North Korea

Avenged7Fold said:
I think the ideal thing to do is for the US (Trump) to back off with his heavy handed threats and to let the Chinese-NK relationship worsen further.
Click to expand...
That wouldn't happen, China aren't getting tough with NK because they think Kim is a loose cannon who could end up turning the peninsula into a huge battlefield, they are getting tough with NK because they think Trump is a loose cannon who could end up turning the peninsula into a huge battlefield, and castrating Kim is easier for them than trying to deal with Trump.


hornetstinger said:
Yeah I believe Japan was blockaided, so literally Japan was forced to go to war.
Click to expand...
It was quite an ingenious play to be fair, Roosevelt knew the US people had no interest in getting involved in another major European war so he forced Japan to attack the US knowing that Hitler would almost certainly declare war in support of Japan thus enabling the USA to enter the main war.
 
ubersonic said:
That wouldn't happen, China aren't getting tough with NK because they think Kim is a loose cannon who could end up turning the peninsula into a huge battlefield, they are getting tough with NK because they think Trump is a loose cannon who could end up turning the peninsula into a huge battlefield, and castrating Kim is easier for them than trying to deal with Trump.
Click to expand...

Nah China and NK relations have been going sour since Un took over. He refused to ever visit Chinese leader, refused to co-operate with requests to not test nukes/missiles on multiple occasions, never informed the Chinese over Nams assassination and has allowed Chinese fishing boats to come under fire/stolen by North Korean army.

The Chinese held a good relationship with the regime when his father was in power but it is an altogether different government as far as they are concerned, now that Un is in.

Relations have been sour for a while but its recent events which are bringing NK disobedience to light in the west.

The Kim Jong Il treated the Chinese as allies, Un treats them like another enemy. These are the main reasons why the relationship has become frosty. The reasoning is far close to home than any reason to do with Trump.
 
I strongly believe now, especially after the tangerine nightmare's latest rant this evening that this is only going to end with military action. Worryingly both Russia and China have stated there will be no winners in conflict within the Korean peninsula.
 
America isn't in a position to do anything militarily.

Any military strike against NK, would just trigger NK to launch everything it has at SK, and possibly any nuclear weapons that it has (it's anybody's guess at this point) but it would be the perfect excuse for them to use them.

The US would have to totally invade NK to secure it's hidden nuclear weapons and facilities - stuff hardly anyone knows about, and defeat it's enormous amount of ground forces (4 million troops?) at the same time, no doubt dug in, with tanks, artillery - all hidden in mountains/forests/huge networks of tunnels - vast amounts of which would be impervious to airstrikes, satellites and intelligence.

If the US threw everything it had at NK, and decided to totally annihilate them via any means possible (nukes, phase plasma pulse rifles, knives, sharp sticks) - yes I think it could, but then it would be just as bad / worse than the enemy it's trying to defeat, it would probably also drag China into it.

My bet is that there will be a continuation of trump/kim throwing words at each other, NK will continue to develop it's nuclear weapons, eventually we'll all have to live with it and hope the concept of MAD prevails.
 
Screeeech said:
America isn't in a position to do anything militarily.

Any military strike against NK, would just trigger NK to launch everything it has at SK, and possibly any nuclear weapons that it has (it's anybody's guess at this point) but it would be the perfect excuse for them to use them.

The US would have to totally invade NK to secure it's hidden nuclear weapons and facilities - stuff hardly anyone knows about, and defeat it's enormous amount of ground forces (4 million troops?) at the same time, no doubt dug in, with tanks, artillery - all hidden in mountains/forests/huge networks of tunnels - vast amounts of which would be impervious to airstrikes, satellites and intelligence.

If the US threw everything it had at NK, and decided to totally annihilate them via any means possible (nukes, phase plasma pulse rifles, knives, sharp sticks) - yes I think it could, but then it would be just as bad / worse than the enemy it's trying to defeat, it would probably also drag China into it.

My bet is that there will be a continuation of trump/kim throwing words at each other, NK will continue to develop it's nuclear weapons, eventually we'll all have to live with it and hope the concept of MAD prevails.
Click to expand...

Yeah - its a bit of a sticky one for the US militarily - there is no way they can bring their military advantage to bare without massive civilian casualties and potential collateral involving China.

Worryingly though I don't think NK sees MAD in the same way as the rest of the world.

I'd hazard with the current political/economic setup globally that if it came to the US going in China would probably push in and setup a buffer zone ~50 miles into NK and largely cooperate with the US while Russia would leverage staying uninvolved in NK in return for concessions in places like Syria and Ukraine, etc. and depending on how bold they feel maybe some other stuff in eastern Europe - they've a lot of interest in the "Suwalki Gap" and have many times practised operations to take it.
 
Rroff said:
Yeah - its a bit of a sticky one for the US militarily - there is no way they can bring their military advantage to bare without massive civilian casualties
Click to expand...

To be fair, the word civilian in North Korea is a very open ended word since everyone and I mean everyone has to do military service for 10 years and that includes women.

Plus all the kids must join their version of the Hitler Youth called the Young Red Guards plus they got a version of the Army reserves after military service is finished.
 
IronWarrior said:
To be fair, the word civilian in North Korea is a very open ended word since everyone and I mean everyone has to do military service for 10 years and that includes women.

Plus all the kids must join their version of the Hitler Youth called the Young Red Guards plus their version of the Army Reserve.
Click to expand...

None the less the perception is there especially women and children and I was also expanding that to the potential consequences for SK civilians as well.
 
If Kim was toppled there will be plenty ready to pose a coup and sue for peace... The majority of the population hate the regime, so no.. America wouldn't have to take out 4m troops.

Also China would intervene before America, primarily due to the idea that China REFUSE to have another american outpost on their backdoor "cough *Taiwan*"
 
terley said:
If Kim was toppled there will be plenty ready to pose a coup and sue for peace... The majority of the population hate the regime, so no.. America wouldn't have to take out 4m troops.
Click to expand...

They may well hate the regime, But they will probably hate the USA more and would strongly resist any attempt at invasion.

Much of the internal hardship in NK is as a result of the US led siege sanctions, the whole point of which is to impose as much hardship as possible on the civilian population short of actually dropping bombs on them. US troops would not be regarded as liberators in NK any more than they have been any where else over the last 70 years or so.
 
Read an article recently that speculated Kim has put himself in a position where he can't back down (turn to diplomacy) without appearing weak to his people and those immediately below him in rank which puts things in a bit of a difficult position.
 
Well, that goes without saying for any leader, that's why the Trump vs Kim thing kept escalating, none can be seen as weak.

But on that front, Kim shouldn't have that problem. His people don't have access to the freedom of information like we do, everything information wise is controlled, they can be told anything. Only their elite will know any sort of truth.
 
I don't think Russia and China will tolerate a U.S attack without any direct threat to its territories.

I think NK will carry on testing missiles until they get that long range ICBM. Can you really agree with saying oh well this specific country is not allowed an ICBM?
 
sityeuropa said:
I don't think Russia and China will tolerate a U.S attack without any direct threat to its territories.

I think NK will carry on testing missiles until they get that long range ICBM. Can you really agree with saying oh well this specific country is not allowed an ICBM?
Click to expand...

Most countries abide by an agreement (non proliferation treaty) in return those that do have them are expected to work towards reducing their stock piles and those that don't, don't pursue them - if any county is allowed to pursue them like NK or a country like the US starts significantly expanding their arsenal that undermines the entire agreement.

Once NK has a viable ICBM even if the delivery vehicle is rudimentary that is a direct threat as ABM systems while these days relatively capable are far from fool proof.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom