North Korea, Sanctions, and Kim Jong-un

Unification is unlikely to happen anytime soon. The comparison with Germany isn't quite the same. East Germany's economy wasn't in such a poor state to that of North Korea's, meaning than the merger wasn't a huge drain on West Germany's economy as it would be on South Korea's. I believe the figures are something like West German wages were on average 3x what the East Germans earned, whereas the South Koreas earn over 30x that of the North. This would create a very large economic and social imbalance plus would more than likely lead to huge population migrations south and increased internal resentment. But then again, the large natural resources and cheap labour of the North could come in very handy for the technologically rich South, and vice versa.

Also there's the China problem. China will do all it can to prevent a unification. Could you imagine China effectively allowing NATO forces direct access to one of their borders? You just have to look at their South China Sea exploits to get a picture of what rights Beijing believe they have to exclusion zones.
 
Alot of people don't understand what NATO means, its a treaty for countries on the Atlantic(eg North America and Europe)and this is on the pacific, while NATO forces would likely be involved this would more fall under the treaties with South Korea, Japan and possibly ANZUS, No NATO Country would have An obligation to join Apart from the US.

NATO being used as a Term for America and it's allies isn't really the right term to use especially when it's not on the Atlantic.
 
mustafur
Alot of people don't understand what NATO means, its a treaty for countries on the Atlantic(eg North America and Europe)and this is on the pacific, while NATO forces would likely be involved this would more fall under the treaties with South Korea, Japan and possibly ANZUS, No NATO Country would have An obligation to join Apart from the US.

NATO being used as a Term for America and it's allies isn't really the right term to use especially when it's not on the Atlantic.
Click to expand...
NATO might be called the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation but 20 out of the 28 member states aren't on the Atlantic Ocean. Yes SEATO would most likely be involved, but the US is very much a NATO member and the Republic of Korea has special IPCO relations with NATO to the point that they actively put troops on the ground in Afghanistan as part of NATO's operations. Either way, the Chinese wouldn't allow it.
 
It is a dream/ambition of both the DPRK and the South to reunify Korea - the trouble is (if it isn't stating the blindingly obvious), the North would like the entire country to be like the North and the South would like the entire country to be like the South, and that ain't going to happen. As alluded to previously, familial and historic ties between the North and South may once have been very close, but with every passing year they become more distant... like the death of the last surviving participant in WWI, there will soon be no-one alive who 'was there', no first-hand account of what it was like before the split and no more personal connections. Couple that with the fact that generations of North and South Koreans are growing up not knowing any other way of life, and the rift becomes permanent. That said, I firmly believe that the North Korean people could adjust to life as it is in the South but not vice versa, for pretty obvious reasons. I also believe that both the North and South Korean people would love reunification to occur, but that the regime in the North would have to disappear for that to happen, and that would require something extraordinary to happen, most likely a deal brokered by China. However, what would China have to gain by instigating the removal of a Stalinist regime and replacing it with a US-allied capitalist regime? The short answer to that is probably not very much other than a warm fuzzy glow of 'championing human rights' - and that's not exactly China's strong suit. It would probably require 'a bit of both' - the soup-to-nuts removal of the Kim regime, but also the removal/breaking of ties between Seoul and Washington, in favour of a pivot towards Beijing. And that definitely isn't going to happen either.
 
Last edited:
mustafur
Alot of people don't understand what NATO means, its a treaty for countries on the Atlantic(eg North America and Europe)and this is on the pacific, while NATO forces would likely be involved this would more fall under the treaties with South Korea, Japan and possibly ANZUS, No NATO Country would have An obligation to join Apart from the US.
Click to expand...

The US is the largest constituent of NATO. If America act then NATO is affected.
 
prisonermonkeys
I don't know what he's trying to achieve there. Does he genuinely think that China will stop acting in China's interests and start acting in America's interests simply because he wants them to?
Click to expand...

He seems pretty convinced that he can solve any problem simply by using his incredible "negotiating" skills. Or by just being a bully.

I wouldn't put it past him at all to think that he can play strict Dad to the entire world and get people to do what he wants just by saying so. The ego knows no bounds.
 
Obama informed Trump that North Korea will have atomic weapons capable of reaching the US west coast by the end of his term. If true, then he has a duty to protect US citizens from this threat. He can talk to China, he can talk to North Korea, and he can bomb North Korea. He has some time, but not overmuch. The main downside to bombing North Korea is that they could raze Seoul (the populous capital city of South Korea), raze it to the ground within a few short hours with long-range artillery firing from the safety of bunkers and tunnels under mountains.
 
