War with N. Korea?

[TheMastersSon]

Wonder what they would do if we flat out TOLD them "Solve this problem yourselves, or WE WILL." and give them a deadline...... Think they would actually make an attempt?

IMO that's probably what Trump told everyone from NK and China to the UN. Not much else to say when a terrorist dictator is openly threatening our major cities with WMD holocaust. If a deadline was/is involved afaik the info hasn't been made public. It would serve no purpose imo other than to give Jong-un a heads up for the timing of his deposition.

Edited November 1, 2017 by TheMastersSon

[Aurielius]

<snip>

Wonder what they would do if we flat out TOLD them "Solve this problem yourselves, or WE WILL." and give them a deadline...... Think they would actually make an attempt?

 

My guess is that it would give Kim a 'Launch or Lose By Date', since I do not trust the Chinese to keep that a secret. I would prefer that the NK would not have that little of gem of intel. If we have to go to war, my preference is that the NK's first awareness comes when the command decapitation air strikes occur.

War is coming IMO, the only conjecture is the operational date.

[Fkemman11]

 

Short of NK handling their own problem, which almost never happens with military dictatorships, I think we're looking at lots of dead people regardless, and the longer we wait the worse it will be. When Jong-un isn't busy threatening us with nuclear holocaust he's doing the same to the other two-thirds of his own country. So I'm baffled by the PRC's apparent desire to keep this monster in power. He'll eventually explode in their faces regardless of what our country does.

Yeah, I really don't expect to see anything change here from within. It hasn't happened in almost 70 years, (and three generations of kims....) no reason to expect that to change.

 

China HAS been more cooperative when it comes to NK of late. It's possible that they are finally figuring out that their 'buffer dictator' is just as dangerous to them, as he is to everyone else. Whether they will actually DO something about it though.... well, that's another question entirely. They could solve the problem in a week, if they had the correct motivation.

 

Wonder what they would do if we flat out TOLD them "Solve this problem yourselves, or WE WILL." and give them a deadline...... Think they would actually make an attempt?

 

I respectfully disagree. That would bring them into a better position on the Korean peninsula against S. Korea and the US- I'd rather not see the shark's teeth up close and personal! No, we need to keep China out of this as much as possible. It would be much better for the US to go it alone and be able to negotiate with China from an much stronger strategic position in the future. The threat of nukes is one thing, but the threat of both nukes and divisions pouring across your borders is something more to think about. How better to deter tactical nukes if your already on their land? A unified, democratic Korea is exactly the buffer we need to ensure China plays honest Joe in the world. And because of Korea's proximity to China, we cannot simply leave and let them settle it themselves. Korea is prime strategic real estate as well as worthy allies in need of the US to play big brother to them- for the time being. The most effective deterrent to war is making the other guy doubt they can beat you.

Lil' Kim is just crazy! But I still think we should wait for N. Korea to fire the first shot- as you have said. Should PRC choose to invade, we can always point to it as war without sufficient provocation on their part and denounce it to the world as "naked aggression" or "totalitarian expansionism". :dry:

[HeyYou]

 

 

Short of NK handling their own problem, which almost never happens with military dictatorships, I think we're looking at lots of dead people regardless, and the longer we wait the worse it will be. When Jong-un isn't busy threatening us with nuclear holocaust he's doing the same to the other two-thirds of his own country. So I'm baffled by the PRC's apparent desire to keep this monster in power. He'll eventually explode in their faces regardless of what our country does.

Yeah, I really don't expect to see anything change here from within. It hasn't happened in almost 70 years, (and three generations of kims....) no reason to expect that to change.

 

China HAS been more cooperative when it comes to NK of late. It's possible that they are finally figuring out that their 'buffer dictator' is just as dangerous to them, as he is to everyone else. Whether they will actually DO something about it though.... well, that's another question entirely. They could solve the problem in a week, if they had the correct motivation.

 

Wonder what they would do if we flat out TOLD them "Solve this problem yourselves, or WE WILL." and give them a deadline...... Think they would actually make an attempt?

 

I respectfully disagree. That would bring them into a better position on the Korean peninsula against S. Korea and the US- I'd rather not see the shark's teeth up close and personal! No, we need to keep China out of this as much as possible. It would be much better for the US to go it alone and be able to negotiate with China from an much stronger strategic position in the future. The threat of nukes is one thing, but the threat of both nukes and divisions pouring across your borders is something more to think about. How better to deter tactical nukes if your already on their land? A unified, democratic Korea is exactly the buffer we need to ensure China plays honest Joe in the world. And because of Korea's proximity to China, we cannot simply leave and let them settle it themselves. Korea is prime strategic real estate as well as worthy allies in need of the US to play big brother to them- for the time being. The most effective deterrent to war is making the other guy doubt they can beat you.

Lil' Kim is just crazy! But I still think we should wait for N. Korea to fire the first shot- as you have said. Should PRC choose to invade, we can always point to it as war without sufficient provocation on their part and denounce it to the world as "naked aggression" or "totalitarian expansionism". :dry:

 

Trouble is, China has no real desire to see a unified Korea..... especially as a US protectorate. Having US soldiers on their new border, would most certainly make them nervous..... Even though it wouldn't benefit either party for China and the US to go to war..... (US more so than China.... we are only about 20% of China's foreign trade.... unfortunately, a fairly significant percentage of our manufacturing comes from China.....) I suspect, that in order to 'protect' their buffer from the US, China would instantly come into the war on the side of NK, should the US stage a pre-emptive attack, with the appearance of an invasion to follow.

 

Quite frankly, I have absolutely zero desire to see the US make yet another attempt at "nation building"..... as we apparently flat out SUCK at it.

