The coming war with....North Korea?

Yonder wrote:
EvilShawnAndrich wrote:

But does the world have anything to fear from him militarily?

LOL. Not at all.

The world has absolutely nothing to fear from NK. However, Japan and especially SK do have something to fear. Since those are two of the US's closest allies (one of them even had a Constitution purpose-written to make it rely on the US for defense!) that is why the US has to be involved, not because it directly is threatened.

Sorry, I might have been a little unclear.

Unless China specifically is going to wage war/military action against anyone, even SK or Japan, North Korea will not make a move.

If a missile is launched threateningly at anyone without China's explicit permission then it would be China itself shooting it down and NK's leader's head would literally be on a plate in the morning. NK's "leader" is a pawn and puppet.

Anytime NK saber rattles, it's their idiotic way to beg other countries into giving more concessions for food/aid, etc. Nothing more.

If NK's douchebag becomes a big enough thorn to china, then he will no doubt end up accidentally falling on a knife 32 times by his overseers.

I think that Kim Jong Un is desperate for legitimacy. Sure, he's the legitimate son, but he is still in a dangerous place transition-wise. His plea to have Obama call him speaks to this. He would use this as a talisman to demonstrate to the people of North Korea that he is indeed the ruler that was promised and this would help mollify those within his government and military apparatus who may be considering other options. The constant military posturing also works to accomplish this and keeps the military/country busy and on alert, which is far more favorable to him than leaving them idle. China is staying out of it. They will do what is necessary to preserve stability in the region and pacify their economic partners, but no more. Right now China is as much in a posture of "wait and see" as anyone else.

The reason why Japan keeps the JSDF is because Japan would go the way of the Gundam. The US, at best, could probably get to Armored Cores (not the ones from 4). Guess which one wins.

Seriously, though, what's the feasibility of letting Japan have an actual military again? Pros/Cons?

IMAGE(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/150715_450965898319375_1643690583_n.jpg)

There is some foreign secretary in China who has an ongoing competition with some other functionary somewhere in the world to see just how crazy they can make NK out to be.

LouZiffer wrote:

I think that Kim Jong Un is desperate for legitimacy. Sure, he's the legitimate son, but he is still in a dangerous place transition-wise. His plea to have Obama call him speaks to this. He would use this as a talisman to demonstrate to the people of North Korea that he is indeed the ruler that was promised and this would help mollify those within his government and military apparatus who may be considering other options. The constant military posturing also works to accomplish this and keeps the military/country busy and on alert, which is far more favorable to him than leaving them idle. China is staying out of it. They will do what is necessary to preserve stability in the region and pacify their economic partners, but no more. Right now China is as much in a posture of "wait and see" as anyone else.

Yup. I've seen a decent amount of articles and analysis that paint a North Korea that's undergoing a massive power struggle. Kim Jong-un is struggling to consolidate his power and he actually had elements of the military try to assassinate him back in November. As a result of that, he's shifted things around including stripping the military of what I could only imagine as the extremely lucrative $100 super note counterfeiting operation North Korea has going on.

The rhetoric and posturing paints Kim Jong-un as a strong leader internally and I've even heard some rumors that this all might just be a giant ruse for him, one that allows him to declare himself the winner of a non-existent conflict or one that allows him to hang the disloyal elements of the military out to dry.

OG_slinger wrote:

The rhetoric and posturing paints Kim Jong-un as a strong leader internally and I've even heard some rumors that this all might just be a giant ruse for him, one that allows him to declare himself the winner of a non-existent conflict or one that allows him to hang the disloyal elements of the military out to dry.

That sounds likely. If everyone in North Korea is only given information by state media, all they'll see is Kim telling the US and South Korea to back off and he'll look like a tough guy. North Korea says a lot of ridiculous things to the world, especially in response to US-South Korean military drills, but even though these threats of "retaliation" are directed at other countries, I think they're really meant to be heard domestically.

IMAGE(http://static.quickmeme.com/media/social/qm.gif)

Hmm, that picture doesn't seem to be working, well, it's here.

Yonder wrote:

IMAGE(http://static.quickmeme.com/media/social/qm.gif)

Hmm, that picture doesn't seem to be working, well, it's here.