Last edited:
Dotini
Obama informed Trump that North Korea will have atomic weapons capable of reaching the US west coast by the end of his term. If true, then he has a duty to protect US citizens from this threat.
Click to expand...

How about by not provoking the threat? Technically, every nation with nuclear arms is a threat, but the US doesn't feel the need to storm India or Pakistan. North Korea may be belligerent, but they're not stupid. They know that they don't win a war against any of the major military powers, or even the minor ones. The only reason that they will actually launch in anger is if they think that they're in danger of being wiped out. Which is ironically what people like Trump propose as a solution, the exact thing that is most likely to trigger a nuclear exchange.

Attacking NK achieves nothing. They're cornered, and so will go down swinging and take as many people as possible with them. China is an unknown quantity, and could well decide to back NK up. There's any number of other minor militaries in the world that would love an excuse to join in a war against the US.

So there's this huge risk of starting WW3, for what? Because some fat kid running a slave dictatorship likes to run his mouth? I'd hope Trump would grow some balls and be the bigger man, but it seems unlikely if he's made it to 70 without doing so.
 
Dotini
Obama informed Trump that North Korea will have atomic weapons capable of reaching the US west coast by the end of his term. If true, then he has a duty to protect US citizens from this threat. He can talk to China, he can talk to North Korea, and he can bomb North Korea. He has some time, but not overmuch. The main downside to bombing North Korea is that they could raze Seoul (the populous capital city of South Korea), raze it to the ground within a few short hours with long-range artillery firing from the safety of bunkers and tunnels under mountains.
Click to expand...
You mean by this assure/guarantee the North Koreans there will be no attempt at regime change? Yes. Perhaps by some degree of politically and economically supporting the Kim regime, we will receive the benefit of a verifiable pact of North Korean de-nuclearization.
 
Last edited:
axletramp
NATO might be called the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation but 20 out of the 28 member states aren't on the Atlantic Ocean. Yes SEATO would most likely be involved, but the US is very much a NATO member and the Republic of Korea has special IPCO relations with NATO to the point that they actively put troops on the ground in Afghanistan as part of NATO's operations. Either way, the Chinese wouldn't allow it.
Click to expand...
The point im trying to state is whilst NATO Countries will likely be involved in any war involving a US ally they have a treaty with, the treaty they have under NATO won't make them obliged to join unless one is attacked.

And SEATO hasn't existed for nearly 40 years.

The one thing that brings all involved is if the US is attacked and that explains the Afghanistan situation.
 
The indictment, arrest and incarceration in solitary confinement of the South Korean President is a further destabilizing factor.


Ousted South Korean President Park Geun-hye, center, is transferred early Friday to a detention house in Seoul. Chung Sung-Jun / AP
 
Imari
North Korea may be belligerent, but they're not stupid. They know that they don't win a war against any of the major military powers
Click to expand...
Exactly - and Trump knows this - so why not call their bluff while it can still be done?

Trump will deal will China in the first instance, while making it clear that he is willing and able to call Kim's bluff. If China doesn't agree to press DPRK for a diplomatic solution, then Trump can go to DPRK with an ultimatum - commit to a peaceful stance towards the US, or be disarmed forcibly. Faced with a genuine and overwhelming military threat, the DPRK (and the Chinese) may decide that it's time to negotiate. Obama's nice guy approach of 'extending the hand of friendship' was met with the DPRK extending the middle finger - maybe a genuine threat of overthrow will finally compel the DPRK to think more seriously about a diplomatic solution. It's a high risk strategy, but so is leaving the cult-like Kim regime to its own (nuclear) devices.

The DPRK cannot possibly win a war against the US, nor even inflict any significant damage to it... yet - Kim knows it and Trump knows it, and so Trump has a strong hand when it comes to that ultimatum. Trump is not a stupid either - he wants a deal, and he probably knows how to get one too. But playing nice with a bunch of insane, paranoid, murdering criminals doesn't really work, but strong-arming them is the last option - Trump, however, will probably make it pretty clear that that option is very much available, and time is running out to accept that offer of a peaceful deal (which may include nuclear weapons in North Korea being 'tolerated' to a certain extent, in exchange for a non-agression pact)...
 
Dotini
You mean by this assure/guarantee the North Koreans there will be no attempt at regime change? Yes. Perhaps by some degree of politically and economically supporting the Kim regime, we will receive the benefit of a verifiable pact of North Korean de-nuclearization.
Click to expand...

