|
JeffersonClay posted:I agree that we should not provoke them intentionally but you're not engaging with the possibility that they might feel provoked regardless of what we do. As you say, they're provoked by the status quo! And I really don't see South Korea responding well to a "remove your troops from the border or get nuked" gambit from the North. But these are all ridiculous assumptions. People like to imagine "what if they're not rational actors!?" But they are. They have to be because people willing to throw everything they've worked for away for nothing don't climb that high. The human condition does not vary too radically from place to place. The men who surround KJU aren't there coincidentally. The country gets exposure to the outside world, especially the governing classes. The nuke thing is a bargaining tool and actually using one would mean the death of almost every north korean leader for literally no gain. Its an absolute last resort tool that is considerably more likely to be used within their own boarders, defensively than even in a preemptive launch. They know they don't stand a chance in a war. A nuke would be used to shock the initial invasion and sue for peace. The rest of the world would be relatively sympathetic to a country that used a nuke on its own soil, in self defense, and the cost of continuing such a war would be legitimately questionable. Even the "radical Imperial Japanese" surrendered rather than watch their country get nuked into oblivion and that was a country with a history of ritual suicide (which would often still net positive effects for the family/clan). I can't think of any leader that has ever welcomed absolute destruction successfully.
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 12:21 |
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:But these are all ridiculous assumptions. People like to imagine "what if they're not rational actors!?" But they are. They have to be because people willing to throw everything they've worked for away for nothing don't climb that high. The human condition does not vary too radically from place to place. The men who surround KJU aren't there coincidentally. The country gets exposure to the outside world, especially the governing classes. quote:The nuke thing is a bargaining tool and actually using one would mean the death of almost every north korean leader for literally no gain. Its an absolute last resort tool that is considerably more likely to be used within their own boarders, defensively than even in a preemptive launch. They know they don't stand a chance in a war. A nuke would be used to shock the initial invasion and sue for peace. The rest of the world would be relatively sympathetic to a country that used a nuke on its own soil, in self defense, and the cost of continuing such a war would be legitimately questionable. North Korea sure is investing a lot of time and energy in miniaturizing its nukes and developing long range missile technology (including SLBMs) if their plan is to use these things inside their own borders. They explicitly stated their last Nodong missile tests were to simulate an airburst missile attack on US naval forces in a Japanese port. quote:Even the "radical Imperial Japanese" surrendered rather than watch their country get nuked into oblivion and that was a country with a history of ritual suicide (which would often still net positive effects for the family/clan). I can't think of any leader that has ever welcomed absolute destruction successfully. Hitler.jpg
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:So you think it's impossible that North Korea could make an irrational judgement based on flawed intel or paranoia. Ok. I think it's unlikely but possible, and I think that possibility is pretty drat scary and thus justifies discussion. And people like Barack Obama agree with me, which is why they are investing shitloads of time and energy trying to stop proliferation, so don't be offended if I don't just take your word for it. Yes i think its impossible. I think their enemies wouldn't do anything flagrantly stupid to provoke them and i don't think they'd deploy a nuclear device until there is absolute proof of its necessity. Because otherwise they're all dead. Like seriously, they're loving dead. No surrendering, no favorable terms, no chance of wiggling out of trouble. Instead they're dead. Its a rather permanent consequence people often try to avoid. quote:North Korea sure is investing a lot of time and energy in miniaturizing its nukes and developing long range missile technology (including SLBMs) if their plan is to use these things inside their own borders. They explicitly stated their last Nodong missile tests were to simulate an airburst missile attack on US naval forces in a Japanese port. Of course they're going to do everything to strengthen their position. To make attacking them as brutally painful as possible. But they're not stupid. They know that out of the sea will rise a dozen submarines and they and their country will be dead within the hour. They have absolutely no offensive capability whatsoever. Everything is all deterrence all the time. And most importantly of