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...
Well I don't line in NK nor do I pretend to understand what people who live there experience, but I feel they have been brainwashed to the extent that removing the leadership would have no effect and they would resist fanatically. correct me if I am wrong
I don't mean to offend anyone I am just posing it as a thought exercise
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.
No, they're returning to war. They were never not at war after 1953. Regardless, its the country's leadership that have made that decision - not the people who would suffer.
Are you genuinely saying that things like Dresden are good and should be repeated? Because if you do you are genuinely delusional, or just mindbogglingly stupid. I don't normally insult people straight up on the internet but if you genuinely think that the "strategic bombing" in WWII was okay you are simply a moron.
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.
Well that's easy. The problem is the civilians don't know what the fuck is going on and cannot help that their leadership has led them into a state of war. Thus, you don't just go and bomb them all to hell.
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).
stirring up a country (the US) in to a war mood does not make it easier to then annoy them with resource grabs. if it came to that, it would be a lot easier for the US to justify a war if NK/china had been antagonistic, and a lot easier to get home support. theres no logical reason for china to want to antagonize the US.
china is also becoming russia 2.0. as they become more capitalist, global trade becomes a bigger source of wealth and prosperity than internal dominance. the deeper chinas international trade ties go the less they have to gain from local power over NK. when china first backed NK in the korean war they were much more focused on dominating trade in S.E. asia, now they have a more global view. its logical their tolerance of NKs antics would be reducing.
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.
No, they're returning to war. They were never not at war after 1953. Regardless, its the country's leadership that have made that decision - not the people who would suffer.
Are you genuinely saying that things like Dresden are good and should be repeated? Because if you do you are genuinely delusional, or just mindbogglingly stupid. I don't normally insult people straight up on the internet but if you genuinely think that the "strategic bombing" in WWII was okay you are simply a moron.
I am sorry if I offended you, of course I do not condone murder of innocent people.
I am just thinking out loud, creating a thought exercise. But would the world be a better, safer place without North Korea as a state. Now the reason I bring up heavy bombing is because IF we invaded North Korea would the citizens of NK be happy with a new regime or resist fanatically due to brainwashing, if so this would surely cost more lives than just a bombing removal.
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.
No, they're returning to war. They were never not at war after 1953. Regardless, its the country's leadership that have made that decision - not the people who would suffer.
Are you genuinely saying that things like Dresden are good and should be repeated? Because if you do you are genuinely delusional, or just mindbogglingly stupid. I don't normally insult people straight up on the internet but if you genuinely think that the "strategic bombing" in WWII was okay you are simply a moron.
I am sorry if I offended you, of course I do not condone murder of innocent people.
I am just thinking out loud, creating a thought exercise. But would the world be a better, safer place without North Korea as a state. Now the reason I bring up heavy bombing is because IF we invaded North Korea would the citizens of NK be happy with a new regime or resist fanatically due to brainwashing, if so this would surely cost more lives than just a bombing removal.
The world would be a safer place without nations full stop. I highly doubt the populace would "resist fanatically" in the event of a land invasion - which probably wouldn't happen anyway.
North and South Korea would be rampant with insurgents if US and SK struck. The citizens, however starving and depraved, are brainwashed and have no idea how the rest of the world lives. They are basically living in an alternate reality. If we come in with any sort of troops they will fight to the death...
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.
No, they're returning to war. They were never not at war after 1953. Regardless, its the country's leadership that have made that decision - not the people who would suffer.
Are you genuinely saying that things like Dresden are good and should be repeated? Because if you do you are genuinely delusional, or just mindbogglingly stupid. I don't normally insult people straight up on the internet but if you genuinely think that the "strategic bombing" in WWII was okay you are simply a moron.
I am sorry if I offended you, of course I do not condone murder of innocent people.
I am just thinking out loud, creating a thought exercise. But would the world be a better, safer place without North Korea as a state. Now the reason I bring up heavy bombing is because IF we invaded North Korea would the citizens of NK be happy with a new regime or resist fanatically due to brainwashing, if so this would surely cost more lives than just a bombing removal.
and what exactly would they do? a bunch of farmers are going to have a hard time attacking a tank. in any case a preemptive strike on the NK population is, in my view, completely unacceptable. this isnt comparable to the total war of the early 20th century and they havent (not that they could) given us reason to believe they would be hostile.
