|
Regime change would be very very difficult. You can't just get rid of the leader, you have to get rid of all the loyalists and the entire military, which is a whole lot of people. Furthermore, your new leadership will have to come from the section of society that doesn't feel particularly loyal to the existing leadership, meaning you'll have to reach into the slums or gulags.
|
On November 25 2010 15:13 TheAngelofDeath wrote:
So with more and more updates coming out and not sure what is true and what isn't....is there an honest concern for a re start to the Korean war, and in turn via alliance a possibility of WW3? Or is this just gonna be dead in a week and no one is gonna talk about it anymore?
Yes, I know the Korean war never actually "ended," but you understand my point.
It's very unlikely. None of the major powers really want to fight eachother. China/US/Russia wouldn't want any war against eachother.
If a real war broke out between North and South Korea did happen though its more then likely that the US would become heavily involved in it. Would be very unlikely for China to defend North Korea.
|
Australia1169 Posts
For those suggesting that this could be World War 3, no doubt thinking of outbreaks of hostilities over Poland in WW2 and the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in WW1 as examples of single events causing mass death and destruction need to put things back in perspective.
In WW1, tensions between the European powers had been building for decades, and especially countries like France and Germany had fought wars well within living memory. In WW2 it was much the same over a shorter period of time, with fascist aggression all over Europe for several years beforehand trodding on the toes of every major power and leaving nobody with any chance but to get involved.
At the moment, the major powers have nothing to gain through major conventional conflict with other major powers, and there is very little tension between the major powers themselves. If you were to compare an outbreak of war between ROK/US and DPRK to the Korean War then you would be a touch more on track, however not taking into account the vastly superior US/Chinese relations we have now, the lack of bulldog antagonists like McArthur (let's nuke China!), and increased US preparation for such events.
I personally think war with North Korea is quite likely, perhaps sooner rather than later. However, WW3 is a scenario as terrifying as it is unlikely.
EDIT: If the US and South Korea were to go to war with North Korea, they would have in mind to finish the job. The issue, as it was in the Korean war, would be how the US dealt with China as they approached the border. Again, the two nations are far less belligerent with each other these days yet the US would still need to make a number of concessions to China to keep them feeling safe. Quite frankly, I think Obama is just the man to deal with such things.
|
On November 25 2010 15:19 ZerglingSoup wrote:Regime change would be very very difficult. You can't just get rid of the leader, you have to get rid of all the loyalists and the entire military, which is a whole lot of people. Furthermore, your new leadership will have to come from the section of society that doesn't feel particularly loyal to the existing leadership, meaning you'll have to reach into the slums or gulags.
You are correct, even i said so when we last talked about it. It's the best possible way to get no casualties but it's so hard to execute because of the brainwashed people and the loyalists. The only way to do it soon would be the regime change when his son will take over. But most likely he is as nuts as Kim Jong il. And i doubt the other high ranked officers wouldn't be pleased with the "treason".
|
Australia1169 Posts
On the topic of the takeover of the son, I find it hard to credit he will have the support or the cahones to change the ways the DPRK elite like to do business.
|
On November 25 2010 15:25 Jugglenaught wrote:
On the topic of the takeover of the son, I find it hard to credit he will have the support or the cahones to change the ways the DPRK elite like to do business.
Probably means that he'll be easier for China to control, and that's where the big decisions come from anyway.
|
The thing is now that N.K warned and fired artillery rounds to S.K they are forced to do same thing or lose leverage. UNLESS some kind talks starts between S.K and N.K (perhaps even China).
|
On November 25 2010 15:25 Jugglenaught wrote:
On the topic of the takeover of the son, I find it hard to credit he will have the support or the cahones to change the ways the DPRK elite like to do business.
I think this whole incident is staged to show that the young Kim Jong-un is in line with his father. He was recently promoted to four-star status (no prior military experience) and there is speculation that he "ordered" this attack.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/11/25/3075782.htm?section=justin
|
On November 25 2010 15:16 n00bination wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2010 15:08 Duban wrote:That said, China wants to keep the status quo. In this instance, it appears that South Korea provoked the North Korean military to shell the island, at least according to Chinese sources. The south was doing military exercises that they do every year. It's true that NK didn't approve but what was so provocative about this time that could justify artillery strikes on a fishing village? South Korean military forces were firing in the direction of North Korea across disputed waters. North Korea demanded that they stop, but South Korean military ignored those warnings. If Chinese investigation is true, then the S. Korean military was being straight up idiots or they were under orders to provoke an attack. Imagine Mexico deciding to shell Texas in an area where there were no people, but still across the border. What would the natural reaction of the military forces be? Warn them to stop firing or face the consequences. If they ignore that, what's he next step? Armed response.
North Korea says they fired in disputed waters towards North Korea.
South Korea says they fired south and west, i.e. their own waters away from North Korea.
Why you would choose to believe the country who continues to act with stupidity and aggression over a country who risks it's capital if it does anything stupid is beyond me.
The problem also stems from North Korea's refusal of the line drawn by the rest of the world as to where each others waters are. For some reason, North Korea believes they have ALL waters around the western South Korean islands with the exception a very small strip heading south. (see picture)
![[image loading]](http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/img/special/070813_p05_will02.jpg)
|
On November 25 2010 15:29 Too_MuchZerg wrote:
The thing is now that N.K warned and fired artillery rounds to S.K they are forced to do same thing or lose leverage. UNLESS some kind talks starts between S.K and N.K (perhaps even China).
