|
Dapper_Swindler posted:i guess i dont understand why they didnt put them inline earlier. i get that NK acts as a buffer state and a cheaper labor source and etc but why didnt they just quietly "remove" Un and put a some better puppet in charge and deseclate the tentions and try to open the country up and turn it into a mini china type state. My impression is that China thought they still had influence in North Korea longer than they actually had it, but they're also afraid of doing anything that might lead to regime collapse because they don't want to deal with a refugee crisis or Korean reunification. At this point they probably don't want North Korea waving nukes in their direction either; obviously North Korea has more to lose in a military confrontation than China does, but even a slight risk of taking a nuke to the face in the event of a confrontation isn't a happy scenario. Arguably there was a benefit to allowing North Korea to frustrate the US and for China to be able to stand aside while saying they wish North Korea would behave better. It's only recently that the US has taken steps that frustrate China in response. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Sep 4, 2017 |
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 17:37 |
|
|
Sinteres posted:My impression is that China thought they still had influence in North Korea longer than they actually had it, but they're also afraid of doing anything that might lead to regime collapse because they don't want to deal with a refugee crisis or Korean reunification. At this point they probably don't want North Korea waving nukes in their direction either; obviously North Korea has more to lose in a military confrontation than China does, but even a slight risk of taking a nuke to the face in the event of a confrontation isn't a happy scenario. yeah. i guess your right. there is no good way out of this and it doesnt help that trump is in charge. there are 3 current solutions. 1. keep kicking the can down the road with sanctions that dont do anything or loud words. 2. let them join the burger king nuke club and destory our reputation and let them do whatever. 3. military actions/regime change. million or so people die and a super refugee crisis happens.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:yeah. i guess your right. there is no good way out of this and it doesnt help that trump is in charge. there are 3 current solutions. 1. keep kicking the can down the road with sanctions that dont do anything or loud words. 2. let them join the burger king nuke club and destory our reputation and let them do whatever. 3. military actions/regime change. million or so people die and a super refugee crisis happens. Also, should I expect them to start testing missiles by firing them over Japan on the regular from now on? Or can they still demonstrate their ICBM capability effectively inside of the Sea of Japan? Should I expect to be woken up by J-alerts every few days or weeks from here on out? Samurai Sanders fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 00:33
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Is there some reason I shouldn't prefer option 2? I mean, the US's reputation is going to be gone in a few years anyway for unrelated reasons. its not the loss of face/respect/whatever that really i care about. its more that our word will mean even loving less then it already will with trump and now we let a hosed up unstable kid dictator dictate poo poo. and with the test, they will probaly do more missle fly overs and probaly test the big ICBMs next.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:02
|
|
|
They should test fly one over china.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
There's also that with the current administration, a temporary slip into 2 doesn't do anything to prevent 3 from happening.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
Isn't 1 just 2 but a few years of bullshit assurances later?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
I feel like 2 is not only the one that is 99.9% the outcome, but also that in a weird way it could theoretically allow for more open communication. I don't think once they're a nuclear power that even China would stand for a lot of their bullshit if they go the holding the world hostage route.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
Does chinas leader and NK meet in face to face meetings? They should do that more I think. Berating sessions
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
Even if you think North Korea's a rational actor and they won't outplay their hand by getting even more aggressive with South Korea and Japan once they feel safe from American retaliation, it allows a country that did absolutely everything to flout the international order to join the big kids table, and tells other aspiring nuclear rogue states that once they hit the threshold they're completely safe. If you don't want every other rogue state in the world wondering if they can rush to that point before they get invaded, there's still a good reason to prove North Korea can't get away with this, though arguably not a good enough reason to justify playing nuclear roulette at this late date. Still, in the long run, the more nuclear actors there are, the more opportunities there are for a misunderstanding or accident to set something off. Sure, we survived the Cold War, but there were near misses, and there's no guarantee that if you play out nuclear confrontation with considerably more nuclear actors you'll get the same result every time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:My impression is that China thought they still had influence in North Korea longer than they actually had it, but they're also afraid of doing anything that might lead to regime collapse because they don't want to deal with a refugee crisis or Korean reunification. At this point they probably don't want North Korea waving nukes in their direction either; obviously North Korea has more to lose in a military confrontation than China does, but even a slight risk of taking a nuke to the face in the event of a confrontation isn't a happy scenario. It doesn't seem like anyone can agree either on how much influence China actually has over them. There was one theory going around that Kim Jong-Un getting into power really took away a lot of China's influence and that they were planning on Kim's uncle taking over the regime, so they could plant their own guy there. And that this is what likely led to his