If China wants to be part of "The New World Order" they would "b***h" slap NK down,but as usuall they are waffling with an "allie". The countries involved would be in total shock if China stepped up to the plate and told NK to cut the nonsense or we pull all our support, but I get the feeling that China likes the tension in the area from a mouse that roars.
Korean Problems
- Thread starter timshatz
- Start date
Matt308
Glock Perfection
NK has done this repeatedly... and to their positive return... since the 1950's. They commit an incident/attrocity, the world recoils in horror, they threaten and the world reacts with "humanitarian aid" to protect the innocents. NK is as predicatable as an atomic clock. Let me ask you this... when is the last time that a tyrant or brutal dictator gave up power with no bloodshed or violence upon the peoples. Frickin' never. I hate to say it, but someone just needs to take Kim Jung Il and his regime out. I bet it could be done in a week with SK help and... wait for it... China's help.
And therein lies the problem.
You would think that with all the NK refugees spilling over the border that China would want to resolve this. But the Chicom's are likely so fearful of SK democracy spreading into their poor southeast region that they are willing to support the continued oppression/killing of innocents.
What a world.
pbfoot
1st Lieutenant
China is such a lame nation they'll never do anything to help unless there is a direct benefit. I wonder if they ever paid any of their lend lease bills .
Matt308
Glock Perfection
I fully believe that China's oppression of their people will double back upon them. We in the west think short term. What I worry about is China's involvement in western economy and its demise's impact upon us. Only time in my opinion.
BombTaxi
Tech Sergeant
I think if NK are going to try anything, the time is now. The US is heavily deployed in Iraq/Afghanistan and will have to divert assests from those sectors to deal with Pyongyang. The deployment of the Big E is a start, but a carrier group cannot win a war on it's own. The UK is also heavily deployed in Afghanistan, and Argentina's sabre-rattling and potential unrest in Ireland are much more immediate threats than NK. The rest of the world, except Japan, is unlikely to take much notice as they all seem to have their own troubles to deal with. So the US might find itself short of allies, and short of resource if it all kicks off in the near future...
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
And the former USSR? Thinking the MiG's back in the day. Would some diehard old communists try something for the former allies?
Night Fighter Nut
Master Sergeant
As memory serves, Kim's dad promised that one day the North would take the South and unite Korea under communism. Every time there is a succession, they start to rattle the sabre again. Last I heard, Kim is not doing well as far as health is concerned and that he has already apointed a successor after he is gone. Perhaps he may be just trying to show his people that he is still in charge and strong in their eyes. Kim is very afraid of the U.S. but perhaps now that we are spread so thin, he thinks he can get away with anything and is feeling that the U.S. is too involved elsewhere to care what he does.
- Thread starter
- #28
Keep in mind fellas that the North has nukes. That's trouble for anyone trying to keep them from getting out of hand. Like the local neighborhood nutjob having an automatic weapon (which is why all sane countries have laws against nutjobs having guns). The work you need to do to take him out is not going to be worth the cost.
Something along the lines of containment is the best plan. Otherwise, you stand the chance of Seoul or Tokyo getting nuked (not that Tokyo has anything to do with this but you can never tell with a nutjob).
Something along the lines of containment is the best plan. Otherwise, you stand the chance of Seoul or Tokyo getting nuked (not that Tokyo has anything to do with this but you can never tell with a nutjob).
Matt308
Glock Perfection
Messy1
Master Sergeant
You may be on to something Matt. Maybe we could just send him a card or something?
Night Fighter Nut
Master Sergeant
We could give his phone number to telemarketers and let them talk him to death? 
RabidAlien
1st Lieutenant
We could give his phone number to telemarketers and let them talk him to death?
Ooooo....cruel and unusual....I like it!
BombTaxi
Tech Sergeant
NK may have nukes, but delivering them is another matter - IIRC, the last NK missile test was something of a failure. IMHO, containment is not going to work - it never has in the past, it isn't now, and it is unlikely that it will do in the future.
NK wants attention - they want to be Public Enemy Number One as this suits the needs of the dictatorship and keeps the minds of the people off the fact that they are rapidly starving to death. There are two realistic options available. Firstly, go in and instigate a regime change. This is difficult, firstly because the US is still dealing with the aftermath of it's regime changes in Iraq and Afghanistan, and secondly because going to war with NK is exactly what Pyongyang wants the West to do.
The other option is to try to increase sanctions and increase the suffering of the ordinary people even further. Three things make this a bad choice. Firstly, it confirms the narrative from Pyongyang that the West is out to make NK suffer and makes a martyr out of Kim Jong Il. Secondly, China will never co-operate so the sanctions will not be fully effective. Thirdly, a sanctions regime has never actually achieved anything in terms of correcting the behaviour of a wayward state - I present Libya and Iraq as classic examples of this.
So whatever is done in NK, it means another long war, another Vietnam, another Afghanistan and another failure in containment policy.