Are you having a conversation with yourself now?

Touring Mars
Exactly - and Trump knows this - so why not call their bluff while it can still be done?
Click to expand...

But how much of a bluff is it? They've seen what happened to Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, and any number of other countries where the US and western allies decided to flex their muscle. They know that they don't win that war, but maybe they decide that it's better for them to go down swinging.

Faced with a genuine and overwhelming military threat, the DPRK (and the Chinese) may decide that it's time to negotiate.
Click to expand...

Maybe. Or maybe not. Last time the Chinese entered the war, while they were undermanned and underequipped, and fought the UN/US to a treaty. China's military is significantly stronger now than it was, and they also have the backing of enormous production ability should a war become protracted. Engaging in a proxy war with China would not be smart, but given how close NK is to Chinese soil they might come in full strength.

Personally, I don't think we need another world war. I get that there's not many people left who remember either of the first two, but they were significantly less fun than games and movies make them out to be.

Obama's nice guy approach of 'extending the hand of friendship' was met with the DPRK extending the middle finger - maybe a genuine threat of overthrow will finally compel the DPRK to think more seriously about a diplomatic solution.
Click to expand...

Probably largely because the DPRK had seen what the US was capable of in the Bush Jr era, and so viewed any suggestion that they should disarm as simply softening them up for invasion. Can't say I blame them. Iraq got stomped for having imaginary weapons of mass destruction, after decades of being a US ally. NK has real ones.

If I was the DPRK I think the threat of overthrow has always been genuine and impending. Why else do you think they're so gung ho on weapons research? It's the only thing that has been left for them to do in order to maintain their independence.

It's a high risk strategy, but so is leaving the cult-like Kim regime to its own (nuclear) devices.
Click to expand...

Do you think that we could discuss North Korea without the need to throw in random cliche buzzwords to show how much you dislike them? We get it. You don't like them. Let's be a little rational about it.

The DPRK cannot possibly win a war against the US, nor even inflict any significant damage to it... yet...
Click to expand...

We don't know that and that's sort of the point. The assumption is that they have nukes, and we know that they have the means of firing them a decent distance. Whether those means are capable of defeating US/Japanese missile countermeasures is another question, but I doubt anyone wants it to go that far.

Trump is not a stupid either - he wants a deal, and he probably knows how to get one too.
Click to expand...

I'm not entirely sold that he's not stupid, and I'm definitely not sold that he knows how to broker a major political deal. The dude can't even get his own party working together. How's he going to convince a nation that views the US as the major threat to their existence that they should work together?

But playing nice with a bunch of insane, paranoid, murdering criminals doesn't really work, but strong-arming them is the last option - Trump, however, will probably make it pretty clear that that option is very much available, and time is running out to accept that offer of a peaceful deal (which may include nuclear weapons in North Korea being 'tolerated' to a certain extent, in exchange for a non-agression pact)...
Click to expand...

I guess the idea of not throwing random abuse around isn't on the cards.

The DPRK isn't insane any more than any other government, or so it seems to me. And it's not paranoia when everyone is legitimately out to get you. As far as murdering...ha ha, very funny. You make it sound like "normal" countries don't also murder people by the truckload.

I assumed that people had learned from Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, and Vietnam that military intervention tends not to work. Oh, and also Korea. There was that war in Korea that basically set up this whole problem that we have now. That was a good one, that made things lots better.

At some point the world is going to have to accept that they created the DPRK, and while it does some horrible things it's as legitimate a nation as any and shouldn't be treated like a red-headed step-child. Legitimising them and assuring them that they will be supported as a nation is exactly what should happen, because the moment the DPRK relaxes their stranglehold on communication and assimilation with the rest of the world is the moment that their populace overthrows the Kims and establishes a real government. The only thing that is keeping the Kims in power right now is that NK is an island unto itself, and the citizens have limited information, means and ability.
 
I'm pretty confident that NK will pull the same rabbit out of the hat as they have done before.

A deal will be made, NK will promise that they'll "stop" their nuclear program, massive amounts of foreign aid goes to NK, and this story will be debated again in a couple of years.
 
I never expected the "maybe the West was the real brutal military dictatorship all along" subtext from the Castro eulogy thread to make its way to the thread about North Korea.
 
Dennisch
I'm pretty confident that NK will pull the same rabbit out of the hat as they have done before.

A deal will be made, NK will promise that they'll "stop" their nuclear program, massive amounts of foreign aid goes to NK, and this story will be debated again in a couple of years.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much what I see happening, too. does anybody remember the billion dollar bribe we paid then not to build a bomb?
 