execution, taking away any chance of that happening. It bears mentioning too that this last nuke test occurred during the same day as Xi's speech at the BRICS summit. Which was seen as a massive gently caress you to China. There was an article that was written today (I'd have to dig for the link, but it's been reiterated a hundred times before) mentioning that while they don't want North Korea waving nukes, they don't want the US on their border or a refugee crisis either. And they look at any scenario where the US gets out of East Asia is a good thing. They're fighting for control of East Asia against the US. Just as Russia is with Europe. Which is why they're likely to continue not doing anything, whether they have any influence or not. They're hoping that the US backs down or ideally to them, completely step away, and they're banking on it. Samurai Sanders posted:Is there some reason I shouldn't prefer option 2? I mean, the US's reputation is going to be gone in a few years anyway for unrelated reasons. The concern everyone has with Option 2 is North Korea becoming more bold and throwing their weight around the region, making constant demands and threatening to nuke if they're not met. It also sends a message to other countries that getting nukes is the way to get the US to leave you alone and let you do what you want. Some also say that the North Korea's endgame is reunification on their terms. That this is basically everything they believe in. But it's either that or war. And assuming that it will only affect South Korea and Japan is underestimating how bad it can get. Samurai Sanders posted:Also, should I expect them to start testing missiles by firing them over Japan on the regular from now on? Or can they still demonstrate their ICBM capability effectively inside of the Sea of Japan? Should I expect to be woken up by J-alerts every few days or weeks from here on out? They've hinted at continuing to do this constantly from now on. And many nuclear experts believe they will, now that they've already passed that taboo. South Korean Intel has even said that North Korea is already prepping for another ICBM test and that it could be days, if not already imminent. They're also prepped for another nuke test if they want to do it. Samurai Sanders posted:Isn't 1 just 2 but a few years of bullshit assurances later? More like months. That's what US intel says is all that North Korea needs in order to become a full nuclear power. Some nuke experts say they're already there. As is South Korean intel, which just announced today that they think North Korea now has nuclear tipped warheads.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
fishmech posted:There's also that with the current administration, a temporary slip into 2 doesn't do anything to prevent 3 from happening. well i feel like 2 also doesnt really solve anything except maybe kicking the can down the road a little further and giving them more leeway to gently caress with the region. as others have said. if we hand them a seat at the table for doing this poo poo. it will show others we dont do poo poo and it will let north korea throw its weight around. Dapper_Swindler fucked around with this message at 01:40 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:37
|
|
|
Burt Sexual posted:Does chinas leader and NK meet in face to face meetings? They should do that more I think. Berating sessions Kim sometimes takes the Choo choo to China because he's scared of planes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Is there some reason I shouldn't prefer option 2? I mean, the US's reputation is going to be gone in a few years anyway for unrelated reasons. The problem is North Korea isn't the only lovely pariah state around and this is the first time non-proliferation has really been tested like this. It also isn't just the US that will lose credibility - this is Europe, the UN, and pretty much every party engaged in non-proliferation. If there are no real consequences to giving the world community the middle finger and building yourself nukes because they can't/won't stop you then you can expect a lot more lovely places to follow that example. The general thought has always been that having fewer nuclear powers and fewer warheads around is a good thing - as is keeping them out of unstable countries (example: Pakistan). For the regional actors this gives North Korea more latitude to gently caress with Japan and South Korea, so expect them to do shittier things more often. At the same time it drives the stakes way the gently caress up if they happen to overstep and provoke a war. It's much more difficult to ignore threats and the like with a bunch of half megaton ICBMs than it is the with conventional or chemical artillery pointed at a city across the border. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
It also increases the likelihood that SK and Japan will decide that they need nukes as well which will piss China off leading to them looking to acquire more nukes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:yeah. i guess your right. there is no good way out of this and it doesnt help that trump is in charge. there are 3 current solutions. 1. keep kicking the can down the road with sanctions that dont do anything or loud words. 2. let them join the burger king nuke club and destory our reputation and let them do whatever. 3. military actions/regime change. million or so people die and a super refugee crisis happens. There are more than these options for the US, though the other options are just variations of bad options. These are not in any order. 1. A bunch of sanctions and loud words forever, I guess. 2. Acknowledge that they have nukes and potentially delivery missiles, but treat them as others in the long term and hope poo poo doesn't go hot. 3. Acknowledge they have nukes and treat them as a rational state that is also a real motherfucker to its people and neighbors who we very much oppose. 4. Surgical strike on their nukes/long-range missiles (hope you don't miss ANYTHING! and good luck Japan/Seoul) 5. Surgical strike on KJU and loyal generals (hope to god less loyal generals are willing to de-escalate!) 6. Go to full conventional war (lol, let's not) 7. Nuke them/whoever you have to. 8. Pull out entirely. A blend of Options 1/2/3 are probably what we'll see unless poo poo goes really sideways. They aren't good options, but they're not The Worst options.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:09
|
|
|
