Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kstewart33

(6,551 posts)
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 11:45 AM Apr 2017

Senior North Korean Defector Tells Lester Holt: "World Should Be Ready."

Source: NBC News

SEOUL, South Korea — A senior North Korean defector has told NBC News that the country's "desperate" dictator is prepared to use nuclear weapons to strike the United States and its allies.

Thae Yong Ho is the most high profile North Korean defector in two decades, meaning he is able to give a rare insight into the secretive, authoritarian regime.

According to Thae, North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un is "desperate in maintaining his rule by relying on his [development of] nuclear weapons and ICBM." He was using an acronym for intercontinental ballistic missiles — a long range rocket that in theory would be capable of hitting the U.S.

"Once he sees that there is any kind of sign of a tank or an imminent threat from America, then he would use his nuclear weapons with ICBM," he added in an exclusive interview on Sunday. Thae was living in London and serving as North Korea's deputy ambassador to the United Kingdom when he and his family defected to South Korea and were announced to the world in August.

Read more: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/north-korean-defector-tells-lester-holt-world-should-be-ready-n741901?cid=eml_nbn_20170403

65 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Senior North Korean Defector Tells Lester Holt: "World Should Be Ready." (Original Post) kstewart33 Apr 2017 OP
North Korea won't go down without causing massive damage dalton99a Apr 2017 #1
2018 Winter Olympics in Pyongyang. 2020 Summer games in Tokyo. underpants Apr 2017 #8
You are mistaken about the 2018 Olympics. They are not in Pyongyang, North Korea. StevieM Apr 2017 #26
Auto correct underpants Apr 2017 #29
There are presently about 300,000 Americans living in Seoul. kstewart33 Apr 2017 #18
This will only strengthen chump because Amerikkka loves war prezidunts kimbutgar Apr 2017 #2
We love "war presidents" that can declare "mission accomplished" with few casualties... regnaD kciN Apr 2017 #38
His supporters don't care about "liberal elitist coastal blue states". NutmegYankee Apr 2017 #42
That's been going through my mind... defacto7 Apr 2017 #52
I'm pretty sure Alaska is the most likely USA target from NK. ColemanMaskell Apr 2017 #57
Scary stuff and yet Dumpty's rhetoric with N Korea can incite this more... iluvtennis Apr 2017 #3
Given the N Korean leaderships actions for the past 10+ years Trump is a minor factor in it as the cstanleytech Apr 2017 #12
Correct...BUT... SkyDaddy7 Apr 2017 #39
True, but... regnaD kciN Apr 2017 #40
in run up to Iraq War, CIA director Tenet was forced to admit Iraq would only use nukes IF attacked yurbud Apr 2017 #64
I've been saying this for awhile now about NK NWCorona Apr 2017 #4
And we have a complete moron in the White House. redstatebluegirl Apr 2017 #5
Well, that certainly makes me glad that we have an COLGATE4 Apr 2017 #6
Yes - and the Nuke Deal with Iran is "Horrible!", "Disgusting!", "Sad!" vkkv Apr 2017 #7
That deal politically ties the current POTUS's hands. AtheistCrusader Apr 2017 #28
If you listen closely, you can hear the war drums beating packman Apr 2017 #9
Hermann Goring agrees workinclasszero Apr 2017 #16
It wouldn't work this time. Charles Bukowski Apr 2017 #51
Sometimes I think we should look at the ban on assassination again. Vinca Apr 2017 #10
There's a ban on assassination? IronLionZion Apr 2017 #20
Yes, it's illegal BainsBane Apr 2017 #25
The US has launched targeted missile strikes at the houses of foreign leaders IronLionZion Apr 2017 #33
I never understood BainsBane Apr 2017 #35
You're thinking like a Democrat IronLionZion Apr 2017 #36
A major war as a distraction BainsBane Apr 2017 #46
Seems likelier than not. ColemanMaskell Apr 2017 #58
That missle strike in Libya was a big deal at the time, a rare occurance. Ligyron Apr 2017 #45
Make America Great Again! IronLionZion Apr 2017 #47
Executive Order 11905 ozone82 Apr 2017 #31
The problem is... regnaD kciN Apr 2017 #41
That's true, but it would happen whether only Kim was taken out or a bomb was dropped Vinca Apr 2017 #48
When's the last time either of them have been in a war? IronLionZion Apr 2017 #56
Is Kim Jong Un really a suicidal moron? perhaps so. yodermon Apr 2017 #11
I think he is simply scared what the N. Korean people will do to him. cstanleytech Apr 2017 #13
Yes! and offer FREE CABLE! Gallon jugs of BON BONS! Fluffy faux-LEATHER COUCHES! vkkv Apr 2017 #17
I don't know if he'd take it davekriss Apr 2017 #21
True he might be as delusional as Trump and be unwilling to accept reality. cstanleytech Apr 2017 #23
It's reported that daddy told young Kim "if you're going down... PearliePoo2 Apr 2017 #14
I feel bad for that young American who is doing 15 years' hard labor in N.K. :-( secondwind Apr 2017 #15
Excessive, yes. But he played on the 3rd rail. WinkyDink Apr 2017 #30
Yup, people are underestimating them IronLionZion Apr 2017 #19
here is tRumps theme song... Javaman Apr 2017 #22
Two desperate plutocrats, BainsBane Apr 2017 #24
I hope they thought up a better name for this guy than 'Curveball'. AtheistCrusader Apr 2017 #27
Gee. How surprising. Someone who achieved a high status fluffing a master in North Korea... hunter Apr 2017 #32
Are they going to call their first nuke "Fat Boy" Dopers_Greed Apr 2017 #34
Could be another Ahmed Chalabi. LS_Editor Apr 2017 #37
And gaurantee their utter destruction? WoonTars Apr 2017 #43
EMP Attack MosheFeingold Apr 2017 #44
Spot on FrodosNewPet Apr 2017 #54
People don't understand it MosheFeingold Apr 2017 #61
ICBM is not an acronym ThatOtherPerson Apr 2017 #49
You mean because it doesn't form a word? Adrahil Apr 2017 #59
As someone who lives on the west coast this scares the fucking shit out of me. Initech Apr 2017 #50
Not worried about the US getting nuked, don't think its possible elmac Apr 2017 #53
I think it depends on if they get their 2 biggest missiles working.. EX500rider Apr 2017 #55
It's possible, but fairly unlikely. First, they have to have reliable nuclear warheads to send over Fast Walker 52 Apr 2017 #62
I read a book about NK treestar Apr 2017 #60
It's unlikely they would attack us because they know it would be suicide Fast Walker 52 Apr 2017 #63
True. The theory was that everything NK does treestar Apr 2017 #65

