Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

General North Korea discussion

430 replies to this topic
Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#361

Posted 11 February 2018 - 03:30 PM

 

 I've read some comments implying that Moon would be kidnapped or killed, but if North Korea wants stability on the peninsula, they obviously aren't going to have the South Korean leader killed on their turf. That would basically be suicide for their government.

 

Yeah, if any sort of thing like that were to happen, I'd bet on the US doing it. North Korea knows that any sort of violence to that level would mean its immediate annihilation. They aren't stupid. If you look at the way they've been acting for the past decade or so, you'd see a fairly rational and predictable actor.


Triple Vacuum Seal
  • Triple Vacuum Seal

    If you ♥ the $, then prepare to die for it.

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2011
  • United-States

#362

Posted 11 February 2018 - 10:07 PM

The fundamental problem for SK is that unified peninsula or not, a drawdown of US military presence in the area leaves a void that may be filled by China.  They are simply moving from under the US' thumb to under China's thumb, or coarsely-put, choosing between being either subjects of US imperialism or Chinese imperialism.  Not to mention the fact US Armed Forces are more or less the only formidable security force of SK.  So there's a massive financial void that needs to be filled by the taxpayers of SK along with the much-needed manpower commitment for their own defense.  Politically, such commitments are a tough sell to the prosperous and unmolested South Korean public.  Without the US, the SK military is undersized, vulnerable, and frankly at the mercy of Beijing's geopolitical will.

 

 

From a South Korean perspective, the terms of this emerging power dynamic with China will be increasingly less optimistic once the fear of a war recedes back to normal levels and Koreans become less desperate for peace.  SK's vast wealth surely lends them some leverage.  But at this point, a US withdrawal from the peninsula will leave behind a nuclear China, a nuclear NK, and non-nuclear SK to reach an amicable settlement of some sort.  Neither of the former parties will give a sh*t about SK's national interests beyond some mutually beneficial trade activity.  If SK wants peace without US occupation, it will certainly have to pay a price in one way or another.  Sooner or later, the US is also gonna have to accept that it's China's sphere out there and adjust its posture accordingly.  Only time will tell.

  • Tchuck likes this

G's Ah's
  • G's Ah's

    Hello, My Children

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014
  • New-Zealand

#363

Posted 13 February 2018 - 07:21 AM

I don't believe the United States would "draw down" or reduce its personnel strength in Korea, especially when it's advantageous for them to maintain soldiers close to or on China's borders. 


Coin
  • Coin

    Feroci

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 06 Jan 2014
  • Australia
  • Best New Member 2014

#364

Posted 13 February 2018 - 06:08 PM Edited by Coin, 13 February 2018 - 06:29 PM.

The fundamental problem for SK is that unified peninsula or not, a drawdown of US military presence in the area leaves a void that may be filled by China.  They are simply moving from under the US' thumb to under China's thumb, or coarsely-put, choosing between being either subjects of US imperialism or Chinese imperialism.  Not to mention the fact US Armed Forces are more or less the only formidable security force of SK.  So there's a massive financial void that needs to be filled by the taxpayers of SK along with the much-needed manpower commitment for their own defense.  Politically, such commitments are a tough sell to the prosperous and unmolested South Korean public.  Without the US, the SK military is undersized, vulnerable, and frankly at the mercy of Beijing's geopolitical will.

 

I'm not sure you're aware but SK has one of the largest military apparatus in terms of active personnel, in addition to millions of reservists by virtue of compulsory military service. That said, I agree with the general gist here - just seemed odd to downplay SK's own forces.

  • Tchuck likes this

G's Ah's
  • G's Ah's

    Hello, My Children

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014
  • New-Zealand

#365

Posted 14 February 2018 - 04:57 AM

The South Korean military in total only has about 625,000 active personnel and around 3.2 million reservists, but they're largely trained for an invasion from North Korea and don't really have the same power projection capabilities as the Chinese do or even the Japanese. South Korea's main military power is in its land forces. 

 

For what it's worth, the People's Liberation Army has 2.3 million active personnel and 2.3 million reserve personnel. In addition, there is the People's Liberation Army Militia, which has a further three million personnel. 


Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#366

Posted 14 February 2018 - 05:06 AM

But the US only has what, 40,000 active personnel in South Korea? 300 or so tanks/armored vehicles. They have a fleet stationed in Japan, but China's fleets could easily overwhelm it if needed. So American backing is not that great in terms of numbers or capability. China and NK's forces combined could overwhelm South Korea without much difficulty, US or no US presence. (Speaking of numbers, only. If you add in Nukes to the equation, then the game changes to a more catastrophic event)

 

China isn't an expansionist state, though. It has no intention in absorbing other states into its empire. It works more on the base of tributaries/client states. So I'd really doubt that China would ever need to exercise military pressure on its neighbours when it can already do so much more efficiently via trading. This potential void is already being filled by China, through their trading and deals with local partners. At least without the US, then the nations here would work for the benefit of the region, and not for the benefit of the US.


G's Ah's
  • G's Ah's

    Hello, My Children

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014
  • New-Zealand

#367

Posted 14 February 2018 - 11:50 AM

China wouldn't be interested in sending in soldiers into a conflict on the Korean peninsular unless it felt that it was directly threatened. It already had contingency plans for the removal of the top echelons of the North Korean state, presumably because a war would present itself as an opportunity to establish a proper buffer state in Korea without having to try and pull leverage on the Kim regime.

 

North Korea on the other hand has about 5.7 million people under arms at any given time, which largely means that based on numbers alone it is larger than South Korea's forces. However, North Korea is also not interesting in attacking because of a few things. One is that attacking would not garner it support from anyone and it would therefore be alone in its endeavours. Two, the only thing the Korean People's Army has going for it is size. It's equipment is hideously outdated and its capacity to fight is pretty much nil. It is slowly modernising but has to rely on clandestine methods to acquire new technologies. In the event of a conflict it would lose out due to a loss of air superiority from better aircraft in the US and South Korean air forces. Three, North Korea is planning for a defensive war, because it has limited power projection and it has virtually no way to sustain any offensive operations. Hence why it is trying to make itself look as reckless and as scary as possible, as well as developing nuclear weapons. It's all part of North Korea's deterrent. The military brass know it can't win a war and so it's best defence is deterrent. Four, and finally, war would mean the loss of the gravy train for the privileged few in Pyongyang. And they, like anyone else in positions of power, want to retain that control and that wealth. 

 

You are right in saying that China is not an expansionist state, but that doesn't mean it wants to exert influence over or control territory elsewhere which it believes is important. That's why there's division over who owns what in the South China Sea. It's why China is calling itself a "near-Arctic state" in order to try and claim some legitimacy for when it sticks its nose into the grab for territory in the Arctic. It's why China is investing heavily in the developing world. Because it wants control, and the best way to do that is to try to establish some control over natural resources. As for military pressure, China will continue to act belligerently with its military not because it believes it can succeed but because it wants countries like the US and others to take it seriously as a military power. That's why it shows of its new carriers or new submarines or makes boasts about leaps in defence technologies: because it wants to be given that prestige that comes from being a global power. 

  • Tchuck and Triple Vacuum Seal like this

Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#368

Posted 14 February 2018 - 02:02 PM

 

It's why China is investing heavily in the developing world. Because it wants control, and the best way to do that is to try to establish some control over natural resources. 

 

Yep. And that's why they will win the spot for top dog in the world soon enough. They own a lot of land in Latin America, in Africa, in other Asian countries. They have extraction rights on a lot of resources around the globe, they are industrializing like mad and improving their own standards for quality. sh*t, They built their first high speed rail line for the Beijing Olympics. A 110 km line. 10 years later, they're at over 25000 km in high speed rail networks, to break the 40000 km mark in another decade or so, with even better quality. And now taking steps to be greener as well, going on massive solar development, massive reforestation efforts, massive curbing of pollution. All of this happened quietly under America's nose as they bullied and bombed countries that didn't comply with them. 

 

Thus why I believe there'll be no conflict in the Korean peninsula, unless the US makes it happen. NK doesn't want it, China doesn't want it, SK doesn't want it. US doesn't give a sh*t who dies, as long as it's not Americans. 