all, the allies will never do anything so foolhardy as provoke them and North Korea is not stupid enough to use a preemptive nuke ever. It will never behoove them to use a nuke in an offensive manner against a civilian target. Fine maybe you and Obama think differently, but its all hogwash because we'll never have invasion sized fleets off the coast for this very reason. Nor will the North ever reinvade the South. Its a perfect stalemate and it will stay that way until the North Korean government topples. quote:Hitler.jpg Its true that I'm speaking in very strong absolutes, but we've been hearing about the dangers of North Korea for years and nothing has come of it. There will be no irrational action to provoke a nuclear event in that region. Like seriously, India and Pakistan have been fighting almost openly for decades over Kashmir and no one is worried about any nuclear incidents. The North/South Korean situation is considerably less active. The US just whips up its own people to show the North Koreans they don't scare us as a means of pushing back on the negotiating front. Its all politics
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
There is always the possibility that Kim and selected Elites sneak into China just before the glassing, but that's pure speculation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
boy all those people worried about nuclear proliferation sure are silly, any dummy knows deterrence will never fail
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Last 50 years seem to prove otherwise, buddy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:I agree that we should not provoke them intentionally but you're not engaging with the possibility that they might feel provoked regardless of what we do. As you say, they're provoked by the status quo! And I really don't see South Korea responding well to a "remove your troops from the border or get nuked" gambit from the North. They've felt provoked for the last sixty years, but it hasn't led to nukes so far. I think it's fair to say North Korea isn't going to start a suicide war over the status quo. JeffersonClay posted:Hitler.jpg He expected to win. He wasn't intentionally trying to commit national suicide.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
Oh ok ill tell Richard lugar to chill
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:They've felt provoked for the last sixty years, but it hasn't led to nukes so far. I think it's fair to say North Korea isn't going to start a suicide war over the status quo. quote:He expected to win. He wasn't intentionally trying to commit national suicide.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:They've felt provoked for the last sixty years, but it hasn't led to nukes so far. I think it's fair to say North Korea isn't going to start a suicide war over the status quo. pretty sure even hitler wasn't dumb enough to think he was going to win after the eastern front went south
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:pretty sure even hitler wasn't dumb enough to think he was going to win after the eastern front went south Might have been high enough though, with all the crap he took
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
Or he was batshit crazy all along. Good thing crazy people don't get to decide when to launch nukes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
I really don't see what the nuclear weapons are providing them except for being some sort of domestic reassurance that everyone is still suffering for a reason. What would they even gain at this point from a legit ICBM and warhead? It's not 1985 anymore, hell it's not even like 2000. While globalization has brought a lot of poo poo into the world in certain aspects, people are way more hesitant to gently caress with other countries because so much capital is interwoven. There is really nothing more for NK to gain for continuing this path. They thought continuing here would get them better bargaining in relief but that clearly hasn't worked in over a decade and will definitely not work in the future. We're not going to trade them a snack pack in return for not punching someone in the arm--its a nuclear weapon and will turn everyone against them even more if it's ever sensed as anything but empty domestic-pointed dialogue. So where do the leaders of NK go from here? That's the bigger question I'm curious about since the world has fundamentally left them in the past even more.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Might have been high enough though, with all the crap he took And given the enormous amounts of meth the norks are churning out, what's the chance that Kim the wide is high off his tits 24/7?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
