• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

North Korea reportedly fires at South

Problem is, no matter how fast, the North Koreans would get at least one NUKE off. Where, is anyones guess? I see troops on the ground to pull something that quick and devastating off. All combined forces aworking as one, and it would require a good amount of NATO, if not UN (Smirk) support. Problem is that to drum up that support, NK will have time. Time to prepare. That said, I don't see how, without China's help, North Korea suvives a modern invasion. Yes, they do damage (A lesson for ever allowing Iran to get NUKES), but NK would cease to exist. The damage they inflict on some unsuspecting nation, Japan perhaps, is weighed against the effort to remove the regime, and replace it. Is it worth it? There are a great many people with more information than I that are debating that very subject right now.

Obama, on the other hand, is thnking politically. Politcs will direct his decision, and if it turns out in his mind that politically, it's best to play hardball with more sanctions, then that is what it will be. All the while, making it even more difficult for the next President to resolve.


My guess is that the Norht Korean army would provide stiff resistance at first, but then buckle as their lines of communication get cut. Just like what happened in Iraq.



Tim-

Speaking of the devil, where is the UN on all this? Silent as a lamb.
 
Speaking of the devil, where is the UN on all this? Silent as a lamb.

The UN has condemned the attack

Given the UN does not have a military it does not have much more other then promote sanctions
 
Today? The state of things has changed. China and the U.S. have far more reason to get along than to get in a fight, North Korea is now even more of a liability, and in the long run South Korea will leave our orbit and enter China's. That does not mean China has no interest at the moment in keeping North Korea around, but if they start making a scene you are more likely to see Chinese tanks rolling into Pyongyang to stop the North rather than assist them.


That doesn't mean we're wrong this time. Back then, we were in a Cold War, of Capitalism vs. Communism. Now, China has combined a free market with communist regulations, and if it attacks the largest free market in the world, its free market is giong to collapse. Remember, the United States represents the demand for their country's goods, and they lose that if we got to war.

Japan was the largest buyer of American scrap metal, in the world...prior to 1941.
 
The UN has condemned the attack

Given the UN does not have a military it does not have much more other then promote sanctions

I think the US should make a move to have China removed as a permanent member if they don't clamp down on Kim Jong ILL.
 
All the lives on the Korean Peninsula are not worth a single drop of American blood. This is not America's fight.

I served iin Korea. I was in the 2nd Infantry Division. At this time we have 28,000 troops in the ROK. The mission of these troops is a first line of defense. American troops are in the ROK for this purpose not as advisors. You may not believe this is our fight, thats fine. But since the cease fire in 1953 our government has chosen to help Korea defend the DMZ at the request of our friends and allies. I disagree with you when you say all of the lives on the Korean Peninsula are not worth a single drop of American blood. First of all 53,686 American military personal gave thier lives defending South Korea against the communist north and China. The decisson has allready been made to help defend the South from military agression from the increasingly hostile North. And If this escalates into an all out ground war Americans will fight to the death to help defend Asia's most successful democracy.
 
I think the US should make a move to have China removed as a permanent member if they don't clamp down on Kim Jong ILL.

Yeah like that would ever happen? LOL

Tim-
 
I served iin Korea. I was in the 2nd Infantry Division. At this time we have 28,000 troops in the ROK. The mission of these troops is a first line of defense. American troops are in the ROK for this purpose not as advisors. You may not believe this is our fight, thats fine. But since the cease fire in 1953 our government has chosen to help Korea defend the DMZ at the request of our friends and allies. I disagree with you when you say all of the lives on the Korean Peninsula are not worth a single drop of American blood. First of all 53,686 American military personal gave thier lives defending South Korea against the communist north and China. The decisson has allready been made to help defend the South from military agression from the increasingly hostile North. And If this escalates into an all out ground war Americans will fight to the death to help defend Asia's most successful democracy.

Well said..



Tim-
 
I think the US should make a move to have China removed as a permanent member if they don't clamp down on Kim Jong ILL.

The US, or even the UN does not have the legal power to do so
 
Says who?..............

Says the UN
the Big five powers all have veto power over any significant UN issue. Removing a permanent member of the security council is a significant issue
 
Japan was the largest buyer of American scrap metal, in the world...prior to 1941.

And we beat them. Bad. Hell, beating them saved our economy. It would be in our economic interests to go to war with China, not vice versa. And those Commies have grown used to being rich.
 
The US, or even the UN does not have the legal power to do so

Not a legal, but a procedural issue.

The 5 'permanent' members are so because they were the victors in WWII. They each have the power to veto anything the council as a whole agrees to. So, even if a vote were held, and all members of the security council voted one way, the hold out could veto it... thus making it procedurally impossible to vote one of the 5 'permanent' members out.
 
What would the US do if China started performing military exercises off the coast of California simulating the invasion of the country? Would that be perceived as an act of war or not? Or are we just all jumping on the "DPRK are a bunch of nutjobs" wagon?

The RoK's policy toward the DPRK of a strong hand has proven to be a complete and abysmal failure. Those calling for even stronger retaliatory measures are simply demanding to have their own collective heads to be smashed ever harder against the wall. The DPRK government is not going to collapse overnight; no policy towards the DPRK that does not recognize that fact will meet with any success. This includes the whole "DPRK are psychos" mindset.

The same goes for Iran.
 
What would the US do if China started performing military exercises off the coast of California simulating the invasion of the country?

If China possessed an island that was within a hundred miles or so of California and had an unresolved war with us that has been in a tenuous "cease fire" that has been routinely stressed over the last 50 years, then that may be legitimate question.
 
If China possessed an island that was within a hundred miles or so of California and had an unresolved war with us that has been in a tenuous "cease fire" that has been routinely stressed over the last 50 years, then that may be legitimate question.