  • Typhus likes this

Typhus
  • Typhus

    OG

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2007
  • None

#369

Posted 20 February 2018 - 06:33 AM

An interesting, if worrying, article:

https://www.theguard...-on-north-korea

Given the diplomatic success of the Winter Olympics for both North and South Korea, I can't see Trump launching a pre-emptive strike. He would have absolutely no way of justifying it.

  • Tchuck likes this

Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#370

Posted 20 February 2018 - 06:54 AM Edited by Tchuck, 20 February 2018 - 07:03 AM.

Sigh. 

 

 

Speculation about such a strike grew last month when Georgetown University professor Victor Cha was dropped from consideration to be the US ambassador to South Korea. In an op-ed, Cha said some administration officials had suggested a preventive military strike aimed at showing American strength – but he had warned of the dangers of triggering a wider war. The administration denies the strategy.

 

Because why listen to specialists who are telling you it is a terrible idea. A bloody nose strategy would be the second most idiotic thing the US could do in the region; the first most idiotic would be dropping a nuke, which Trump seems hellbent in wanting to do so he can get the complete "presidential" experience.

 

Anyone with any knowledge about the situation in the region know that America striking first is the worst idea. Unless they manage to neutralize NK's fighting potential in one strike, the retaliation over Seoul will be devastating. And they can't neutralize it all. NK learned from the Korean War: go underground. They have very extensive networks of tunnels linking up their arsenal, hidden from the satellites and the bombs.

 

Most aggravating is all this right after a wonderful Winter Olympics, which showed the two Koreas acting in a more friendly, peaceful way, showing that collaboration between the two nations is completely possible.

 

But of course the imperialists can't allow that. Not under their watch. Peace on their own terms, or not at all.

 

Perhaps this has something to do with it...


Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#371

Posted 06 March 2018 - 12:28 AM

North Korea leader wants to advance Korea ties, makes agreement with South: KCNA

 

 

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un told a visiting delegation from South Korea that it is his “firm will to vigorously advance” inter-Korean ties and “write a new history of national reunification,” the North’s official news agency said on Tuesday.

 

So much for a madman who wants to destroy the entire world, huh?

 

Now all that's left is for Moon to visit the North and have a sitdown with Un. And for America to let things take its course. This could be huge!

  • Typhus likes this

G's Ah's
  • G's Ah's

    Hello, My Children

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014
  • New-Zealand

#372

Posted 06 March 2018 - 02:52 AM

Well it's not the first time the leaders of the two Koreas have met, but this is still progress nonetheless. 


Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#373

Posted 06 March 2018 - 04:35 AM Edited by Tchuck, 06 March 2018 - 12:32 PM.

It'll be the first time for Un, though. And now we have a nuclear North Korea, and a South Korean president that is friendly towards North Korea/Reunification...

sh*t, this is huge.

 

 

North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, has told South Korean envoys that his country is willing to begin negotiations with the United States on abandoning its nuclear weapons and that it would suspend all nuclear and missile tests while it is engaged in such talks, South Korean officials said on Tuesday.

 

America, don't f*ck it up.


Typhus
  • Typhus

    OG

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2007
  • None

#374

Posted 06 March 2018 - 12:34 PM

North Korea leader wants to advance Korea ties, makes agreement with South: KCNA

 

 

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un told a visiting delegation from South Korea that it is his “firm will to vigorously advance” inter-Korean ties and “write a new history of national reunification,” the North’s official news agency said on Tuesday.

 

So much for a madman who wants to destroy the entire world, huh?

 

Now all that's left is for Moon to visit the North and have a sitdown with Un. And for America to let things take its course. This could be huge!

To add on to this, North Korea are now saying that they are willing to suspend nuclear testing if America agrees to sit down and talk with them:

https://www.theguard...litary-tensions

  • Tchuck likes this

Svip
  • Svip

    I eat babies

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None
  • Best Returning Member 2014
    Lifetime Achievement Award

#375

Posted 06 March 2018 - 01:32 PM

But they also wants the US at the table, which makes me suspicious. It sounds like North Korea wants concessions from the US.

Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#376

Posted 06 March 2018 - 02:25 PM

Probably. And the US would be wise to work it out, and come out the hero. This could be a massive win for Trump. 

