BBC - US Bombers fly close to North Korea

[Aircraftpaulcornwall]

If Kim should carry out the threat to shoot down any U.S. military (or any other!) aircraft - that in itself is an act of war!
Further to my post of a few days ago, ANY hitting of U.S. soil, whether it be Guam or the west cast of the USA, surely, all of these scenarios
would result in a devastating destructive strike by the U.S. on North Korea.
Also, N.K. says that they may shoot down a U.S. aircraft - they have plenty of artillery pieces and anti-aircraft guns, but would these have the range to reach
a high flying B1, B2, or a B-52 for that matter? Unless they have long-range surface to air missiles, I somehow doubt it - I may be wrong though! -Paul

[page_verify]

There's enough US aircraft that fly within missile range of NK on a daily basis (U-2, RC-135 etc.) for him to choose what he shoots down, should he want to.

[page_verify]

Apologies for digging up an old thread, but there's a story in the news this weekend which quotes a senior general as saying he would "would resist (an) 'illegal' presidential strike order". The US government is openly sharing now how just because Trump could authorise a nuclear strike, doesn't meant his military would perform a nuclear strike.

A nice quote from General John Hyten, Head of the US Strategic Command, where he said he "had studied US laws of armed conflict for many years which stipulates key criteria the president must consider before launching any attack:

Necessity
Distinction
Proportionality
Unnecessary suffering"

"US nuclear chief would resist 'illegal' presidential strike order" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42041975

[filmman]

Oops! Christmas gift to Kim? He thought he needed Nukes to invade South Korea, but now he has them he is possibly given "Carte Blanche" to invade. If he invades, at what point would the US military allow nukes to be used and where and to do what, particularly as he could retaliate. Also he might worry about the end of the Zimbabwe dynasty, invade or purge his military before they Kim him. MAD worked in Europe because of certainly, but now if the Russians carved off part of NATO what then?
Filmman

[Sparts99]

Don't understand your logic, why does he need nukes to invade S Korea? he knows any use of nukes will be the end of him, the nukes are a threat to the outside world to keep out of his. The US has more than enough conventional capability to stop an invasion of S Korea by N Korea in its tracks and he knows it. The big problem is stopping a confrontation between China and the US, China does not want US military right on its border, N Korea is a good buffer for them, hence them treading a careful line between keeping him in power but in check. Fail to see the Zimbabwe connection? Kim Wrong 'un is well known for having even close family members dealt with if they don't toe the party line. MAD worked as you say because the Warsaw Pact knew there would be an instant and massive nuclear response to an attack on the West in Europe hence they could never achieve their goals, an attack would be pointless. Since the collapse of the Warsaw pact a tripwire posture with reduced nuclear dependancy was instigated, but now that is falling out of favour and deterrence becoming the buzzword again. The longer Russia leaves it to make its move the less chance of success it has.

[filmman]

He needs Nukes to deter the US from using theirs against an overwhelming N K conventional attack. By the time the US deployed significant conventional assets it might be too late, as almost happened last time.
Seol is very near to the border and could be easily devastated and China might resupply Kim to keep the NK buffer.
NK has just beefed up its tactical AA missile systems. The Egyptians attacked Israel under a missile umbrella and hammered the Israeli AF until the advanced beyond it.
Zimbabwe's military stopped a perpetuating dynasty; how many generations of Kim's family ruled NK. Stalin murdered his party/military officers and died in bed. But will Kim?
Film an