kstewart33

(6,551 posts)
18. There are presently about 300,000 Americans living in Seoul.
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 12:51 PM
Apr 2017

A huge problem for our country if Seoul is attacked.

regnaD kciN

(26,045 posts)
38. We love "war presidents" that can declare "mission accomplished" with few casualties...
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 03:43 PM
Apr 2017

A war president that might get Hawaii or the west coast nuked? Not so much.

NutmegYankee

(16,207 posts)
42. His supporters don't care about "liberal elitist coastal blue states".
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 04:04 PM
Apr 2017

As long as the nukes don't hit Dumnfuckistan, Bible Belt USA, they will back him.

ColemanMaskell

(783 posts)
57. I'm pretty sure Alaska is the most likely USA target from NK.
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 01:57 AM
Apr 2017

Don't remember where I read that, but it seemed to make a lot of sense. Easier target for unreliable guidance system -- he might know that.

iluvtennis

(19,912 posts)
3. Scary stuff and yet Dumpty's rhetoric with N Korea can incite this more...
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 11:53 AM
Apr 2017

...instead of the rhetoric, Dumpty should be employing his "I'm the greatest deal maker" to be having diplomatic talks with Kim Jong Un.

I worked on the launch software for ICBMs - we don't want ICBM nukes used as this earth can be destroyed.

