What do you think will happen in North Korea?

LOL, the shah was ALREADY in power in 1953, go read a history book.

And I do find it rather hilarious that many of the same people advocating for assad because he is "secular" are railing against the FAR more secular shah. But then it is more of a question of anti-american sentiment; allies of america are to be attacked while its enemies extolled, regardless of all other events or facts.

Turn off the far left/KGB/iranian propaganda. The coup was led by a group of religious fanatics like khomeini who usurped power; they probably would have done so 10 or 20 years earlier had a weak president like Carter been around then.

iran had been threatening to destroy iraq, other arab states, and the West, so saddam was the tip of the spear to use against iran.

Don't forget the nature of the iranian regime then: murdering 40K people to take power and sending over 1 MM children under 12 years of age to walk across and clear minefields.

Try speaking to an iranian over 50 and ask under which regime were they given far more freedom, the shah or the current monstrosity.

 

I think if the USA attack North Korea, it would apply for military aid to China and Russia. Then Russia would send a thousand of tanks to North Korea, China would send five thousand tanks more, and then the dreams about the united Korea would be suspended for maybe next two hundred years.

 

The USA isn't trying to unite Korea. They're trying to protect themselves.

 

Nice joke. They are trying to protect themselves from a tiny country - one of the poorest in the world - which is 10.000 miles away from the nearest poibt of the United States. Cool.

 

Nope. The Shah was around, but not in power. The president was.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état

Lets not. The coup in 1953, was done by a bunch of power hungry fanatics that found it totally justified millions should be refrained from their democratic elected secular leader, but live under fascist murdering rule... so they could get cheap deals on resources.

No doubt they would say, the all prefer how it was under 1953... without being violently oppressed by a foreign installed dictatorship. All planned by the scum of humanity.

 

The CIA has publicly admitted for the first time that it was behind the notorious 1953 coup against Iran's democratically elected prime minister Mohammad Mosaddeq, in documents that also show how the British government tried to block the release of information about its own involvement in his overthrow.

On the 60th anniversary of an event often invoked by Iranians as evidence of western meddling, the US national security archive at George Washington University published a series of declassified CIA documents.

"The military coup that overthrew Mosaddeq and his National Front cabinet was carried out under CIA direction as an act of US foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government," reads a previously excised section of an internal CIA history titled The Battle for Iran.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/19/cia-admits-role-1953-iranian-coup

 

LOL, you're so out of your league, rookie. Go read the iranian 1907 constitution, the shah was VERY much in power - who do you think appointed mossadegh into the prime minister post? You think he was voted in LOL? Clueless...

Why don't you go read the de-classified CIA papers on the subject, the US paid money and printed posters; it was IRANIANS who conducted the action to help remove mossadegh, who tried to usurp the powers given to the shah according to the iranian constitution.

Interesting how you attack the US for being the last involved - but are silent about ratholes like iran and russia running proxy wars across the globe today.

They will state the facts, that iran was FAR freer under the shah until 1980 then they have been under the monstrous regime since. Go look up photos of women before after 1980, you might actually learn something instead of spouting far left lies/propaganda.

Amazing how the US gets relentlessly attacked for being basically a bystander during these events, while russia - who had its army in TWENTY-ONE other countries from 1945 to 1990 and was ruling them directly from Moscow - gets a pass from people like you.

The scum of humanity are those who tirelessly attack the US for the tiniest of actions, yet refuse to say anything bad about iran or russia for FAR worse.

 

The Brits did FAR more, so how come you aren't complaining about them?

 

The problem is China much prefers having North Korea instead of another US ally or at least one heavily influenced by the US there. Similar to the increasing tensions with Russia after the Cold War ended and the breakup of the Soviet Union . NATO started expanding and Russia began getting nervous seeing NATO gain power and influence.

A US strike is not in our best interest IMHO.

China has already sent signals of willingness to do something about North Korea. Voting against North Korea in the UN, plans to stop importing coal from them, turning back coal shipments recently.