Dennisch
I'm pretty confident that NK will pull the same rabbit out of the hat as they have done before.

A deal will be made, NK will promise that they'll "stop" their nuclear program, massive amounts of foreign aid goes to NK, and this story will be debated again in a couple of years.
Click to expand...
BobK
That's pretty much what I see happening, too. does anybody remember the billion dollar bribe we paid then not to build a bomb?
Click to expand...

Positive thoughts are always welcome.

But I'm afraid the time for US negotiations with the Kim regime is done and gone. Trump's position now seems to be that either China will put Kim and his nukes in a box, or the US will put them in a crater.

Edit: It just occurred to me, this is an ultimatum! :eek:
 
Last edited:
Tornado
I never expected the "maybe the West was the real brutal military dictatorship all along" subtext from the Castro eulogy thread to make its way to the thread about North Korea.
Click to expand...

It's pretty hard to ignore the fact that most of the troubled countries in the world have roots in the US/USSR conflict and the desperation of those two to either assimilate or crush everyone else.

It's frankly impossible to ignore it in a discussion of North Korea. Look up how North Korea came to be. It is entirely because the US and USSR decided to split the country in half. It hasn't migrated, it's entirely relevant to a discussion of North Korea, it's history and it's current place in the world. It's not my fault that the US has historically had it's fingers in aggravating a lot of dictators who were foolish enough not to bend over for Uncle Sam.
 
Imari
It's pretty hard to ignore the fact that most of the troubled countries in the world have roots in the US/USSR conflict and the desperation of those two to either assimilate or crush everyone else.

It's frankly impossible to ignore it in a discussion of North Korea. Look up how North Korea came to be. It is entirely because the US and USSR decided to split the country in half. It hasn't migrated, it's entirely relevant to a discussion of North Korea, it's history and it's current place in the world. It's not my fault that the US has historically had it's fingers in aggravating a lot of dictators who were foolish enough not to bend over for Uncle Sam.
Click to expand...
Well if it wasn't for the US it would be all under North Korea.

The Country would likely be unified right now if the USSR just took over the North like East Germany.
 
Imari
Do you think that we could discuss North Korea without the need to throw in random cliche buzzwords to show how much you dislike them? We get it. You don't like them. Let's be a little rational about it.
Click to expand...
My prerogative - the answer is no, I'll speak about DPRK in whatever terms I choose.

I guess the idea of not throwing random abuse around isn't on the cards.
Click to expand...
As above, I'll choose whatever words I see fit - but please, don't insult me by suggesting that I am using "random abuse" - I choose my words advisedly - you can make all the comparisons you like, but I think you will find that my choice of words are very far from random. Anyway, maybe it's best to stick to discussing the points I've raised rather than suggesting that I should keep my opinions to myself.
 
Imari
It's pretty hard to ignore the fact that most of the troubled countries in the world have roots in the US/USSR conflict and the desperation of those two to either assimilate or crush everyone else.

It's frankly impossible to ignore it in a discussion of North Korea. Look up how North Korea came to be. It is entirely because the US and USSR decided to split the country in half. It hasn't migrated, it's entirely relevant to a discussion of North Korea, it's history and it's current place in the world. It's not my fault that the US has historically had it's fingers in aggravating a lot of dictators who were foolish enough not to bend over for Uncle Sam.
Click to expand...
Ah, so something the US did in the 50s justifies why we need to allow the North Korean governent to have an international presence free of trigger words to make them feel bad in 2017?



Should we extend a similar arm to Hamas or ISIS on the same basis?
 

Similar threads

Turbo
  • Poll
GTP Alternative Cool Wall: 1948-present North Korea
Replies
11
Views
1K
Rage Racer
Rage Racer
Lasdul
  • Locked
Opinions on N. Korea
Replies
6
Views
1K
A2K78
A2K78
Delirious
US Orders Blackout Over North Korean Torpedoing Of Gulf Of Mexico Oil Rig
Replies
10
Views
4K
eran0004
eran0004
NissanSkylineN1
  • Locked
US and Iran Make Breakthrough Nuclear Deal
6 7 8
Replies
217
Views
8K
Famine
Famine
llNovall
SNAIL-Porsche GT3 Cup Challenge (using new 992 GT3), Season Champ: Sand_68, Congratulations on the Win and a Great Season!!!
23 24 25
Replies
724
Views
66K
Noob01_lmdead
Noob01_lmdead

Latest Posts

Back