On March 30 2013 10:08 aquanda wrote: North and South Korea would be rampant with insurgents if US and SK struck. The citizens, however starving and depraved, are brainwashed and have no idea how the rest of the world lives. They are basically living in an alternate reality. If we come in with any sort of troops they will fight to the death...
the translation in that video is wildly inaccurate and probably actually spread by people trying to drum up support for a war against NK. the north korean people are sheltered not stupid. you think they would believe the imperialist country they are told tries to run the world cant afford central heating?
North Korea and the United States are engaging in a dangerous game of brinkmanship that could spiral out of control Russia warned on Friday as Kim Jong-un vowed to "settle accounts" with Washington for threatening him with nuclear-capable stealth bombers.
"We are opposed to any steps from any side that increase tensions," said Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister.
THE FLEXING of military muscles has spread beyond North Korea, with both Russia and China demonstrating their might to nervous neighbours.
China held a `surprise' naval exercise in the disputed South China Sea earlier this week as Russia put on a show of its resurgent military strength in the Black Sea.
China's activity in the disputed region involved some of its most modern warships.
An amphibious assault exercise - where amphibious landing craft deployed troops - was conducted just 80km off the Malaysian coast.
James Shoal, where the exercise took place, is the southern-most island China has laid claim to in the South China Sea, including the contentious Spratly Islands.
Chinese soldiers and marines reportedly conducted a ceremony on the island, vowing to "defend Chinese sovereignty". [link to www.theaustralian.com.au］
When U.S., South Korea and the world agree that the replacement of today's Kim dynasty in North Korea is a pro-chinese state without U.S. affiliated military base, then China will gladly give up. Kim dynasty is the lesser of two evils for China. Pro-chinese obedient buffer state >>>>>>Kim dynasty>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>pro-U.S. state across their border. Promise China whatever they want there, then North Korera will be gone easily, but that's something U.S. and South Korea are unwilling to do.
On March 30 2013 10:18 Seldentar wrote: By Malcolm Moore, Beijing 7:00 PM GMT 29 Mar 2013
North Korea and the United States are engaging in a dangerous game of brinkmanship that could spiral out of control Russia warned on Friday as Kim Jong-un vowed to "settle accounts" with Washington for threatening him with nuclear-capable stealth bombers.
"We are opposed to any steps from any side that increase tensions," said Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister.
THE FLEXING of military muscles has spread beyond North Korea, with both Russia and China demonstrating their might to nervous neighbours.
China held a `surprise' naval exercise in the disputed South China Sea earlier this week as Russia put on a show of its resurgent military strength in the Black Sea.
China's activity in the disputed region involved some of its most modern warships.
An amphibious assault exercise - where amphibious landing craft deployed troops - was conducted just 80km off the Malaysian coast.
James Shoal, where the exercise took place, is the southern-most island China has laid claim to in the South China Sea, including the contentious Spratly Islands.
Chinese soldiers and marines reportedly conducted a ceremony on the island, vowing to "defend Chinese sovereignty". [link to www.theaustralian.com.au］
Sorry for being ignorant here.
But what is it that the chinese and the russians fear about US involvement, is it just that a united Korea would be a puppet state of the US very close to their eastern border?
the translation in that video is wildly inaccurate and probably actually spread by people trying to drum up support for a war against NK. the north korean people are sheltered not stupid. you think they would believe the imperialist country they are told tries to run the world cant afford central heating?
lol... propaganda alright, just not sure from where? :D
Man... I gotta lay off that snow-coffee. I hear it causes diabetes and obesity.
On March 30 2013 10:18 Seldentar wrote: By Malcolm Moore, Beijing 7:00 PM GMT 29 Mar 2013
North Korea and the United States are engaging in a dangerous game of brinkmanship that could spiral out of control Russia warned on Friday as Kim Jong-un vowed to "settle accounts" with Washington for threatening him with nuclear-capable stealth bombers.
"We are opposed to any steps from any side that increase tensions," said Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister.
THE FLEXING of military muscles has spread beyond North Korea, with both Russia and China demonstrating their might to nervous neighbours.
China held a `surprise' naval exercise in the disputed South China Sea earlier this week as Russia put on a show of its resurgent military strength in the Black Sea.
China's activity in the disputed region involved some of its most modern warships.