Both countries state run media are starting to run negative stories about the other. Which is a rather large indication that the relationship is deteriorating. If the US tries to tell China what they need to do it likely will not be well received. If the US works with China on a solution I see it as a win-win. China is not too enthusiastic about having a nuclear armed North Korea either. Showed signs of approval when North Korea was cutting back on military spending and dropping plans for nuclear weapon development. Then showed signs of disapproval when Kim Jung Un took over after his uncle and started back down the road his father took.

The US needs to build on what China is already doing, not conduct a military strike without the approval of China. Working with China we would likely end up getting the approval if needed as long as there are assurances that the US will not try to put "our guy" in power.

 

You're just trolling around. It's right there on wikipedia that the CIA was behind the coup against the elected leader.

You are trying to sell me THE CIA,.. was just printing a couple of posters? lmao.
How utterly pathettic. Try paying a Iranian general the equivalent wealth of 700 million in todays money!
That's just 1 bribe. A general who tried to make Iran a nazi supporting country in the past.... by the way.

The scum of humanity did that!

It was far better before 1953. And the scum of humanity had to change that, to get natural resources cheaply while never mind it was dripped in blood.

 

"The Agreed Framework between the United States of America and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea was signed on October 21, 1994 between North Korea (DPRK) and the United States. The objective of the agreement was the freezing and replacement of North Korea's indigenous nuclear power plant program with more nuclear proliferation resistant light water reactor power plants, and the step-by-step normalization of relations between the U.S. and the DPRK. Implementation of the agreement was troubled from the start, but its key elements were being implemented until it effectively broke down in 2003."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreed_Framework
It's far more likely the US and its permanent war-time economy sabotaged Carter's efforts just as it has from Korea to Kandahar over the past 72 years.

 

Well, I'm thinking the North Korean government is highly unstable and not inherently capable of smooth transitions of government.

Since the first two devices North Korea tested were >2 kt, I'm also thinking North Korea could build dozens of "back-pack nukes" to use against South Korea and US Forces in South Korea or sell on the open market to terrorists.

I'm also thinking that since your southern border with Mexico is so porous, terrorists would have an easy time waltzing a back-pack nuke across the border to detonate in some metropolis.

But don't worry....that would only kill about 100,000 to 500,000 Americans depending on the actual conditions.

 

Yes, because wiki is the most definitive source. I'll take the CIA's own de-classified documents first.

So besides print posters and payments to iranians to remove a PM who had tried to usurp the powers of the shah as per the iranian constitution - what EXACTLY did the CIA do?

My goodness - a BRIBE!!!

The scum of the earth is ruling iran since 1980.

No wonder you are so totally ignorant, you refuse to deal with reality:

http://www.thenational.ae/opinion/c...ries-wonder-if-life-was-better-under-the-shah

"Any unbiased historian would undoubtedly find several failures and missed opportunities in the Shah’s rule. Nevertheless, under his command and until his fall, Iran did become one of the Middle East’s most advanced and successful countries. Iran was an industrial and military power and an outstanding scientific hub. Other countries in the region looked at Tehran as a model for culture and civilisation. Unfortunately, he said, it didn’t take overzealous rebels long to wipe out all that history and rewrite it to justify their own actions.

Faced with ever-growing nostalgia for the Shah’s era, defenders of the revolution are desperately trying to justify 36 years of failings in development, welfare and freedoms. Remaining rebels attribute their shortcomings to the West and the opposition. Three-and-a-half decades later, none of those aspirations were really fulfilled. In fact, Iranians’ living conditions are much worse today than they were under the former regime. The margin of political freedom has significantly diminished, stringent social restrictions have become the norm, parliamentary and presidential elections are restricted to Islamists, and political partisanship is controlled by the regime."

 

Where's your proof?

