|
On March 30 2013 05:51 archonOOid wrote:
I've upgraded the NK'an threat from a "yawn" to "definite cause for alarm, but another war is not the answer" as all NK has severed all channels to the outside world. Maybe the new young leader has figured that progress in NK can only be achieved by foreign intervention and by deploying an aggressive military stance he hope to trigger a foreign intervention. His possibles to reform NK economically and politically is probably less likely than committing to war. The military elite that has the real power will at 85% likelihood stay on the status quo course but the reform route is less likely than the war path. Which means if NK will change for the better although through a war seeking a military solution might be the logical option for the new leader.
The Guy has also put his military on a high state of alert, threatened to attack various targets in the are with rockets, and brought up the prospect of a nuclear first strike. I would say that a foreign intervention is not entirely out of the question. Its not like NK just stopped talking to people all of a sudden, those hotlines are there to prevent miscalculation and accidental war. If an outside force attacks them because of a percieved threat without 100% proof then the North Koreans have only themselves to blame at this point.
|
Everybody is saying that China is pissed at NK. I don't know why you would be so sure about that. Sure, in public, China seems pissed at NK.
But what if behind the curtain, China is actually testing the US using NK while not being involved publicly and only pretending to be mad... ? They have a lot of regional claim especially in the seas in the region. They might be observing the reaction of the US, while poking through NK and gathering some useful informations about US reaction.
I mean, it's not as if the US would try to invade NK (unless there is a strike at the south mainland ofc).
|
On March 30 2013 07:23 Bermuda wrote:
Everybody is saying that China is pissed at NK. I don't know why you would be so sure about that. Sure, in public, China seems pissed at NK.
But what if behind the curtain, China is actually testing the US using NK while not being involved publicly and only pretending to be mad... ? They have a lot of regional claim especially in the seas in the region. They might be observing the reaction of the US, while poking through NK and gathering some useful informations about US reaction.
I mean, it's not as if the US would try to invade NK (unless there is a strike at the south mainland ofc).
Having a war break out on their borders would not be good for china and I highly doubt they would risk it. Also they have nothing to gain from "testing" the US since the US reaction to Chinese aggression would of course be massively different from the way it reacts to North Korean brinkmanship. Besides if China wanted to know about US power in the region all they would have to do is observe US-ROK bilateral training exercises like Team Spirit. The point of those exercises is not only to prepare for massive deployment but to show off the capability of the US/NATO military machine. Its not exactly something that we keep under wraps.
Also I wouldn't be so sure that the US wouldn't attack. While I think its unlikely they might feel serious pressure from their allies in the region for whom the threat of a nuclear strike is more plausible. A North Korean nuke almost certainly couldn't hit Hawaii, but if they have one then they could definitely target Seoul or Tokyo. Combined with the fact that US wants to look strong against rogue states, there is a definite chance of a US first strike.
|
On March 30 2013 07:53 packrat386 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2013 07:23 Bermuda wrote:
Everybody is saying that China is pissed at NK. I don't know why you would be so sure about that. Sure, in public, China seems pissed at NK.
But what if behind the curtain, China is actually testing the US using NK while not being involved publicly and only pretending to be mad... ? They have a lot of regional claim especially in the seas in the region. They might be observing the reaction of the US, while poking through NK and gathering some useful informations about US reaction.
I mean, it's not as if the US would try to invade NK (unless there is a strike at the south mainland ofc). Having a war break out on their borders would not be good for china and I highly doubt they would risk it. Also they have nothing to gain from "testing" the US since the US reaction to Chinese aggression would of course be massively different from the way it reacts to North Korean brinkmanship. Besides if China wanted to know about US power in the region all they would have to do is observe US-ROK bilateral training exercises like Team Spirit. The point of those exercises is not only to prepare for massive deployment but to show off the capability of the US/NATO military machine. Its not exactly something that we keep under wraps. Also I wouldn't be so sure that the US wouldn't attack. While I think its unlikely they might feel serious pressure from their allies in the region for whom the threat of a nuclear strike is more plausible. A North Korean nuke almost certainly couldn't hit Hawaii, but if they have one then they could definitely target Seoul or Tokyo. Combined with the fact that US wants to look strong against rogue states, there is a definite chance of a US first strike.
Well I was not really trying to talk about war. I don't believe in the possibility of a war depsite all the posturing. In my opinion, the more important thing for China, right now, is not war. It is influence.
NK says crazy things including threats that go unanswered, except for some economic sanctions. Shitload of hacking that goes pretty much unanswered in Europe and in the US. China disputing claims in the seas surrounding them. Those things expand China influence and provide strenght to the chinese regime inside the country and outside it. IMO, NK posturing is one of those thing.
For the military intelligence, I suppose you are right. But I didn't mention it. There is all kind of reaction you can fish for : diplomatic, economic, how is the domestic reaction in the other country. That kind of things. It's like playing poker with the world. You gauge the people around the table. Are they weak right now ? Are they strong ? What exactly, could I get away with ? China is playing the long game and it is always useful information to have when you're an aspiring world power.
But it is pure speculation on my part, without any specific info to back it up. Just a feeling China is still pulling the strings in NK. So feel free to strongly disagree all you want :p
P.S : Also, I don't believe in a first strike from the US. You see Obama starting a new war right now ? It would be political suicide (I know he isn't facing re-election. I mean for his party).
|
|
|
On March 30 2013 08:20 Bermuda wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2013 07:53 packrat386 wrote:On March 30 2013 07:23 Bermuda wrote:
Everybody is saying that China is pissed at NK. I don't know why you would be so sure about that. Sure, in public, China seems pissed at NK.
But what if behind the curtain, China is actually testing the US using NK while not being involved publicly and only pretending to be mad... ? They have a lot of regional claim especially in the seas in the region. They might be observing the reaction of the US, while poking through NK and gathering some useful informations about US reaction.
I mean, it's not as if the US would try to invade NK (unless there is a strike at the south mainland ofc). Having a war break out on their borders would not be good for china and I highly doubt they would risk it. Also they have nothing to gain from "testing" the US since the US reaction to Chinese aggression would of course be massively different from the way it reacts to North Korean brinkmanship. Besides if China wanted to know about US power in the region all they would have to do is observe US-ROK bilateral training exercises like Team Spirit. The point of those exercises is not only to prepare for massive deployment but to show off the capability of the US/NATO military machine. Its not exactly something that we keep under wraps. Also I wouldn't be so sure that the US wouldn't attack. While I think its unlikely they might feel serious pressure from their allies in the region for whom the threat of a nuclear strike is more plausible. A North Korean nuke almost certainly couldn't hit Hawaii, but if they have one then they could definitely target Seoul or Tokyo. Combined with the fact that US wants to look strong against rogue states, there is a definite chance of a US first strike. Well I was not really trying to talk about war. I don't believe in the possibility of a war depsite all the posturing. In my opinion, the more important thing for China, right now, is not war. It is influence. NK says crazy things including threats that go unanswered, except for some economic sanctions. Shitload of hacking that goes pretty much unanswered in Europe and in the US. China disputing claims in the seas surrounding them. Those things expand China influence and provide strenght to the chinese regime inside the country and outside it. IMO, NK posturing is one of those thing. For the military intelligence, I suppose you are right. But I didn't mention it. There is all kind of reaction you can fish for : diplomatic, economic, how is the domestic reaction in the other country. That kind of things. It's like playing poker with the world. You gauge the people around the table. Are they weak right now ? Are they strong ? What exactly, could I get away with ? China is playing the long game and it is always useful information to have when you're an aspiring world power. But it is pure speculation on my part, without any specific info to back it up. Just a feeling China is still pulling the strings in NK. So feel free to strongly disagree all you want :p P.S : Also, I don't believe in a first strike from the US. You see Obama starting a new war right now ? It would be political suicide (I know he isn't facing re-election. I mean for his party).
