps responding to the trolling when really, he should be very clear with US intent and actions. You can't be vague and hope to deter conflict, you need to be abundantly clear "If you strike Guam I'll end you". Not "We are locked and loaded" or "you should be careful". What does that mean? Does that translate well, contextually, into North Korean tongue? It doesn't imply any specific consequence to action. The DPRK has survived for decades by lightly probing the US and antagonizing it, and as dumb as that may sound they may react badly if they poke it a little bit and the US spergs out and starts off a new conflict over what USED to just be a slap on the wrist. The point being, due to our vagueness the DRPK may misinterpret our resolve/intent, which leads to a war where we abruptly start kicking their ass, which leads to my first point where they may feel the need to use their WMDs.

Imagine if there was a neighbor A who, for years, dumped his trash on his neighbor B's lawn. B and C is afraid that A will shoot neighbor C, since A is an asshole. For years, B kinda tolerated it, sometimes dumped a little on A's lawn, or proved a point. Then one day, B says something vague, like normal "get of my lawn or you'll be sorry..." then A dumps on the lawn again. Then B shows up with a plate carrier, grenades, and ARs and starts shooting at A, which triggers the "doomsday scenario" of A actually shooting back at C, which was the situation B and C were trying to avoid in the first place.

With all the dick waving lil' kimmy been doing with the jsdf assume a first strike if he launches a missile there direction?

>>34849601
>Will
>their

Tfw auto correct is worse at grammar than I am.

>>34849583
>>34849587
Do you think the US will try to intercept?

File: Bedroom Gown.jpg (176KB, 1375x1375px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1375x1375px

So let's have a change of pace from all this cream and flour in America and instead look at cream and flour abroad.


Any day now it is expected that Kim Jong-Un will receive the recipe from his advisers on a lobster pie within ~30m of Red Star Kitchen, a prominent lobster cooking installation. If prepared the ITLD (Intermediate Tasty Lobster Dish) Will travel down the hall and across the dining room.

Rumours within the culinary/amongst international observers say that this dish may actually be a ruse of culinary war and that the dish will be instead aimed at targets between Kim's jaws. This Observation along with the reports of North Korea possessing miniaturised seafood cookpots has people worried of a possible culinary first strike by North Korea.


What do we think will come of this /k/? How do you see this ending?

Also I suppose this is the CMD/Seafood Weapons thread.

>>34849587
The great Best Korean leader always said that nukes will be used if Best Korea gets attacked. The orange monkey says the US will retaliate if they are attacked. Therefore, nothing will happen since they are both defensive.

>>34849860
No, why would they?

Even in the HIGHLY UNLIKELY event it's a sneak attack with a live nuclear weapon it's not targeting sovereign US soil

File: 1387165110596.gif (509KB, 172x129px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 172x129px

>>34849587
Telling them what you will do specifically if they do something specifically is a bad move, you moron.

>>34850108
No, it isn't if you are trying to deter a war. It is a bad move DURING war to make it clear what you are doing, but clear warning signs are very important. It's like with animals; animals make very clear warning signs (cat's hiss, arch their backs, etc) before conflict between them specifically to reduce fighting and miscommunication.

"I will obliterate you if you strike" is a firm warning. It may limit your options diplomatically, but it can limit confusion and reduce the chance of misinterpretation.

>>34849860
That's not something I could judge. It will depend on a lot of factors.
>Do we think it's conventional? if so, then probably not.
>Do we think it is heading right for Guam?
>Can we tell what type of missile it is before launch via imagery/other intel?

All of these are critical details. If it's just some Scud knock-off that LOOKS like it's heading towards Guam but we know that it's doomed and heading to the sea, who cares. If it's an actual IRBM and we think it may have a WMD on it.... well then yeah, we'd have to try. But that's a decision based on so many factors that it's like guessing if a car will suffer fatalities if it crashes; there are so many variables to make the question almost pointless without more details about velocity, mass, orientation, health of the passengers, what it is hitting, etc.

>>34849919
I see a Best Korean Michellin Star award.

>>34850086
Guam is important. Very important. We'd try to intercept if we thought it had a WMD.

File: 1489190050077.png (135KB, 800x850px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 800x850px

>>34849412
Back to /pol/ with you.

Your "Happening" will never happen. This is routine sabre rattling and has been going on for decades.