 

The complete unwillingness on the part of the US to sit down and talk to North Korean leaders:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/04/17/the-problem-is-washington-not-north-korea/

"Here’s how Jimmy Carter summed it up in a Washington Post op-ed (November 24, 2010):

“'…in September 2005, an agreement … reaffirmed the basic premises of the 1994 accord. (The Agreed Framework) Its text included denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, a pledge of non-aggression by the United States and steps to evolve a permanent peace agreement to replace the U.S.-North Korean-Chinese cease-fire that has been in effect since July 1953. Unfortunately, no substantive progress has been made since 2005…'

“'This past July I was invited to return to Pyongyang to secure the release of an American, Aijalon Gomes, with the proviso that my visit would last long enough for substantive talks with top North Korean officials. They spelled out in detail their desire to develop a denuclearized Korean Peninsula and a permanent cease-fire, based on the 1994 agreements and the terms adopted by the six powers in September 2005….'

“'North Korean officials have given the same message to other recent American visitors and have permitted access by nuclear experts to an advanced facility for purifying uranium. The same officials had made it clear to me that this array of centrifuges would be ‘on the table’ for discussions with the United States, although uranium purification – a very slow process – was not covered in the 1994 agreements...'"

Maybe it's a good time for Trump to buy Kim that hamburger?

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/donald-trump-north-korea-nukes-224385

 

How will they do a scorched earth policy without effective delivery systems. Their missiles can only reach South Korea, Japan or China, they cannot reach the US as yet?

 

Sorry, that site is not even remotely acceptable as a source for anything.

Second, NK has not adhered to anything agreements that have been negotiated with it.

Third, since it ignores all of the legally-binding UNSC resolutions against it, the threat of military force is the only leverage to which to make it comply with any agreements it has signed.

 

Are you disputing the accuracy of the Carter quotation?

http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/04/17/the-problem-is-washington-not-north-korea/

“'Pyongyang has sent a consistent message that during direct talks with the United States, it is ready to conclude an agreement to end its nuclear programs, put them all under IAEA inspection and conclude a permanent peace treaty to replace the ‘temporary’ cease-fire of 1953. We should consider responding to this offer. The unfortunate alternative is for North Koreans to take whatever actions they consider necessary to defend themselves from what they claim to fear most: a military attack supported by the United States, along with efforts to change the political regime.”

 

CIA officers were bragging publicly about installing the Shah decades ago. It was yet another CIA blunder, but It is history - not "news".

 

25 million human beings are within range of massed NK artillery. Nukes are not the only way to scorch the earth.

 

You don't think we have all those positions dialed in already?

 

It is probably is not possible. See Battle of Okinawa for a good example of how hard it is to knock out artillery dug into rock - even with 16" guns and air dropped steel bombs. How many bunker busters do we have?

 

Tens or hundreds of thousands.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-...ers-in-exchange-for-not-striking-iran-2012-12

 

North Korea would certainly lose in any confrontation with the US, it would mean the end of Kim's dynasty, the uncertainty is what damage he could do. Past performance indicates it is highly unlikely any North Korean missiles could reach the US, they don't have that many and we've seen they often fail.

South Korea is well defended, but the DPRK has a tremendous force, and one expects their conventional weapons work, but an all out invasion is a massive undertaking and as noted, the South is well defended. A surprise first salvo at the DMZ and Seoul would be devastating, particularly on the city, the DMZ is highly fortified and would counterattack immediately. Likely within minutes Kim would be buried in bunker rubble and whatever forces he had sent on the offensive would quickly surrender.

In two or three hours China would need to either massively reinforce DPRK directly engaging US and South Korean forces, or secure an arrangement for them not to take over the whole peninsula. They would likely face masses fleeing over their border (as would the US and the South).

China is in a difficult situation, they certainly don't want a military confrontation with the US, this would ruin their economy. They don't want the devastation in DPRK that surely would follow any attack. During two or three hours very risky military decisions have to be made quickly. I doubt the US or China would opt for nuclear weapons, I expect Kim will use everything he has and quite ineffectively, but China will need to quickly see the US and South Korea aren't trying to seize the North while they devastate Kim's military. If DPRK forces are quickly routed, decimated at the border while a few nuclear installations get destroyed, China could stabilize the place and install another regime.

 

All sounds good except the last sentence. Why is it up to China to pick the new regime? I think the USA, South Korea, and China should work together. I think we all want the same thing.