In any case that would be considered an act of war.
 
Or are we just all jumping on the "DPRK are a bunch of nutjobs" wagon?

Not at all. Communist or not, the DPRK has a few smart people in its government. These people are smart enough to know that going to war against South Korea would be national suicide, and they can't count on Communist Solidarity to bring in China on their side. These people have prevented war from happening as often as the South Korean smart people.
 
Interesting article following up on this. I'm not sure I buy it, but some of the reasoning makes a little bit of sense: they're doing this to force us back to the negotiations, where they'll ask for aid.

Link
 
repeter said:
Not at all. Communist or not, the DPRK has a few smart people in its government. These people are smart enough to know that going to war against South Korea would be national suicide, and they can't count on Communist Solidarity to bring in China on their side. These people have prevented war from happening as often as the South Korean smart people.

repeter I'm not simply talking about people on this forum. I know you're smarter than the average bear, and I can respect that. But the way that this is being played out in the major media outlets as well as the overall opinion put forward by both officials from the RoK and the US and the popular opinion is that "North Korea attacked South Korea" seemingly completely unprovoked, in order to get some attention.

Seriously, this is the dumbest load of crap I've ever heard. The viewpoint of the DPRK on this is blatantly obvious: RoK was performing simulated invasions of their country with live firing in disputed waters. The North reacted, in my opinion, with extreme restraint in this instance, as I think any sane person in the position of the DPRK would consider that an act of war and prepare accordingly. They did not retaliate (i.e. not attack) against the RoK simply to get some attention.

The aggressors in this instance were blatantly the South, who could very well have been attempting to provoke the North as a means of diverting attention from their crazy domestic issues. Now, I wouldn't necessarily argue that, I just wanted to point out that that silly argument cuts both ways.
 
What would the US do if China started performing military exercises off the coast of California simulating the invasion of the country? Would that be perceived as an act of war or not? Or are we just all jumping on the "DPRK are a bunch of nutjobs" wagon?

The RoK's policy toward the DPRK of a strong hand has proven to be a complete and abysmal failure. Those calling for even stronger retaliatory measures are simply demanding to have their own collective heads to be smashed ever harder against the wall. The DPRK government is not going to collapse overnight; no policy towards the DPRK that does not recognize that fact will meet with any success. This includes the whole "DPRK are psychos" mindset.

The same goes for Iran.

Both of these things can be true. We're assholes, AND they're lunatics.
(although they aren't suicidal)
 
Both of these things can be true. We're assholes, AND they're lunatics.
(although they aren't suicidal)

Some of them are lunatics, more than we have, because we tend to turn our lunatics into scapegoats who don't get re-elected. I'm not going to lie, I think Kim Jung Il is the biggest problem there, because he seems to be a lunatic and is in charge.
 
repeter said:
Some of them are lunatics, more than we have, because we tend to turn our lunatics into scapegoats who don't get re-elected. I'm not going to lie, I think Kim Jung Il is the biggest problem there, because he seems to be a lunatic and is in charge.

How is he a lunatic?
 
My guess is that the Norht Korean army would provide stiff resistance at first, but then buckle as their lines of communication get cut. Just like what happened in Iraq.

Are you talking about in 1991 or 2003? I do not think the situation is even remotely comparable in either case, but even less so for 2003 in Iraq. North Korea is in many ways a military state. They been preparing for war for decades and have over a million troops with, as I recall, over 100,000 special forces. Obviously in a war with the U.S. they will lose (even with just South Korea they would likely lose), but it will be far bloodier than either war with Iraq. Never mind that any war will not involve us pounding them for a month before any ground forces get involved.

Japan was the largest buyer of American scrap metal, in the world...prior to 1941.

Japan's interest strongly clashed with our own, as such there was a greater incentive for war.
 
How is he a lunatic?

Top 10 Crazy Facts About Kim Jong Il As it says on the site, the last 5 are true. Some of them just seem something that a Communist leader would do, out of a need to control the masses. Not to mention the fact that his life has been rather sheltered, not as much as his son, but that type of environment builds a huge ego. And like all politicians, I'm sure he surrounds himself with Yes men to make him feel good.

He has also consistently put the military before the people, who have been starving for decades. I'd say all of those things compounded would make him out of touch with reality, to say the least.
 
repeter said:
Top 10 Crazy Facts About Kim Jong Il As it says on the site, the last 5 are true. Some of them just seem something that a Communist leader would do, out of a need to control the masses. Not to mention the fact that his life has been rather sheltered, not as much as his son, but that type of environment builds a huge ego. And like all politicians, I'm sure he surrounds himself with Yes men to make him feel good.

I don't see how any of those make him crazy, or a lunatic. Most of those are just regarding the cult of personality that the bureaucracy has developed around himself.

He has also consistently put the military before the people, who have been starving for decades. I'd say all of those things compounded would make him out of touch with reality, to say the least.

Quite the contrary, I think it shows that he, as a politician, is deeply grounded in reality. States the world over continually put the interests of this or that group over the interests of the people over which it resides. That does not make said politicians lunatics. That makes them politicians.

Moreover, I think that his role in the government, much like any dictator, is greatly exaggerated by both North Korean sources (who wish to portray this in a good manner) and foreign sources (who wish to portray it in a bad manner).

I think people portray in their mind whenever they picture a dictatorship some kind of 1984-esque situation where the government is omniscient and omnipresent, and where the common man works long hours for little pay to purchase substandard goods, and that he is threatened at every corner with banishment to the work camps or execution for any single word that escapes his mouth that could be construed as in opposition to the current order, and that the police come and beat him up and take all his stuff whenever they want, etc... In reality that really isn't the case.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom