North Korea

[ubersonic]

Korea was occupied by Japan. Russia liberated the North, America and the Allies liberated the South. After WW2 the North invaded the South, backed by Russia and China. The South fought the North backed by America.

That's not technically correct, a more literal explanation (though linguistically confusing) is that Japan occupied Korea in WW2, then the USSR liberated the north of Korea, then the allies liberated the south of Korea, then the allies partitioned off part of the south and declared it a new country because they said so, then Korea attempted to retake it's lost territory, then the US came back and defended it against the Korean forces, then China stepped in to defend Korea from the US and pushed them back into the south.

Why from this do you think the South belongs to the North?

I never said it belongs to the north (or even that it should in the modern world), I was just pointing out that the north didn't invade the south per say, thye were attempting to liberate their own territory from annexation.

Realistically in this, you're ignoring the fact that the North is a Communist **** hole, and the South is one the most successful countries in South East Asia, and infact the world.

I'm not ignoring it, it's just not relevant to what was being discussed. But realistically if it hadn't been for the US lead war then the whole of Korea would have been unified 67 years ago and today it would all be one the most successful countries in South East Asia, because the only thing that has kept the Kims in power is the public fear of the USA after what they did to their country last time. Had it not been for the USA and the Korean war then the Kims would have fallen decades ago and NK would have moved on from dictators/communism just like China did.

 

[Nasher]

China moved on from dictators and communism? When?

Maybe you should tell the people of Hong Kong because it might cheer them up a bit.

 

[LOAM]

That's not technically correct, a more literal explanation (though linguistically confusing) is that Japan occupied Korea in WW2, then the USSR liberated the north of Korea, then the allies liberated the south of Korea, then the allies partitioned off part of the south and declared it a new country because they said so, then Korea attempted to retake it's lost territory, then the US came back and defended it against the Korean forces, then China stepped in to defend Korea from the US and pushed them back into the south.



I never said it belongs to the north (or even that it should in the modern world), I was just pointing out that the north didn't invade the south per say, thye were attempting to liberate their own territory from annexation.



I'm not ignoring it, it's just not relevant to what was being discussed. But realistically if it hadn't been for the US lead war then the whole of Korea would have been unified 67 years ago and today it would all be one the most successful countries in South East Asia, because the only thing that has kept the Kims in power is the public fear of the USA after what they did to their country last time. Had it not been for the USA and the Korean war then the Kims would have fallen decades ago and NK would have moved on from dictators/communism just like China did.

You have this so back to front its unreal. Russia boycotted a 1948? UN resolution to begin supervised democratic peninsular wide elections with the sole intention of self rule and to unify Korea once more (it had been a unified state for nearly 1000 years before Japan occupied it around 30 years before WW2). When that failed they tried to sabotage the elections taking place in the South.

Russia prevented the unification of post war Korea as they did post war Germany. To suggest the Allies partitioned off the south as oppose Russia partitioned off the North depends entirely upon where you stand politically I guess and whether you consider Stalinism lead dictatorship is better or worse than democratically appointed governments*.

Personally I think Korea and the world as a whole would have benefited from them being allowed to unify and appoint their own government and would find it difficult to believe anyone could think otherwise considering the complete mess that area is now in.

* Just to clarify that point, the south didn't actually get a true democracy for a very long time. The guy they voted in was a US backed militaristic dictator in his own right. Its arguable however that this was as direct result of Russia maintaining control of the North. There is no denying America cocked it all up as they always do but had Russia allowed unification in the first place none of it would have happened.

 

[Rroff]

Looks like they are expected to carry out another long range missile test either Saturday morning or early hours of Sunday. Some speculation it could be a regular angle test.

 

[#Chri5#]

Had it not been for the USA and the Korean war then the Kims would have fallen decades ago and NK would have moved on from dictators/communism just like China did.

That's just supposition - who knows what would have happened (or not happened) in the past 40 or 50 years without the Korean War (or other events).

 

[Rroff]

Ignoring the media hysteria around it this video is quite interesting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPYxrmxOvcQ and also demonstrates some of the complications with an armoured assault on Pyongyang.

 

[glenimp617]

http://news.sky.com/story/north-kor...s-history-if-un-passes-new-sanctions-11030493

The wolf is chasing the sheep, the wolf is chasing the sheep

 

[Kronos]

I see on the news that the waste of space that is the UN Security Council are going to vote on imposing more sanctions on North Korea. Err why? As sanctions have no real effect on a country in fact North Korea's economy grew by 3.9% last year which is 2.9% better than Europe and a figure the UK can only dream of.
Still it does give the well paid members and staff something to do.

 

[VincentHanna]

Of course sanctions have an effect, if China stops buying their coal and stops supplying them with oil, the tiny amount of industry they do have will grind to an absolute halt.

Unfortunately it'll affect the innocent civilians more than people like Kim Jong Un, but it's better than starting a war on the border of China...