c0ldfuse posted:I really don't see what the nuclear weapons are providing them except for being some sort of domestic reassurance that everyone is still suffering for a reason. The point we often miss from the outside is that the people in control of this poo poo may not even be interested in us. We see NK developing nukes and think "Why? They have nothing we want. We don't care about their rear end-backwards country and would never invade. What could they possible gain from nukes?" but it may not actually be about outside forces at all. Internal politics. North Korea is a complete black box. We have no idea who is really in charge, who the factions are, whether KJU holds any real power or is in fact the real dictator, nothing. We know nothing. Anyone who tells you what the real internal situation is is probably lying to you. It's a mystery state. The only things we know is that they are super isolated and super authoritarian and when viewed through that lens nukes make more sense because it's all about whoever within the country is trying to outplay whoever else within the country. To the real power players in NK the rest of the world doesn't even exist. I'd wager that whatever they get up to, up to and including nuclear weapons, are all about fighting for control within the country, and nothing about impressing us.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 03:08
|
|
|
c0ldfuse posted:I really don't see what the nuclear weapons are providing them except for being some sort of domestic reassurance that everyone is still suffering for a reason. North Korea has nukes because Kim Il Sung demanded them way back in 1963 or so, when he first asked the Soviets to help him develop a nuclear weapons program (they refused, they instead agreed to help them build nuclear power plants). Later, when the Chinese proved they had their own nukes, Kim Il Sung went and begged them for assistance and got rejected by them as well. There were repeated abortive attempts since then, but the current nuclear program doesn't get going til the mid-80s. So for the past 50-odd years, the North Koreans have been working on it, though they didn't really start achieving much until the 90s.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:pretty sure even hitler wasn't dumb enough to think he was going to win after the eastern front went south Well, yeah, but by the time he realized the Soviet Union was far stronger than intelligence agencies thought it was too late to do anything about it. I don't think North Korea is in danger of thinking the US is weaker than they are.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
To be fair, if Stalin hadn't decided to stop sucking his own cock and let his generals do what they were there for, Russia could well have had it's rear end reamed after the Battle of Stalingrad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
WarpedNaba posted:To be fair, if Stalin hadn't decided to stop sucking his own cock and let his generals do what they were there for, Russia could well have had it's rear end reamed after the Battle of Stalingrad. Unless I'm misremembering STAVKA was still the one doing most of the strategic decision making; Stalin wasn't making orders like "Encircle Kiev instead of continuing the advance on Moscow" like Hitler was.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 07:46
|
|
|
Fargo Fukes posted:The point we often miss from the outside is that the people in control of this poo poo may not even be interested in us. We see NK developing nukes and think "Why? They have nothing we want. We don't care about their rear end-backwards country and would never invade. What could they possible gain from nukes?" but it may not actually be about outside forces at all. I agree that there is an internal political dynamic to the nukes, but I'd contend that North Korean nuclear weapons development is just as much a long gambit by the North Korean government to continue prodding the world to take it seriously and maintain the status quo "or else". There is still plenty of threat development potential that North Korea can build up - longer range rockets, greater device yields, and so on. Every nuclear weapon that they build up in their arsenal is one more for the major players engaging with North Korea (South Korea, China, Japan, the US, and so on) to worry about. Could it end up being diverted? What would happen to that arsenal if the country destabilized and collapsed? Absent nuclear weapons, North Korea isn't docile and pacified by any means, but it's easier to opt for a policy of containment by China and South Korea and let the situation take care of itself for the indefinite future. That isn't something that North Korea's government wants to happen, though, because that could start to spell the beginning of the end for the regime in the country as it continues to basketcase and the population becomes angry or (more likely) one political faction decides it can take control of the country and cut a deal with outside powers before everything collapses. Thus, nuclear weapons give North Korea geopolitical relevancy. They're like a hobo with a gun; normally, you might be inclined to ignore and avoid engaging with them at all, but when they're waving a 12 gauge shotgun (or hand grenades, more like) around, it's a lot harder to do. Basically, nuclear weapons are North Korea's way of making the world give a poo poo about it, and in line with what you're saying, they help to maintain the legitimacy of the Kim regime and its supporting factions (since they're "known" entities, comparatively speaking).