...ok, that is pretty funny.

Chairman_Mao wrote:

They asked for Jordan, they got Rodman. I'd be pissed off too.

Holy sh*t, I was right

Chairman_Mao wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

They asked for Jordan, they got Rodman. I'd be pissed off too.

Holy sh*t, I was right

I like how one person was "using Google" mostly by just wiggling the mouse around. I do that at work sometimes!

Actually, there's probably good reason to fear North Korea, but it's not something most people outside of the region think about.

North Korea is very likely going to turn out to be the single greatest humanitarian *and* environmental disaster in the history of the world. And the current policy of containment is simply enabling and perpetuating the problem. As an analogy, imagine a dysfunctional fascist Germany in the early 20th century that was somehow contained from expansion, but it's cruel leadership and death camps still in full operation...for decades. When the truth is finally revealed, I can't help but wonder if the world's choice of containment won't begin to look like global criminal cowardice.

ringsnort wrote:

Actually, there's probably good reason to fear North Korea, but it's not something most people outside of the region think about.

North Korea is very likely going to turn out to be the single greatest humanitarian *and* environmental disaster in the history of the world. And the current policy of containment is simply enabling and perpetuating the problem. As an analogy, imagine a dysfunctional fascist Germany in the early 20th century that was somehow contained from expansion, but it's cruel leadership and death camps still in full operation...for decades. When the truth is finally revealed, I can't help but wonder if the world's choice of containment won't begin to look like global criminal cowardice.

I think the issue is that you're advocating the violation of a country's sovereignty with no provocation (and one that may or may not have viable nuclear weapons for the ensuing conflict). I do genuinely believe that the citizens of North Korea are in need of help, and would love it if there was some way to do so... but we recently tried this with Iraq, and that didn't exactly go so well for almost anyone involved either.

Demosthenes wrote:
ringsnort wrote:

Actually, there's probably good reason to fear North Korea, but it's not something most people outside of the region think about.

North Korea is very likely going to turn out to be the single greatest humanitarian *and* environmental disaster in the history of the world. And the current policy of containment is simply enabling and perpetuating the problem. As an analogy, imagine a dysfunctional fascist Germany in the early 20th century that was somehow contained from expansion, but it's cruel leadership and death camps still in full operation...for decades. When the truth is finally revealed, I can't help but wonder if the world's choice of containment won't begin to look like global criminal cowardice.

I think the issue is that you're advocating the violation of a country's sovereignty with no provocation (and one that may or may not have viable nuclear weapons for the ensuing conflict). I do genuinely believe that the citizens of North Korea are in need of help, and would love it if there was some way to do so... but we recently tried this with Iraq, and that didn't exactly go so well for almost anyone involved either.

Right. And where does it end? You could imagine a day where China decided they thought Americans weren't being treated properly and it was time to invade and free us. It may seem like you're helping, but unless the government has completely dissolved you're probably meddling.

Demosthenes wrote:
ringsnort wrote:

Actually, there's probably good reason to fear North Korea, but it's not something most people outside of the region think about.

North Korea is very likely going to turn out to be the single greatest humanitarian *and* environmental disaster in the history of the world. And the current policy of containment is simply enabling and perpetuating the problem. As an analogy, imagine a dysfunctional fascist Germany in the early 20th century that was somehow contained from expansion, but it's cruel leadership and death camps still in full operation...for decades. When the truth is finally revealed, I can't help but wonder if the world's choice of containment won't begin to look like global criminal cowardice.

I think the issue is that you're advocating the violation of a country's sovereignty with no provocation (and one that may or may not have viable nuclear weapons for the ensuing conflict). I do genuinely believe that the citizens of North Korea are in need of help, and would love it if there was some way to do so... but we recently tried this with Iraq, and that didn't exactly go so well for almost anyone involved either.

Comparison to Iraq is understandable (systematic, government sponsored Sunni oppression of the Shia and all that). However, I'm not proposing a return to the failed Neo-Con policies of regime change and the exporting of American democracy at gunpoint. Far from it.