An amphibious assault exercise - where amphibious landing craft deployed troops - was conducted just 80km off the Malaysian coast.
James Shoal, where the exercise took place, is the southern-most island China has laid claim to in the South China Sea, including the contentious Spratly Islands.
Chinese soldiers and marines reportedly conducted a ceremony on the island, vowing to "defend Chinese sovereignty". [link to www.theaustralian.com.au］
Sorry for being ignorant here.
But what is it that the chinese and the russians fear about US involvement, is it just that a united Korea would be a puppet state of the US very close to their eastern border?
There's obviously a lot to it, but I think first and foremost both Russia and China make a hell of a lot of money selling munitions etc to North Korea.
I don't think anyone is actually scared of NK; the real threat is China. The real question is; how much does China value the buffer that is North Korea? Are they willing to start a proxy war to keep that space? Also considering the Naval strength of the United States in comparison to China; in a war revolving around a peninsula; even I'm sure China knows that it's not in an "unbeatable" position if a proxy war broke out. It all comes down to how much China values that buffer zone.
On March 30 2013 10:18 Seldentar wrote: By Malcolm Moore, Beijing 7:00 PM GMT 29 Mar 2013
North Korea and the United States are engaging in a dangerous game of brinkmanship that could spiral out of control Russia warned on Friday as Kim Jong-un vowed to "settle accounts" with Washington for threatening him with nuclear-capable stealth bombers.
"We are opposed to any steps from any side that increase tensions," said Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister.
THE FLEXING of military muscles has spread beyond North Korea, with both Russia and China demonstrating their might to nervous neighbours.
China held a `surprise' naval exercise in the disputed South China Sea earlier this week as Russia put on a show of its resurgent military strength in the Black Sea.
China's activity in the disputed region involved some of its most modern warships.
An amphibious assault exercise - where amphibious landing craft deployed troops - was conducted just 80km off the Malaysian coast.
James Shoal, where the exercise took place, is the southern-most island China has laid claim to in the South China Sea, including the contentious Spratly Islands.
Chinese soldiers and marines reportedly conducted a ceremony on the island, vowing to "defend Chinese sovereignty". [link to www.theaustralian.com.au］
Sorry for being ignorant here.
But what is it that the chinese and the russians fear about US involvement, is it just that a united Korea would be a puppet state of the US very close to their eastern border?
It Weakens the Chinese territorial claims in the east and south china seas and its probably not good mentally for china to have a land border with a USA satellite state
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.
Let's think about this for a second.
As you might notice, i am german. I consider most people i meet in my daily live good people, or at least not-bad people. I'd also say most people would agree that Germany as a whole is at this point a generally more of a positive than a negative force.
However, if i would have to guess then i'd say that during the end of WW2, the common view among the allies would have been that Germany was a country full of maybe brainwashed or just simply evil people following an insane leader. Most germans today are descendants of those people back then, for example my grandparents were teenagers at the end of the war (they were too young to be in the military), and i consider them to be good people.
Today, a country can be "bombed into rubble" far more effectively than back then. If today's technology would have existed back then, and the decision would have been made to simply turn Germany into rubble, none of what i know today would exist. And bombing Germany during WW2 was a lot more justified than "turning NK into rubble" would be nowadays, because Germany was actually of comparable power to the allies.
The North Korea of today is most definitively not. So what we have is basically Nazi Germany, but without the power. They got the Death/Torture camps, the insane leader, the focus on the military.
I can accept that one can ethically debate attacking that country to end the insane dictatorship. To be honest, i am kind of split about this myself. I do not wish a war, and i don't think countries should just invade other countries, but i also think that the North Korean Dictatorship is pure evil.
What is in no way ethical is turning the whole country into rubble and killing everyone who is there. Most of the people there are just ordinary people trying to live their lives in a bad situation. Simply killing them because they are in your way is disgusting, and even considering that option borders a god complex in my opinion.
And as Germany has proven, it is possible to turn a state quite similar to that one into a positive one with good people living in it under the right circumstances.
this whole ww2 conversation is just completely off topic. the world wars were a state of total war where everything the country did was with the aim of helping the war effort. it was justified (to an extent) to bomb traditionally civilian targets as it would weaken the sides war effort.
any war in north korea will be over so fast and fought in such a different way that there will be no logical justification for bombing of civilians.
EPT