The talks have been discontinued on account of NK test-launching a suspected ICBM.
|
On November 25 2010 15:22 Grettin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2010 15:19 ZerglingSoup wrote:Regime change would be very very difficult. You can't just get rid of the leader, you have to get rid of all the loyalists and the entire military, which is a whole lot of people. Furthermore, your new leadership will have to come from the section of society that doesn't feel particularly loyal to the existing leadership, meaning you'll have to reach into the slums or gulags. You are correct, even i said so when we last talked about it. It's the best possible way to get no casualties but it's so hard to execute because of the brainwashed people and the loyalists. The only way to do it soon would be the regime change when his son will take over. But most likely he is as nuts as Kim Jong il. And i doubt the other high ranked officers wouldn't be pleased with the "treason".
Not sure how much power he'll have initially, but I wouldn't count on Kim Jong-un as a catalyst for any kind of change in NK, unless China can get to him and exploit his youthful insecurities- if he has any. But this is unlike anything we've seen in modern global politics, so it's hard to predict how this might end up.
He's only 25 years old, so we're in for a long run if he maintains the status quo (and everyone else does too).
|
On November 25 2010 15:35 xBillehx wrote:South Korea says they fired south and west, i.e. their own waters away from North Korea. Why you would choose to believe the country who continues to act with stupidity and aggression over a country who risks it's capital if it does anything stupid is beyond me. The problem also stems from North Korea's refusal of the line drawn by the rest of the world as to where each others waters are. For some reason, North Korea believes they have ALL waters around the western South Korean islands with the exception a very small strip heading south. (see picture)
Ultimately,it won't matter who was in the right, but rather who China decides to believe, as they have the greatest influence in the area. I'm done with this, seeing as how this is going in circles and I'm exhausted.
Hope for the best!
|
|
|
On November 25 2010 14:35 oRacLeGosu wrote:I commented on this a few pages ago..ridiculous 
oops, my bad. lots o pages on this one...
And to the people saying it's an honest mistake, cmon, who goes and says we need to defend the taliban? It's the type of mistake that arises from lack of knowledge about the issue. And this isn't the first stupid and misinformed thing she's said. Tina Fey's got her down pat.
|
btw for all the people bringing the Sinking of the ship to this thread...
Russian experts have found no proof of North Korea’s involvement in the sinking of a South Korean warship, a source close to the Russian Navy General Headquarters told Interfax on Tuesday.
In a move initiated by President Dmitry Medvedev, a group of Russian defense experts arrived in South Korea last week to examine the wreckage of a torpedo allegedly fired at the Cheonan corvette by a North Korean submarine in late March.
Source
can you smell False-Flag?
|
On November 25 2010 16:16 ImFromPortugal wrote:btw for all the people bringing the Sinking of the ship to this thread... Russian experts have found no proof of North Korea’s involvement in the sinking of a South Korean warship, a source close to the Russian Navy General Headquarters told Interfax on Tuesday.
In a move initiated by President Dmitry Medvedev, a group of Russian defense experts arrived in South Korea last week to examine the wreckage of a torpedo allegedly fired at the Cheonan corvette by a North Korean submarine in late March.Sourcecan you smell False-Flag?
That has been "cleared" months ago. It was kinda obvious after couple of weeks of investigation, it either sinked because of reef or then something exploded inside the ship, but not by North Korean mine or torpedo. I think Russians weren't the only one actually founding this proof.
|
More information on NK's current stance:
"The (North) Korean People's Army will deal without hesitation the second and third strong physical retaliatory blow" if provoked by South Korean forces, a North Korean military delegation said in a statement carried by official media.
The communist North does not uphold the inter-Korean Yellow Sea border that was drawn by the U.S. at the end of the 1950-53 Korean War. The war technically continues to this day as it ended in a truce rather than a peace pact, which Pyongyang has long demanded.
"The U.S., therefore, cannot evade the blame for the recent shelling," the North's delegation at the border truce village of Panmunjom said, according to the Korean Central News Agency.
"It was none other than the U.S. which sparked off the conflict in the above-said waters," it said, accusing Washington of sowing seeds of conflict. The U.S. has 28,500 forces stationed in South Korea, a legacy of the Korean War.
Earlier Thursday, South Korean officials said North Korea rejected a proposal by the U.S.-led U.N. Command to hold general-level military talks on Tuesday artillery attack.
Late Wednesday, the North's foreign ministry said in a statement that any firing by the South near the border is considered an attack because shells "are bound to drop inside the territorial waters of the (North) no matter in which direction they are fired."
The North, or the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) by its official name, warned Washington not to side with Seoul, arguing it would be "little short of feeding oil to the fire."
"The DPRK that sets store by the peace and stability of the Korean Peninsula is now exercising superhuman self-control, but the artillery pieces of the army of the DPRK, the defender of justice, remain ready to fire," it said.
Source
Frankly a lot of bullshit, like always. It seems even trying to talk to them didn't work, so really the only peaceful way this can be handled is China stepping in, which they currently refuse to do. Word is the US President will call the Chinese President and push for them to do something rather than sit on their hands.
|
On November 25 2010 15:21 Jugglenaught wrote:
. Quite frankly, I think Obama is just the man to deal with such things.
What are you basing that on? Obama has caved on every single major issue that he claimed to stand for, from Israeli-Palestinian negotiations to health care reform to Gitmo. Why would you think he would be the man to deal with any of this?
|
statements like
"The DPRK that sets store by the peace and stability of the Korean Peninsula is now exercising superhuman self-control, but the artillery pieces of the army of the DPRK, the defender of justice, remain ready to fire,"
seem so unreal and crazy...
|
From twitter:
"#NKorea said early Thurday Chinese gov't health delegates gave gift to Kim Jong-il. #DPRK also expresses condolence over Cambodia stampede"
No proof how reliable the news is
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