Now that we have idiots like Dumpty and Jong Un in control of nukes, we all need to be afraid, very afraid.

cstanleytech

(26,364 posts)
12. Given the N Korean leaderships actions for the past 10+ years Trump is a minor factor in it as the
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 12:23 PM
Apr 2017

N. Korean leadership has been belligerent and would probably still be so even if Hillary had won.

SkyDaddy7

(6,045 posts)
39. Correct...BUT...
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 03:46 PM
Apr 2017

The 70yr old CHILD that occupies the White House now will take all of NK belligerent behavior as a personal attack on him! Hillary would never act so irrational. IMHO. Hillary would not back down or get pushed around but she would clearly understand who NK is & how they act unlike the man/CHILD TRUMP.

regnaD kciN

(26,045 posts)
40. True, but...
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 03:48 PM
Apr 2017

...there are ways of handling nuts with nukes like Kim. Obama and even Dubya knew that -- ignore the provocations, try to work out deals that benefited us while making Great Leader be able to pretend he won, and call in the Chinese to help keep him in line if all else fails. The problem now is that we've got a leader who, in crucial aspects, resembles Kim -- one that might be ready to risk the death of millions just to prove that his, uh, hands are larger.

yurbud

(39,405 posts)
64. in run up to Iraq War, CIA director Tenet was forced to admit Iraq would only use nukes IF attacked
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 04:04 PM
Apr 2017

and in danger of losing power.

The same is likely true of North Korea.

redstatebluegirl

(12,265 posts)
5. And we have a complete moron in the White House.
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 11:55 AM
Apr 2017

I would feel so much safer with Hillary in there, but it is not to be. I can only hope the crazy Congress loves the country enough to help protect us from Trump.

COLGATE4

(14,732 posts)
6. Well, that certainly makes me glad that we have an
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 11:56 AM
Apr 2017

incurious, lazy ignoramus with a "Dirty Harry" complex with his little hands on the nuclear trigger.

 

vkkv

(3,384 posts)
7. Yes - and the Nuke Deal with Iran is "Horrible!", "Disgusting!", "Sad!"
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 11:57 AM
Apr 2017

I am so glad that we have a madman in the Oval office right now, aren't you?




AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
28. That deal politically ties the current POTUS's hands.
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 01:48 PM
Apr 2017

War with Iran is basically off the table today. They HATE that.

 

packman

(16,296 posts)
9. If you listen closely, you can hear the war drums beating
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 12:10 PM
Apr 2017



And they will get louder as the Trump administration implodes - War is always good for the corrupt and evil
 

workinclasszero

(28,270 posts)
16. Hermann Goring agrees
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 12:34 PM
Apr 2017

'The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.' Hermann Göring

 

Charles Bukowski

(1,132 posts)
51. It wouldn't work this time.
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 05:45 PM
Apr 2017

Trump is largely viewed as incompetent and unstable, and the disastrous War in Iraq (that pushed those same patriotic buttons) is still fresh on everyone's minds. If Shitbag goes to war, there will be rioting on the streets, on the WH lawn.

Vinca

(50,334 posts)
10. Sometimes I think we should look at the ban on assassination again.
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 12:10 PM
Apr 2017

I'd rather have Crazy Kim and his band of thugs taken out than risk hundreds of thousands of innocent lives in a nuclear strike . . . and that's exactly what may happen with Trump itching to prove his manhood.

IronLionZion

(45,667 posts)
20. There's a ban on assassination?
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 01:07 PM
Apr 2017

The CIA would find a way to do it if they really wanted to and make it look like local rebels did it.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
25. Yes, it's illegal
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 01:42 PM
Apr 2017

but they have done it anyway. In the 1970s, the Church Committee investigated Assassination Plots by the US government. There is a government publication on it. Many were toward Fidel Castro. You can see how that worked out.

IronLionZion

(45,667 posts)
33. The US has launched targeted missile strikes at the houses of foreign leaders
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 02:25 PM
Apr 2017

killing members of their family

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_United_States_bombing_of_Libya

It's happened other times since then. The ambiguity of air strikes might give them some cover in some operations where we can pretend they weren't targeting the leader. But when America wants someone dead badly enough, he tends to end up dead sooner or later.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
35. I never understood
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 03:02 PM
Apr 2017

Why the Bush administration didn't just take out Saddam rather than destroying the whole country. The entire justification for the war was about him.

IronLionZion

(45,667 posts)
36. You're thinking like a Democrat
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 03:16 PM
Apr 2017

Clinton and Obama launched targeted strikes. Bush's people liked large ground wars with lots of troops and heavy bombers for some reason.

I worry about what Trump and Bannon are planning for us.

Ligyron

(7,645 posts)
45. That missle strike in Libya was a big deal at the time, a rare occurance.
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 04:55 PM
Apr 2017

We launch them damn near every day now, sometimes twice on Sunday.

regnaD kciN

(26,045 posts)
41. The problem is...
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 03:53 PM
Apr 2017

...Kim and his gang have the support of China. If we take action against him, we put our ties with a much, much bigger threat to the U.S. at risk.

Vinca

(50,334 posts)
48. That's true, but it would happen whether only Kim was taken out or a bomb was dropped
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 05:31 PM
Apr 2017

that killed him and a thousand innocent civilians. I suspect the Fool-In-Chief will opt for the latter. He's not big on sanctions and diplomacy and all that other stuff that requires an iota of knowledge and expertise.

IronLionZion

(45,667 posts)
56. When's the last time either of them have been in a war?
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 08:31 PM
Apr 2017

The US military is very experienced. China and North Korea are not. And Bannon wants to start some shit so bad, just to rally the patriotism angle and boost Dolt 45's poll numbers. They are into bold moves, not subtle diplomacy. Impulsive action, not thoughtful decisions.

yodermon

(6,143 posts)
11. Is Kim Jong Un really a suicidal moron? perhaps so.
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 12:11 PM
Apr 2017

I have in-laws in Seoul, however, so this is not even remotely an academic question for me.

cstanleytech

(26,364 posts)
13. I think he is simply scared what the N. Korean people will do to him.
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 12:26 PM
Apr 2017

One way to reduce his fear though might be to simply be to offer him the option of free passage to a neutral country, yes it would suck somewhat as I suspect he would escape varies criminal charges including some crimes against humanity but if it comes down to that vs taking his finger off the nuclear trigger I would take the deal.

 

vkkv

(3,384 posts)
17. Yes! and offer FREE CABLE! Gallon jugs of BON BONS! Fluffy faux-LEATHER COUCHES!
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 12:35 PM
Apr 2017

Maybe he'll take the offer.

davekriss

(4,644 posts)
21. I don't know if he'd take it
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 01:30 PM
Apr 2017

Anyone who delights in executing relatives with anti-aircraft guns at close range does not view the world through the same sensible lenses that the rest of us do.

PearliePoo2

(7,768 posts)
14. It's reported that daddy told young Kim "if you're going down...
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 12:29 PM
Apr 2017
take everyone you can with you."

Here's excerpts from a lengthy article analyzing how N.K. may respond to a strike and what their capabilities are:

"North Korea is powerless to prevent a U.S. strike on its nuclear program, but retaliation is well within its means. The significant military capability that North Korea has built up against South Korea is not advanced by Western standards, but there are practical ways Pyongyang could respond to aggression.

The North Korean military's most powerful tool is artillery. It cannot level Seoul as some reports have claimed, but it could do significant damage. Pyongyang risks deteriorating its forces by exposing them to return fire, however, which significantly restricts their use. Less conventional methods of retaliation, such as sabotage or cyber warfare, are less risky but also limit the shock that North Korea would desire."

"After a strike, North Korea's most immediate and expected method of retaliation would center around conventional artillery. Many of the North's indirect fire systems are already located on or near the border with South Korea. By virtue of proximity and simplicity, these systems have a lower preparatory and response times than air assets, larger ballistic missiles or naval assets. Nevertheless, there are several critical limitations to their effectiveness.

Tube and Rocket Artillery
The biggest anticipated cost of a North Korean artillery barrage in response to an attack would be the at least partial destruction of Seoul. But the volume of fire that the North can direct against the South Korean capital is limited by some important factors. Of the vast artillery force deployed by the North along the border, only a small portion — Koksan 170-mm self-propelled guns, as well as 240-mm and 300-mm multiple launch rocket systems — are capable of actually reaching Seoul. Broadly speaking, the bulk of Pyongyang's artillery can reach only into the northern border area of South Korea or the northern outskirts of Seoul."

more:https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/how-north-korea-would-retaliate








IronLionZion

(45,667 posts)
19. Yup, people are underestimating them
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 01:02 PM
Apr 2017

We are told simultaneously that they are a dangerous threat and their technology is laughably dysfunctional. I wouldn't be so sure about either one. They seem to operate in a different mentality than we do. If enough of their people starve, they might start some shit to hang onto power and keep people occupied. Plus they seem a bit paranoid and suicidal, which we have experience with in the Middle East. And they are also an excuse for the US to keep a large military presence in the area near China.