Actually, except for honoring our obligations to South Korean defense, America has little or no active role in such intervention. But I'm getting ahead of myself here.

North Korea's bellicose threats are rarely taken seriously by the world these days but I certainly wouldn't say they haven't provided adequate provocation countless times over the years. So, yes, while I believe that a new policy of active intervention in North Korea is completely warranted, I also believe that it's China and, to a lesser extent, Russia, who have the largest moral and ethical burden for addressing the crimes of their former creature state.

Chairman_Mao wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

They asked for Jordan, they got Rodman. I'd be pissed off too.

Holy sh*t, I was right

Dude's only got so much pull, and they're cash poor. Beyonce, Usher and Mariah Carey played private concerts for Gaddafi; Kim Jong Un would be lucky to get the Marshall Tucker Band.

So, yes, while I believe that a new policy of active intervention in North Korea is completely warranted, I also believe that it's China and, to a lesser extent, Russia, who have the largest moral and ethical burden for addressing the crimes of their former creature state.

We've done similar things, on larger scales, for longer. Glass houses and all that. If we can invade NK, can the Chinese save Nicaragua or South Korea from the depredations of corrupt capitalism? The abuses we sponsored there and in many other places are hard to sweep under the rug, and they leave a noticeably uncomfortable lump.

Robear wrote:
So, yes, while I believe that a new policy of active intervention in North Korea is completely warranted, I also believe that it's China and, to a lesser extent, Russia, who have the largest moral and ethical burden for addressing the crimes of their former creature state.

We've done similar things, on larger scales, for longer. Glass houses and all that. If we can invade NK, can the Chinese save Nicaragua or South Korea from the depredations of corrupt capitalism? The abuses we sponsored there and in many other places are hard to sweep under the rug, and they leave a noticeably uncomfortable lump.

I'd argue the U.S. has clearly done similar things in terms of being less than a white knight all the time (to put it mildly), but North Korea is an order of magnitude worse than anything we've seen for a long time. This is a regime so repressive it would shock Stalin, and the country is mired in a combination of poverty and insanity that's historically unmatched. The last time I can think of something this awful would probably be the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia ~35 years ago.

I do think there's a real possibility China will shortly become fed up and force some reforms. Hopefully, at least. North Korea is clearly in need of money, but have one thing people will pay a lot of money for--nuclear weapons. Their nuclear capacity scares me more than anybody on the planet; not because they're going to use them, but because they're going to be willing to sell them to somebody who will use them. I'd like to believe we could sit down with Russia (who have their issues with Islamic radicals in Chechnya and other places) and China (who don't want this headache on their doorstep) and do something about it.

Robear wrote:
So, yes, while I believe that a new policy of active intervention in North Korea is completely warranted, I also believe that it's China and, to a lesser extent, Russia, who have the largest moral and ethical burden for addressing the crimes of their former creature state.

We've done similar things, on larger scales, for longer. Glass houses and all that. If we can invade NK, can the Chinese save Nicaragua or South Korea from the depredations of corrupt capitalism? The abuses we sponsored there and in many other places are hard to sweep under the rug, and they leave a noticeably uncomfortable lump.

I specifically said that it is not America's role to invade NK. That aside, it's entirely likely that 21st Century China may very well feel compelled to assert its will and protect its interests almost anywhere in the world. This certainly appears to be the role they are grooming themselves for. But that's beside the point.

Ever since the Korean War, China has taken upon itself to protect the North Korean regime. China is North Korea's closest ally and their most reliable and important trading partner. Proximity and influence make China really the only nation on earth that could possibly apply the full range of diplomatic and military pressure necessary to make a difference. If anything, where you suggest that the US simply sweeps it's past mistakes under the rug, here is a chance for China to take the high road, own up to it's past role as an enabler for NoK's bad behavior, and do the right thing for Korea, the region, and the world.

Why should they? North Korea is a good distraction for the rest of the world to keep attention off China.

LeapingGnome wrote:

Why should they? North Korea is a good distraction for the rest of the world to keep attention off China.