 

But mostly, I think he wants the US at the table to legitimize everything. The US have announced that they wouldn't recognize any treaty signed by the two Koreas if they weren't consulted about it.


G's Ah's
  • G's Ah's

    Hello, My Children

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014
  • New-Zealand

#377

Posted 07 March 2018 - 03:25 AM

North Korea's nuclear program is primarily designed to act as a deterrent from future "aggression" from the United States. Because apparently having 5.4 million people conscripted is too expensive. Anyway, it's likely that Kim Jong-un will offer giving up said nuclear program and demand that the US withdraw it's forces from South Korea in return. That seems like an appropriate concession given what he's offering. 

  • Tchuck likes this

Hmmm nice bike
  • Hmmm nice bike

    No, my bike!

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 28 Oct 2006
  • United-States

#378

Posted 09 March 2018 - 12:21 AM Edited by Hmmm nice bike, 09 March 2018 - 12:22 AM.

Looks like Kim Jong Un and Trump are going to meet in-person by May. Major development right now, and seeing Trump and Kim meeting is gonna be a trip, but let's see what happens between now and then. Could just be one big photo op. Or, for all we know, this could fall apart between now and May and they won't even meet.
  • Tchuck likes this

Svip
  • Svip

    I eat babies

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None
  • Best Returning Member 2014
    Lifetime Achievement Award

#379

Posted 09 March 2018 - 06:21 AM

Or, maybe Kim Jung-Un is just so fascinated by Trump, he realises this his only chance to meet him in person, but doesn't have any real desire for peace?

No, that's too ridiculous. Something significant must have happened, but since we know so little about North Korea, it's almost impossible to say what. I sure as hell don't think Kim is inviting South Korea and the US out of the goodness of his heart.

That, or he was planning to come to the tables anyway, but wanted the nuclear weapons as a negotiation position when he did. Again, so far, we are only hearing about what North Korea is willing to give up; I am far more interested in what they want!

They are even allowing the US-South Korean military exercises to continue, even though this used to be a major complaint for them.
  • Tchuck and Otter like this

G's Ah's
  • G's Ah's

    Hello, My Children

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014
  • New-Zealand

#380

Posted 09 March 2018 - 07:11 AM

It's hard to tell what Kim Jong-un's intentions are because he's new to the statesmen role and we don't know much about North Korea in general. Undoubtedly Trump will milk this as much as it's worth. I said earlier that North Korea wants American forces out of South Korea. I still stand by this because it appears to be something of equal measure to giving up nuclear weapons, and something which allows both leaders from opposing sides of the DMV to talk about future reunification. 


Typhus
  • Typhus

    OG

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2007
  • None

#381

Posted 09 March 2018 - 07:58 AM Edited by Typhus, 09 March 2018 - 08:02 AM.

Whilst this is a positive step, Trump's presence at the negotiations might not be as helpful as North and South Korea are hoping. Everything we've seen of him so far suggests a man who is volatile in the face of challenge or even mild criticism, and I am skeptical that Trump will conduct himself appropriately in this setting. Or, worse still, that he will hold true to any agreement they reach.

 

Maybe he will surprise us? But for my part, I'm not so sure.

  • Tchuck likes this

Shyabang Shyabang
  • Shyabang Shyabang

    Wild Thing

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Oct 2011

#382

Posted 09 March 2018 - 08:06 AM


G's Ah's
  • G's Ah's

    Hello, My Children

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014
  • New-Zealand

#383

Posted 09 March 2018 - 11:42 AM

Maybe he will surprise us? But for my part, I'm not so sure.

 

This is the timeline with Donald Trump as President. Anything is possible. 

  • Tchuck likes this

Darth Yokel
  • Darth Yokel

    A Sith now, aparently.

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2007
  • Jamaica

#384

Posted 09 March 2018 - 02:53 PM

Two possibilities that I think are most likely:

1. Trump tries to start a war

2. NK manipulates Trump

 

I'm leaning towards the second possibility. North Koreans aren't stupid.


Input
  • Input

    Pineapple

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 May 2009

#385

Posted 09 March 2018 - 11:17 PM

I'm sure this is just my imagination running wild. But who is to say this isn't just a way for NK to get it's major rivals into one room and take them as hostages?