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 08:48
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Well, yeah, but by the time he realized the Soviet Union was far stronger than intelligence agencies thought it was too late to do anything about it. I don't think North Korea is in danger of thinking the US is weaker than they are. Towards the end of the war Hitler completely refused any attempts at peace or surrender negotiations because he believed that the German people had demonstrated to be weak, had disappointed him and now deserved to be destroyed for this. That's not even an interpretation, he literally said that. He was totally mental at this point. Also, for most of the war he was given large, daily dosages of meth by his physician, which is known to decrease your ability to make rational decisions, especially if it's coupled with sleep deprivation. My point being, that you can't always rely on everyone being a rational actor, just because they made it far in life. Sometimes people go crazy later in life or go insane due to drug abuse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 12:48
|
|
|
I'm all for not provoking North Korea too but sometimes they decide to just randomly torpedo ships or launch artillery at the South so maybe we should plan for them bumbling into a colossally stupid situation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:03
|
|
|
What happens if/when NK starts selling nukes to make a few extra bucks?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:Towards the end of the war Hitler completely refused any attempts at peace or surrender negotiations because he believed that the German people had demonstrated to be weak, had disappointed him and now deserved to be destroyed for this. That's not even an interpretation, he literally said that. He was totally mental at this point. Yes, but we're talking about starting a war, not failing to surrender when national destruction is already assured regardless. Besides, look at the circumstances - the Allies had all agreed to accept nothing less than an unconditional surrender (look at well holding out for a negotiated peace worked for Japan), an unconditional surrender much earlier than the historical surrender would have essentially been a surrender to the Soviets, and the Allied plan after the war was to reduce Germany to a nation of subsistence agriculture barely able to feed itself.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
Ragingsheep posted:What happens if/when NK starts selling nukes to make a few extra bucks? Tom Clancy rises from the dead and releases a new novel.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Yes, but we're talking about starting a war, not failing to surrender when national destruction is already assured regardless. Besides, look at the circumstances - the Allies had all agreed to accept nothing less than an unconditional surrender (look at well holding out for a negotiated peace worked for Japan), an unconditional surrender much earlier than the historical surrender would have essentially been a surrender to the Soviets, and the Allied plan after the war was to reduce Germany to a nation of subsistence agriculture barely able to feed itself. Barbarossa was irrational. Declaring war on the USA was irrational. There was zero chance of the Nazis winning either of those conflicts. Hitler was nuts, and there weren't any institutional safeguards to check him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
I once saw a couple of actual North Koreans (complete with summer Mao suits with pins of Kim Jong il and his dad) at a major high tech international airport. I know those guys are propably party officials but I felt really bad for them that they can go around the world and see how many light years ahead everyone else is in the world and they have to go back to a Stalinist medieval time capsule. I really wonder how the hell the North Korean people are going to cope with eventually learning about how much the Kim dynasty completely hosed them over for no real reason and how they didn't even bother to give them even a decent consumer economy like China has, and how all of their suffering and starvation and gulags was really for nothing.
Al-Saqr fucked around with this message at 18:24 on Sep 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:I once saw a couple of actual North Koreans (complete with summer Mao suits with pins of Kim Jong il and his dad) at a major high tech international airport. I know those guys are propably party officials but I felt really bad for them that they can go around the world and see how many light years ahead everyone else is in the world and they have to go back to a Stalinist medieval time capsule. I really wonder how the hell the North Korean people are going to cope with eventually learning about how much the Kim dynasty completely hosed them over for no real reason and how they didn't even bother to give them even a decent consumer economy like China has, and how all of their suffering and starvation and gulags was really for nothing. But they don't necessarily see that as a bad thing. Koreans are the superior moral race, and their lack of material wealth doesn't remove that fact.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Barbarossa was irrational. Declaring war on the USA was irrational. There was zero chance of the Nazis winning either of those conflicts. Hitler was nuts, and there weren't any institutional safeguards to check him. Okay, it's pretty clear you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Okay, it's pretty clear you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Oh well do feel free to elaborate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 23:33
|
|
|
Yeah, the nazi war was unwinnable at any point, period, it's nuts to describe it as 'rational'. Same goes for japan and its adventures in china and the pacific
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Yeah, the nazi war was unwinnable at any point, period, it's nuts to describe it as 'rational'. Same goes for japan and its adventures in china and the pacific Thanks to poor intel, underestimation of the enemy, and various historical coincidences they learned the wrong lesson from, they had good reason to think it was winnable. They were wrong, but a mistake isn't the same as an irrational move. I don't think North Korea is in any danger of thinking it can take the US in a fight.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 02:24