I still don't see what kind of reaction you think China is baiting that helps them out. For starters, NK brinkmanship almost certainly means that the US is going to up is presence in the surrounding area which is basically the only direct constraint on China in one of the areas they are trying to have greater influence. Its also more likely to make US friendly nations throughout SEA rally around the US flag since they perceive the need for some sort of protection in the case of crazy ass NK shenanigans. That once again constrains Chinese power relative to the US. You make it sound like NK is somehow pushing the US around in the region and making them look bad, but at best this is just another chance the US gets to show off its military strength as well as deepen regional alliances. It also hurts the position of China internationally because their tacit consent of NK actions make them look bad in international forums like the UN.
As for gauging things like the domestic politics or economic readiness, those are once again things that they can learn more about from reading the NY times than trying to provoke the US with North Korea. And the fact that NK has shut down diplomatic channels means they are only making it more difficult for themselves to gather information. I understand the idea of like "wanting to see what they're going to do" but at the end of the day china already knows most of that sort of thing, and I highly doubt they want to know the details so badly they would risk a war that would produce a relatively large number of refugees and lead to a staunchly US allied ROK bordering china directly.
Lastly your assertion that Obama couldn't go to war makes 0 sense. First of all, you have to understand that this wouldn't be another iraq or afghanistan. In those cases the US removed the regime in power without a credible alternative to step in in the meantime. In the case of NK the south koreans would happily take back the north and administrate it themselves. A war with NK would be much more like the incredibly successful intervention in Libya. Obama can sell it at the end of the day as spreading freedom, protecting the US from a direct threat, and acting the best interests of an international community that has been searching for a solution to the North Korean issue. All in all a war wouldn't last more than a month and would be an incredibly strong show of US power that could only shore up support for the party that initates it.
Lastly China doesn't particularly want to risk the destruction of NK. It serves as a particularly important buffer between them and the thousands of US troops stationed in the ROK. As long as NK keeps (relatively) quiet the US isn't going to attack them since they could never swing international opinion in their favor after the fact. Why would they want to risk giving the US a justification for an intervention that they've wanted since the 60's. Its too much of a risk for china and an incredibly small reward.
I don't doubt that China has some influence with NK, nor do I doubt their aspirations at becoming the global hegemon, but provoking the US into starting a war in their own backyard would be a really bad move here so I highly doubt they would test them this much for so little.
edit: The guy above me only proves my point. You don't go feeling out what peoples reactions might be by declaring an overt state of war. If China was really pulling the strings they would be FAR MORE careful to avoid a US attack.
|
Didn't they already say that when they broke the Ceasefire? At this point this is slowly getting ridiculous, there is only so many times you can go to war with someone without actually shooting at them.
This whole affair is incredibly weird. It is obvious that NK does not really want to fight a war, i doubt that if you want to go to war with someone you tell them you are at war with them 20 times without actually shooting at them. What i don't quite understand is what they hope to gain from all this, and i really hope that nothing goes wrong and suddenly this "war" turns into an actual war because some guy in a some bunker misinterpretes an order or panics and starts shooting and starts a chain reaction. Stuff like that is bound to happen if you keep that shit up for too long.
|
On March 30 2013 09:08 Simberto wrote:
Didn't they already say that when they broke the Ceasefire? At this point this is slowly getting ridiculous, there is only so many times you can go to war with someone without actually shooting at them.
This whole affair is incredibly weird. It is obvious that NK does not really want to fight a war, i doubt that if you want to go to war with someone you tell them you are at war with them 20 times without actually shooting at them. What i don't quite understand is what they hope to gain from all this, and i really hope that nothing goes wrong and suddenly this "war" turns into an actual war because some guy in a some bunker misinterpretes an order or panics and starts shooting and starts a chain reaction. Stuff like that is bound to happen if you keep that shit up for too long.