 

[Washout]

Yeah, but if someone in NK found £20 between the cushions of their sofa the countries GDP would go up by 15%. They'd also be shot for having foreign currency.*

*I might have made this up.

 

[Rroff]

http://news.sky.com/story/north-kor...s-history-if-un-passes-new-sanctions-11030493

The wolf is chasing the sheep, the wolf is chasing the sheep

NK's rhetoric concerns me a little - that isn't like their past belligerence more like someone who knows or thinks they have a trick up their sleeve.

Of course sanctions have an effect, if China stops buying their coal and stops supplying them with oil, the tiny amount of industry they do have will grind to an absolute halt.

Unfortunately it'll affect the innocent civilians more than people like Kim Jong Un, but it's better than starting a war on the border of China...

I don't think it will stop a war - if anything a chance it might precipitate one if they are really squeezed to the point of desperation.

 

[Roar87]

I see on the news that the waste of space that is the UN Security Council are going to vote on imposing more sanctions on North Korea. Err why? As sanctions have no real effect on a country in fact North Korea's economy grew by 3.9% last year which is 2.9% better than Europe and a figure the UK can only dream of.
Still it does give the well paid members and staff something to do.

North Koreas economy is worth $25 billion, the UK economy is worth $2.63 trillion. We have 40 times the economic output per person. I'm not sure it's a fair equivalency to compare growth between the two and say "we can only dream of" it.

 

[Kronos]

Of course sanctions have an effect, if China stops buying their coal and stops supplying them with oil, the tiny amount of industry they do have will grind to an absolute halt.

And China is going to do that?

 

[VincentHanna]

And China is going to do that?

Well they already agreed to the last lot in early August and have imported 75% less coal already in the first 6 months of the year.

 

[Participant]

NK's rhetoric concerns me a little - that isn't like their past belligerence more like someone who knows or thinks they have a trick up their sleeve.

I don't think it will stop a war - if anything a chance it might precipitate one if they are really squeezed to the point of desperation.

Do you (and anyone else) actually think there will or can be a war over this? I don't believe there will be and NK will be allowed to continue pursuing nuclear armament and will eventually become another nuclear state.

 

[Rroff]

Do you (and anyone else) actually think there will or can be a war over this? I don't believe there will be and NK will be allowed to continue pursuing nuclear armament and will eventually become another nuclear state.

I really can't say - the US seems a bit confounded by a situation where they can't talk their way out of, negotiate their way out of and can't just walk all over militarily (despite the rhetoric about how easily they'd beat them using the on paper differences). I'm not sure they have the stomach for that war unless absolutely pushed to it.

I think there is a real danger that the two countries will play a game of brinkmanship where one pushes it so close to the line the other is forced to walk over it or back down with unpredictable results and likewise a real danger NK will push their development and use of nuclear capabilities to the point its so unpredictable what they might do the world is forced to take action - people assume that like most counties today NK knows the cost of a significant nuclear exchange and won't actually do it but generally their mentality is quite different and in some ways when it comes to military matter decades behind conventional wisdom especially of the Western kind (for instance they would send 100s of thousands of their countrymen to their deaths in military action in ways that almost no developed and even most 3rd world countries would do today).

 

[Avenged7Fold]

China was all for these coal sanctions, if these sanctions did not benefit the Chinese government, we would have seen very half hearted co-operation. A series of events made Chinese-NK relations frosty and banning coal imports from NK was a convenient way to:

-reduce reliance on energy intensive industries which rely on coal, something China has been trying to do to shift their economy in a different direction
-introduce a policy which would have a significant impact environmentally, this aligns with the approach China has taken in recent years to 'clean up'
-snub Kim Jong Un after undermining the Chinese-NK relationship by not informing them of ballistic tests, nuclear tests, assassinating Kim Jong Nam under Chinese protection and also failing to visit China to discuss trade or relations since coming to power. Un has turned the relationship between North Korea and China completely on its head and China has responded by choking its economy.

 

[Rroff]

China completely on its head and China has responded by choking its economy.

Sadly I suspect that Russia to a degree has been stepping into the hole left by China albeit somewhat covertly. None the less it serves their interests to have the US tied up with matters in Asia while Russia has interests ongoing elsewhere.

I wonder if from recently positioning if Russia would try to capitalise on the US being tied up in that direction to take some land bridges in Eastern Europe I'm really not sure if they'd risk an upset like that or not these days.

 

[Avenged7Fold]

I rather believe that Russia, like very other country, does not pass up the opportunity to make money. That said, i believe that even though they like making things hard for the US, they would be happy to see the US gone from South Korea after NK have been dealt with.

 

[The Running Man]

I don't understand why they are backing down on asset freezes for kim. Surely this is the best method of tackling him with least cost/stress to the population - who otherwise get punished most heavily by economic sanctions