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:I once saw a couple of actual North Koreans (complete with summer Mao suits with pins of Kim Jong il and his dad) at a major high tech international airport. I know those guys are propably party officials but I felt really bad for them that they can go around the world and see how many light years ahead everyone else is in the world and they have to go back to a Stalinist medieval time capsule. I really wonder how the hell the North Korean people are going to cope with eventually learning about how much the Kim dynasty completely hosed them over for no real reason and how they didn't even bother to give them even a decent consumer economy like China has, and how all of their suffering and starvation and gulags was really for nothing. Eh if they're the sort who are allowed to travel they're still doing pretty well for themselves. And they often, when back home, aren't spending a lot of time outside of the high-wealth-for-North-Korea enclaves like the nicer parts of Pyongyang or whatever. Really not much different from members of the rich elite of any other dictatorship you'd care to mention throughout history.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 03:06
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Thanks to poor intel, underestimation of the enemy, and various historical coincidences they learned the wrong lesson from, they had good reason to think it was winnable. They were wrong, but a mistake isn't the same as an irrational move. I don't think North Korea is in any danger of thinking it can take the US in a fight. Hitler absolutely knew declaring war on the US was a bad move contrary to his plan for Europe, but he did it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 11:13
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Oh well do feel free to elaborate. Your pearl clutching about Korea potentially pressing the button is really dumb, because while we can never prove NK leadership is not a rational actor( how would you?), their actions largely confirm that they are, even if you don't understand why.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 11:34
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:I once saw a couple of actual North Koreans (complete with summer Mao suits with pins of Kim Jong il and his dad) at a major high tech international airport. I know those guys are propably party officials but I felt really bad for them that they can go around the world and see how many light years ahead everyone else is in the world and they have to go back to a Stalinist medieval time capsule. I really wonder how the hell the North Korean people are going to cope with eventually learning about how much the Kim dynasty completely hosed them over for no real reason and how they didn't even bother to give them even a decent consumer economy like China has, and how all of their suffering and starvation and gulags was really for nothing. Don't feel too bad for them. If they're allowed to travel abroad, they're almost certainly part of the elite. Remember that there is, almost by definition, a relative aspect to wealth, social standing and power. People have the psychological tendency to compare themselves to those within their own society that are in some way comparable, that they have some link to. So even though those same people would objectively lead better lives as anonymous members of the middle class in South Korea or the West, they still don't want to give up their privileged positions in North Korea by rocking the boat too much. I think this also relates to the discussion of whether or not they are rational actors, and I'm inclined to agree with RaySmuckles. All of these control mechanisms that were originally at least partly devised to create the perfect classless or Juche society, such as the division of the population into three categories, have now almost exclusively become simple tools to cynically perpetuate the existing political elite within a pseudo-feudal system. It answers the question of how a monstrous regime like North Korea is able to survive, there are very few people with actual power that have the incentive to risk dissenting. The acquisition of nukes should be seen in the same light, as additional insurance against outside attempts at regime change. I don't believe they would ever launch any sort of pre-emptive strike. This does not mean that them having nukes isn't a bad thing, as their purpose is to prolong the suffering of the North Korean people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 11:55
|
|
|
Crackeds quick fix today explains why you really should check the source before passing dumb "facts" about NK on: http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/why-you-dont-actually-know-anything-about-north-korea/
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 13:01
|
|
|
Tias posted:Your pearl clutching about Korea potentially pressing the button is really dumb, because while we can never prove NK leadership is not a rational actor( how would you?), their actions largely confirm that they are, even if you don't understand why. On one hand I have the international nonproliferation community which is clutching its pearls about the possibility that a rogue actor might actually use a nuclear weapon, and on the other hand I've got a few goons who say I'm dumb. It's a tough one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:On one hand I have the international nonproliferation community which is clutching its pearls about the possibility that a rogue actor might actually use a nuclear weapon, and on the other hand I've got a few goons who say I'm dumb. It's a tough one. Why is it hard to believe that someone whose job is literally fearmongering about nuke use would, uh, monger fear about the possibility of nukes? I seriously doubt any researcher who knows the first thing about North Korea, "international nonproliferation expert" or not, would consider their government a rogue actor. So, you know, source your bullshit or stop being a dumb.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 12:21 |
|
|
Tias posted:Your pearl clutching about Korea potentially pressing the button is really dumb, because while we can never prove NK leadership is not a rational actor( how would you?), their actions largely confirm that they are, even if you don't understand why. There's all sorts of areas where they don't behave as a rational actor now or haven't in the past. But things that actually risk invasion/restarting the war are a place they've studiously behaved in a rational manner for decades.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 15:48
|
|