Matt308
Glock Perfection
I honestly don't think that NK has any credible nuke threat. Neither delivery nor detonation. Maybe lob the equivalent of a dirty bomb in Seoul. That would be bad enough.
Exactly right. This has been their modus operandi ever since the ceasefire negotiations began in the early 1950s.
I don't agree with this. Bluffing about war is one thing. Actually going to war is another. The threats and probes keep the masses focused upon the evil intentions of the West. Going to war would quickly result in dispelling that myth. This would not be a war of the 1950s wherein the bombing doctrine was steeped in WWII with cities being annihilated. This would be a precision war with comparatively little civilian casualties. Comparatively.
However, see my comment below because it's not quite that simple now is it.
Not sure if Libya is your best example. But your main point is spot on. Sanctions do nothing but focus the NK civilian ire upon the evil west. Mission accomplished.
I agree with this ONLY if China gets involved. Personally, I question whether they would. There would be lots of teeth gnashing, but I profess that the actual war would be waged so quickly that China would not have time to react in a credible fashion. But post war (like Iraq), we would have one hell of a time with occupation and underground enemies supported by China. And what would SK do with the literally millions upon millions of refugees that would certainly flood their borders with no skills, no money, no possessions, starving, etc. The DMZ serves two purposes if you ask me. SK doesn't want war. Their economy is humming right along even with the recession. A war would bring that to a screeching halt.
It's a no win situation in my opinion.
BombTaxi
Tech Sergeant
I think you're right Matt, the war would be easily won, but the peace would be very, very difficult to win, as per Iraq.I think this is true no matter what China does. If China remains neutral but hostile to an occupying force, reconstruction will be near impossible. But if China gets involved, there will be inevitable tension with the US over who sets the agenda and leads the projects.
Still, at a very basic level I feel that 'Something Needs To Be Done'. My gut says that there should be retaliation for the sinking of the SK warship - and there is absolutely no doubt NK did it. Problem is, how do you get the job done without de-stabilizing the whole region and/or making a martyr of Kim Jong Il?
I personally suspect that Kim Jong Il would welcome a war as a vindication of his paranoia and a chance to go down in a blaze of glory - but I accept your point that if there is a war, he loses his bargaining chip with the masses.
However, I would say that SK doesn't want or need a war for much the same reasons as you give for NK - not least as anti-North posturing seems to be a key part of their politics - take away the threat and what is there to posture about? Just as the people of NK are taught to fear the West, I suspect the people of SK are taught to fear the North - it's a very handy way of uniting the populace and diverting their discontent away from the govt...
Still, at a very basic level I feel that 'Something Needs To Be Done'. My gut says that there should be retaliation for the sinking of the SK warship - and there is absolutely no doubt NK did it. Problem is, how do you get the job done without de-stabilizing the whole region and/or making a martyr of Kim Jong Il?
I personally suspect that Kim Jong Il would welcome a war as a vindication of his paranoia and a chance to go down in a blaze of glory - but I accept your point that if there is a war, he loses his bargaining chip with the masses.
However, I would say that SK doesn't want or need a war for much the same reasons as you give for NK - not least as anti-North posturing seems to be a key part of their politics - take away the threat and what is there to posture about? Just as the people of NK are taught to fear the West, I suspect the people of SK are taught to fear the North - it's a very handy way of uniting the populace and diverting their discontent away from the govt...
- Thread starter
- #36
Good posts Matt and Bomb. Everything keeps coming back to Kim being a nut and there isn't a lot that you can do that won't cost more than it's worth.
Although, while I agree the NK military is nowhere near as effective as those around it, I gotta believe they've got a way to get a nuke, a functioning nuke, to where they want it. Even the threat of them being able to do so is enough. Who wants to test it and find out if they can or can't pop a nuke over Seoul?
Although, while I agree the NK military is nowhere near as effective as those around it, I gotta believe they've got a way to get a nuke, a functioning nuke, to where they want it. Even the threat of them being able to do so is enough. Who wants to test it and find out if they can or can't pop a nuke over Seoul?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnG_ycQECwY
though we do not care as long as it is their simulation or dream...
Matt308
Glock Perfection
Absolutely right. And even a poorly targeted and partially exploded device in Seoul would be devasting to civil moral and hugely expensive to clean up.
Funny how a single nuke can hold a huge occupation army hostage and in another defense thread in the Modern sub-forum, there are posts arguing for the UK to dismantle their nukes over costs. That's cheap insurance to maintain sovereignty, if you ask me.
- Thread starter
- #39
Got that right. And I'd hate to be the "True Believer" who dismantles their arsenal only to find the potential enemy that promised they'd do the same...didn't.
Matt308
Glock Perfection
..or that Canada's imperialistic aspirations finally came to the forefront and they notified the non-nuke world that they were taking over the galaxy. 