This is getting a little bit intense. I'm growing more and more concerned as this situation is extremely weird and I think there's something going on that we do not know about.
|
Kim Jong-un might actually mean what he says after all.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh shit, worrying indeed.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
I firstly want to preface this by letting you know I am not in a state of panic, anger or irrational fear.
What would be the negative implications of "getting rid" of North Korea? Like just bombing them to hell and reducing them to total rubble
|
On March 30 2013 09:45 infKelsier wrote:
I firstly want to preface this by letting you know I am not in a state of panic, anger or irrational fear.
What would be the negative implications of "getting rid" of North Korea? Like just bombing them to hell and reducing them to total rubble
The deaths of millions upon millions of innocent people? You can't just bomb a nation to hell because the nation didn't ask to be put in the situation it is.
|
On March 30 2013 09:45 infKelsier wrote:
I firstly want to preface this by letting you know I am not in a state of panic, anger or irrational fear.
What would be the negative implications of "getting rid" of North Korea? Like just bombing them to hell and reducing them to total rubble
What the hell kind of question is this?
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On March 30 2013 09:46 Larkin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2013 09:45 infKelsier wrote:
I firstly want to preface this by letting you know I am not in a state of panic, anger or irrational fear.
What would be the negative implications of "getting rid" of North Korea? Like just bombing them to hell and reducing them to total rubble The deaths of millions upon millions of innocent people? You can't just bomb a nation to hell because the nation didn't ask to be put in the situation it is.
But North Korea has declared War so surely they have to recognise this as a consequence, I don't see the problem.
In WWII Britain and Germany both bombed the hell out of eachother and it wasn't always just military targets.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On March 30 2013 09:47 Sephy90 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2013 09:45 infKelsier wrote:
I firstly want to preface this by letting you know I am not in a state of panic, anger or irrational fear.
What would be the negative implications of "getting rid" of North Korea? Like just bombing them to hell and reducing them to total rubble What the hell kind of question is this?
I only see negatives to having North Korea exist that is my question
|
On March 30 2013 09:46 Larkin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2013 09:45 infKelsier wrote:
I firstly want to preface this by letting you know I am not in a state of panic, anger or irrational fear.
What would be the negative implications of "getting rid" of North Korea? Like just bombing them to hell and reducing them to total rubble The deaths of millions upon millions of innocent people? You can't just bomb a nation to hell because the nation didn't ask to be put in the situation it is.
This. Everyone saying that NK is doing this and that has to keep in mind it's just the stupid leaders that are using their power to do all this shit...
|
On March 30 2013 09:49 infKelsier wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2013 09:46 Larkin wrote:On March 30 2013 09:45 infKelsier wrote:
I firstly want to preface this by letting you know I am not in a state of panic, anger or irrational fear.
What would be the negative implications of "getting rid" of North Korea? Like just bombing them to hell and reducing them to total rubble The deaths of millions upon millions of innocent people? You can't just bomb a nation to hell because the nation didn't ask to be put in the situation it is. But North Korea has declared War so surely they have to recognise this as a consequence, I don't see the problem. In WWII Britain and Germany both bombed the hell out of eachother and it wasn't always just military targets.
Are you implying that did not have any negative implications?
|
On March 30 2013 09:49 infKelsier wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2013 09:47 Sephy90 wrote:On March 30 2013 09:45 infKelsier wrote:
I firstly want to preface this by letting you know I am not in a state of panic, anger or irrational fear.
What would be the negative implications of "getting rid" of North Korea? Like just bombing them to hell and reducing them to total rubble What the hell kind of question is this? I only see negatives to having North Korea exist that is my question
WW2 Millions of people died, it put both countries into massive debt and ruined their economies for many years. For north korea im betting china and russia wouldnt be happy with a unified korea as a US satalite state either, bordering china especially.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