Trump and Bannon want to go to war with someone to justify their defense build up boost their poll numbers here. Many in the Trump administration enjoy killing innocent civilians in the Middle East and would like to carpet bomb Koreans to show the world the might of the alpha males after the weak and soft Obama years.

There are shitheads who told us the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts would be easy and quick. Those people should be punched in the face.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
27. I hope they thought up a better name for this guy than 'Curveball'.
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 01:44 PM
Apr 2017

It feels like I've heard this song and dance before.

hunter

(38,353 posts)
32. Gee. How surprising. Someone who achieved a high status fluffing a master in North Korea...
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 02:15 PM
Apr 2017

...apparently serves a new master.



Dopers_Greed

(2,640 posts)
34. Are they going to call their first nuke "Fat Boy"
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 02:34 PM
Apr 2017

Last edited Mon Apr 3, 2017, 04:53 PM - Edit history (1)

Wait...or is that already Kim Jong-un's nickname?

WoonTars

(694 posts)
43. And gaurantee their utter destruction?
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 04:29 PM
Apr 2017

Not likely.

They won't do it for the same reason Iran would never attack Israel, swift, massive, and total destruction.

MosheFeingold

(3,051 posts)
44. EMP Attack
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 04:44 PM
Apr 2017

Would result in 9/10 Americans (and Canadians and Mexicans) dying.

I was an advocate of hardening our electrical grid back in the 1970s against this, along with a program to gradually harden key emergency vehicles and facilities; water systems; food distribution areas (e.g., Wal-Mart distribution systems); hospitals, police, fire, and utility vehicles; banks and banking computers; and finally consumer-level vehicles and certain key home systems -- e.g., HVAC, etc.

It was deemed far too unsexy of a project. No bridge for a politician to put his name on.

I think with rogue nations with limited nukes and our electronic world, it's a bigger need now than 1970.

Seriously consider talking to you Congressman. Trump and Congress plan a giant infrastructure bill. This needs to be part of it.

FrodosNewPet

(495 posts)
54. Spot on
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 07:42 PM
Apr 2017

My biggest fear for years has been an EMP, or even conventional high explosives, attack against our electrical infrastructure during a cold snap in the dead of winter.

MosheFeingold

(3,051 posts)
61. People don't understand it
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 02:41 PM
Apr 2017

So they don't fear it.

An EMP is the most likely existential threat against the USA.

There are certainly several countries both capable (Iran and NKorea) and crazy enough to do it -- both of whom have stated they intend to do it.

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
59. You mean because it doesn't form a word?
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 06:54 AM
Apr 2017

The term is now commonly used to refer to initial letter-type abbreviations. Some purists don't like that, but language changes....

 

elmac

(4,642 posts)
53. Not worried about the US getting nuked, don't think its possible
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 06:16 PM
Apr 2017

but I worry for Japan and S. Korea.

EX500rider

(10,891 posts)
55. I think it depends on if they get their 2 biggest missiles working..
Mon Apr 3, 2017, 08:29 PM
Apr 2017

.....and miniaturized a warhead. But if Pakistan can do it I think N Korea can also.

 

Fast Walker 52

(7,723 posts)
62. It's possible, but fairly unlikely. First, they have to have reliable nuclear warheads to send over
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 03:59 PM
Apr 2017

and second, reliable high performance intercontinental missiles to send them on. I doubt they have either.

But still, Trump is clearly the wrong person to be dealing with this.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
60. I read a book about NK
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 08:46 AM
Apr 2017

Last edited Tue Apr 4, 2017, 04:56 PM - Edit history (1)

The theory the writer had was that this would never happen. The Kims use this threat to get the West to give them aid. Food aid, mainly, as they cannot feed their population.

Everything they do is to keep the Kims in power, and that's all. They have no interest in actually attacking any other country.

The Real North Korea: Life and Politics in the Failed Stalinist Utopia
by Andrei Lankov

 

Fast Walker 52

(7,723 posts)
63. It's unlikely they would attack us because they know it would be suicide
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 04:00 PM
Apr 2017

like Saddam Hussein, they want to pretend they have WMD.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
65. True. The theory was that everything NK does
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 04:57 PM
Apr 2017

makes sense if you realize that the whole goal for the Kims is to stay in power. Seen through that lens, their actions make sense.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Senior North Korean Defec...