China is long past it's days of inward looking simi-isolationism. North Korea is an embarrassing political anachronism perched on modern China's doorway to the world. This isn't the sort of unresolved baggage that an emerging global superpower can ignore.

ringsnort wrote:
LeapingGnome wrote:

Why should they? North Korea is a good distraction for the rest of the world to keep attention off China.

China is long past it's days of inward looking simi-isolationism. North Korea is an embarrassing political anachronism perched on modern China's doorway to the world. This isn't the sort of unresolved baggage that an emerging global superpower can ignore.

I would argue that the last 40 years of history shows that this is exactly the sort of unresolved issue that superpowers get to ignore.

I think I heard a solution in there. Since scarcity of nuclear weapons keeps them in power give everyone nuclear weapons.

Hand of the market and stuff.

ringsnort wrote:

Actually, there's probably good reason to fear North Korea, but it's not something most people outside of the region think about.

North Korea is very likely going to turn out to be the single greatest humanitarian *and* environmental disaster in the history of the world. And the current policy of containment is simply enabling and perpetuating the problem. As an analogy, imagine a dysfunctional fascist Germany in the early 20th century that was somehow contained from expansion, but it's cruel leadership and death camps still in full operation...for decades. When the truth is finally revealed, I can't help but wonder if the world's choice of containment won't begin to look like global criminal cowardice.

You could try starting to trade with them.
I understand where you are going with this. I get that we have a responsibility to other humans who can't help themselves, but a lot of African nations need help and won't shoot at you for giving it.
So is NK more important than that? Because we could have done a lot more good with the Iraq war money than what we did.

DSGamer wrote:

I think I heard a solution in there. Since scarcity of nuclear weapons keeps them in power give everyone nuclear weapons.

Hand of the market and stuff.

Reminds me of Lord of War. Loved that movie. Laughed openly in the theater... people who didn't realize how close some of the things were to reality game me some very strange looks.

Ringsnort, don't forget that Russia shares a border and a strong historical relationship with NK. I think the NKs are more ideologically inclined with Stalin than Mao, but China is a much larger economic power, even though Russia has provided much more military and educational aid. I'd say North Korea plays them off against each other (or tries to).

In truth I think both Russia and China are thinking about the same thing we are even if they can't say it publicly the same way. NK is a serious problem and they are quietly looking for a nice peaceful solution where everyone saves face.

Robear wrote:

Ringsnort, don't forget that Russia shares a border and a strong historical relationship with NK. I think the NKs are more ideologically inclined with Stalin than Mao, but China is a much larger economic power, even though Russia has provided much more military and educational aid. I'd say North Korea plays them off against each other (or tries to).

My knowledge is limited here, but NoK's previously close ties with Russia mostly died out after the end of the Cold War. I think there is still a token relationship there, if for no other reason than to provide Russia with a means of keeping track of their unstable neighbor and nominal ally in the Russian Far East.

realityhack wrote:

In truth I think both Russia and China are thinking about the same thing we are even if they can't say it publicly the same way. NK is a serious problem and they are quietly looking for a nice peaceful solution where everyone saves face.

I'd be very surprised if you weren't exactly right. Russia and China both have much to lose, region wide, if NoK were to precipitate a crisis that spiraled out of control. However, just because they "get the problem" doesn't mean that pressure to act from both North America and Europe can't help them refine their focus and determination to achieve a resolution. Even among world powers, the absence of pain is often seen as a reward.

ringsnort wrote:
realityhack wrote:

In truth I think both Russia and China are thinking about the same thing we are even if they can't say it publicly the same way. NK is a serious problem and they are quietly looking for a nice peaceful solution where everyone saves face.

I'd be very surprised if you weren't exactly right. Russia and China both have much to lose, region wide, if NoK were to precipitate a crisis that spiraled out of control. However, just because they "get the problem" doesn't mean that pressure to act from both North America and Europe can't help them refine their focus and determination to achieve a resolution. Even among world powers, the absence of pain is often seen as a reward.

I very much doubt that we are not applying subtle pressure behind the scenes and our naval movements are obvious.
But overt public pressure would likely force them into more of a corner with their need to save face in the situation and be counter productive.
I bet the pressure is there... just in the correct diplomatic way.