[TheMastersSon]

The benefit of statehood is that the nation building is already done. I think I'm repeating myself again but from my reading South Korea's government is a major part of the current problem. They most definitely enjoy having their bread buttered on both sides.

 

Sorry for another Civil War analogy, but imagine if France had forcibly separated the U.S. at the start of our conflict, and provided massive amounts of aid to the South for a half century. The North would have been starved of agriculture and economically strained if not destitute, while the South would have enjoyed a real but artificially created dominance in our country as a whole. I think that's moreless the current situation in Korea.

 

My understanding is that most Koreans north or south consider the heart and soul of the country to reside in the north. It's pure coincidence, same way the northern half or our country contains virtually all of our federal infrastructure, and it's irrespective of Jong-un and his regime, and irrespective even of their party which has been in power for 70 years. So imo everything should be done to focus attention on the specific problem and those who are threatening us with WMD (Jong-un and loyal factions of his regime) and as few others as possible. Our operation must be framed as what it is: a response to a specific WMD threat, not on Korea as a country or its self-determination for government.

Edited November 3, 2017 by TheMastersSon

[HeyYou]

The benefit of statehood is that the nation building is already done. I think I'm repeating myself again but from my reading South Korea's government is a major part of the current problem. They most definitely enjoy having their bread buttered on both sides.

 

Sorry for another Civil War analogy, but imagine if France had forcibly separated the U.S. at the start of our conflict, and provided massive amounts of aid to the South for a half century. The North would have been starved of agriculture and economically strained if not destitute, while the South would have enjoyed a real but artificially created dominance in our country as a whole. I think that's moreless the current situation in Korea.

 

My understanding is that most Koreans north or south consider the heart and soul of the country to reside in the north. This is purely coincidental, the same way the northern half or our country contains virtually all of its federal infrastructure, and it's irrespective of Jong-un and his regime, and even irrespective of their party which has been in power for 70 years. So imo everything should be done to focus attention on the specific problem (Jong-un and loyal factions of his regime) and as few others as possible.

NK had China backing them for the last 70 years..... SK had the US backing them. Please note which area is in better condition....... NK could be in pretty much the same state as SK, if China had had the will to make it so. Instead, NK is the neglected step-child, that is used to concentrate the ire of the neighbors away from the true source.

[TheMastersSon]

China itself has well over a billion people, so they struggle just to provide standard of living improvements for their own citizens let alone foreign countries. What they do provide is weapons sales to friendly countries, just as we and most/all other countries do with our friends. So while you hit the underlying issue on the head imo, it's a given constant and not worth fighting over or arguing about because nothing whatsoever will change it. The bottom line is that we wasted 57,000 lives trying to impose democracy in Vietnam, it failed and our federal government has had normalized relations with Vietnam since 1995 without issue. I see zero reason why the same can't or shouldn't be true in Korea. Nation building is neither the goal nor even possible. Whether a majority of Koreans wish or are even able to retain the north's or south's existing government, or wish to replace their political parties etc or whatever else is up to them not anyone else. We are responsibly responding to a specific WMD threat. Edited November 2, 2017 by TheMastersSon

[HeyYou]

China itself has well over a billion people, so they struggle just to provide standard of living improvements for their own citizens let alone foreign countries. What they do provide is weapons sales to friendly countries, just as we and most/all other countries do with our friends. So while you hit the underlying issue on the head imo, it's a given constant and not worth fighting over or arguing about because nothing whatsoever will change it. The bottom line is that we wasted 57,000 lives trying to impose democracy in Vietnam, it failed and our federal government has had normalized relations with Vietnam since 1995 without issue. I see zero reason why the same can't or shouldn't be true in Korea. Nation building is neither the goal nor even possible. Whether a majority of Koreans wish or are even able to retain the north's or south's existing government, or wish to replace their political parties etc or whatever else is up to them not anyone else. We are responsibly responding to a specific WMD threat.

Unless we permit lil kim to retain his nuclear weapons, we will ever be the boogeyman for them. Not to mention that lil kim uses the "evil USA" as a whipping boy for why his country is in such dire straights... (with his own population) Going on past behavior of three generations of kims, giving in to his demands, concessions in any form, are pretty much any other kind of deal, won't last any longer than the next time kim wants something more. It has been a vicious cycle since 1953, I don't expect THAT to change either. That would suggest to me that NO deal we can make with NK, with kim in charge, is going to last any longer than any of the others did. (six months to a year.... then, right back to the same ol shlock)

 

On the other hand..... If we simply remove the bests head, and most of the neck..... and then let the NK people decide what to do from there.... perhaps they will install a government that is a little less antagonistic.... or not. :D (and by "let the NK people decide", I mean, we blast the leadership, and we are done. No invasion, no rebuilding, no aid, not a single thin dime of american taxpayer money.)

Edited November 2, 2017 by HeyYou

[TheMastersSon]

Two-thirds of Korea have already been successfully democratized for the last several decades, so imo we'll be surprised at how fast NK seeks a negotiated settlement once they're relieved of Jong-un and his intimidation. IMO whether it happens or is even likely to happen has no bearing whatsoever on our responsibility to defend ourselves and our country from NK's WMD threats. Edited November 3, 2017 by TheMastersSon

[HeyYou]

Two-thirds of Korea have already been successfully democratized for the last several decades, so imo we'll be surprised at how fast NK seeks a negotiated settlement once they're relieved of Jong-un and his intimidation. IMO whether it happens or is even likely to happen has no bearing whatsoever on our responsibility to defend ourselves and our country from NK's WMD threats.

Indeed, lil Kim needs to go. Along with most of the leadership of NK. What happens after that, is up to what's left.