 

I don't know how possible something like that would even be on that scale, but if I wanted to kill off my rivals I would use a phony peace meeting to get them where I want them with their defenses down.

 

Over the top, sure. But you can't tell me you don't see the plausibility of the idea.


Hmmm nice bike
  • Hmmm nice bike

    No, my bike!

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 28 Oct 2006
  • United-States

#386

Posted 10 March 2018 - 01:10 AM

I'm sure this is just my imagination running wild. But who is to say this isn't just a way for NK to get it's major rivals into one room and take them as hostages?

 

I don't know how possible something like that would even be on that scale, but if I wanted to kill off my rivals I would use a phony peace meeting to get them where I want them with their defenses down.

 

Over the top, sure. But you can't tell me you don't see the plausibility of the idea.

I think that was a movie that came out a few years ago, "London Has Fallen" or something, where the president is taken hostage. I was thinking more along the lines of "The Interview," except they both go in expecting to poison each other and mess up in a hilarious set of circumstances.

  • Input likes this

Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#387

Posted 10 March 2018 - 01:47 AM

I'm sure this is just my imagination running wild. But who is to say this isn't just a way for NK to get it's major rivals into one room and take them as hostages?

 

I don't know how possible something like that would even be on that scale, but if I wanted to kill off my rivals I would use a phony peace meeting to get them where I want them with their defenses down.

 

Over the top, sure. But you can't tell me you don't see the plausibility of the idea.

 

Very, very, very, very unlikely. Taking the leader of a nation as hostage is quite possibly the dumbest idea that any serious head of state could ever consider. It's the sure path to lose any and all support for whatever cause you think you had. 

 

Not to mention that killing a rival, in this case, would have 0 positive outcomes. But countless negative ones. Kim playing the rational man extending a hand for peace in contrast to Trump being a loose cannon is the best play for North Korea.

 

And it's working. Trump being Trump, first said that he'd meet with Kim in May.

Now, however, they're going back on their word (as the US has done quite frequently regarding North Korea), and demanding more "concrete steps and actions" prior to any meeting occurring.

 

Nevermind the fact that Kim already said he's willing to freeze the nuclear research and begin a dismantling process after talks, and that he won't retaliate against South Korea and America's military exercises. What the f*ck do they want? That he just goes on and dismantles every single nuclear weapon/facility he has before reaching the negotiation table? That just isn't going to happen. The leverage is there for a reason.

  • Input likes this

Input
  • Input

    Pineapple

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 May 2009

#388

Posted 10 March 2018 - 03:34 PM

@Hmm nice bike: Funny you mention that movie, just the other night my friend was telling me about it. Not the greatest from what I hear.

 

@Tchunk: Yeah, your right. Maybe the guy just finally came to his senses, or all his bullsh*t is falling apart and he has no real choice. Either way we can hope this will bring some war tension down at least.


rome7
  • rome7

    King

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2007
  • None

#389

Posted 11 March 2018 - 01:57 AM

why did he decide to build a nuclear arsenal in the first place?
Is the change of heart because of his country starving?
This whole situation seems fishy

Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#390

Posted 11 March 2018 - 04:19 AM

 

why did he decide to build a nuclear arsenal in the first place? 

 

Because as a regime that is the target of the imperialists, he looked around the world and its history:

-All countries that the US didn't like that didn't possess nukes, got invaded and left in rubbles.

-All countries that did have nukes, got proper negotiations done.

 

Obviously, he would go for the nukes if he can afford it. It's cheaper than having a massive standing army and tanks and whatnot.

And hey, it worked. Now America is willing to sit down and talk. Sort of.

 

 

Is the change of heart because of his country starving? 

 

Meh, there's hunger in North Korea just like there's hunger in the US and other countries. The thing is that America is pretty much enforcing that hunger, so it's kind of like blaming North Korea for feeling the results of something caused by American Imperialism.

 

But even if he did change his mind because of his country's alleged famine, that's good enough, no?

But in reality it's more likely the case that now that he has nukes, he can finally get proper negotiations going with the South and the US. Leverage is everything.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users