When does Saudi Arabia get their first nuke?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:17
|
|
|
If they do want to test missiles at long range and don't want the risk of them failing and falling on Japan, is there a "safe" corridor anywhere they can fire them through? Looking at a map it just doesn't seem possible to me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:If they do want to test missiles at long range and don't want the risk of them failing and falling on Japan, is there a "safe" corridor anywhere they can fire them through? There isn't. That's one of the reasons why launching the missiles was considered a huge risk.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:25
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:If they do want to test missiles at long range and don't want the risk of them failing and falling on Japan, is there a "safe" corridor anywhere they can fire them through? They could do something like this again, I guess, but they might have to overfly Australia if they want to do a reentry test. https://prateekchandrajha.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/north-korean-space-launch-strategy-maneuvers-and-disinformation/  http://thediplomat.com/2016/02/north-koreas-kwangmyongsong-satellite-launch-what-we-know-and-dont-know/
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:26
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:They could do something like this again, I guess, but they might have to overfly Australia if they want to do a reentry test. https://prateekchandrajha.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/north-korean-space-launch-strategy-maneuvers-and-disinformation/ Can thaad hit that on a pass by? Would NK consider that "aggressive" act of war? Like spotting a missile that was passing by your territory? Lol the pretzel that becomes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:They could do something like this again, I guess, but they might have to overfly Australia if they want to do a reentry test. https://prateekchandrajha.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/north-korean-space-launch-strategy-maneuvers-and-disinformation/
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
fishmech posted:You don't really seem to get how big Japan is, even just the core islands. While NK is unlikely to ~take out and conquer all of Japan~ or whatever Willo is on about, as a counterpoint: a single-megaton device each hitting the Tokyo and Kyoto-Osaka metroplexes would result in the greatest single-day loss of human life in the history of the species. Japan has powerful reasons for not wanting any kind of nuclear entanglements near them, and ones that don't even have anything to do with history. Their population is sufficiently dense that any kind of attack would result in incomprehensible horror and I'm sad we're even discussing this. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
Burt Sexual posted:Can thaad hit that on a pass by? Would NK consider that "aggressive" act of war? Like spotting a missile that was passing by your territory? Lol the pretzel that becomes. THAAD is not designed to engage targets that are not in the terminal phase. THAAD is explicitly designed to hit targets as they descend into the from exo-atmospheric altitudes into the atmosphere again (helps the system discriminate decoys/chaff/etc) and only engages targets threatening a defended asset, barring some really stupid and possibly impossible operator overrides. This is a big part of why people crying about THAAD being near China are often times being rather disingenuous or just really stupid.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
Is that path through the Tsugaru strait that the missile last week took the "safest", all things considered? Would they want to keep using it for testing? Jesus, that was just last week...
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Future of Korea Megathread -- Nonproliferation Mourning Station
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 03:00
|
|
|
I really hope that nothing happens, but in the event of war, I hope nothing happens to Japan. I've always loved their culture and always have wanted to visit Tokyo's districts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 03:18
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:I really hope that nothing happens, but in the event of war, I hope nothing happens to Japan. I've always loved their culture and always have wanted to visit Tokyo's districts. yeah me too. if Clinton or honestly anyone else(maybe even shitsacks like cruz) i would feel less nervous. but trump is an rear end in a top hat who may have dementia and is also a idiot who acts impulsively. i think even the neocon super hawks realize this would be a really bad thing. honestly the waiting is the worst part.(least until all the badshit hits.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
SpaceDrake posted:While NK is unlikely to ~take out and conquer all of Japan~ or whatever Willo is on about, as a counterpoint: a single-megaton device each hitting the Tokyo and Kyoto-Osaka metroplexes would result in the greatest single-day loss of human life in the history of the species. Would NK focus their efforts more on SK or Japan?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 04:02
|
|
|
SpaceDrake posted:While NK is unlikely to ~take out and conquer all of Japan~ or whatever Willo is on about, as a counterpoint: a single-megaton device each hitting the Tokyo and Kyoto-Osaka metroplexes would result in the greatest single-day loss of human life in the history of the species. Well Willo is always on about NK destroying "all of japan" or "all of korea", Nuclear war is already horrible sure, but it'd be quite difficult for even the US or Russians to really wreck all of Japan if they wanted, let alone NK. And that gives a simple illustartion just using the amount of the Tsar Bomba you'd need to successfully deliver up the islands.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
fishmech posted:And that gives a simple illustartion just using the amount of the Tsar Bomba you'd need to successfully deliver up the islands. I saw an illustration depicting the tsar bomb's strength relative to the bombs dropped in WW2 and my god the tsar bomb is almost comical in it's power. Truly a useless and horrible creation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 05:25
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:I saw an illustration depicting the tsar bomb's strength relative to the bombs dropped in WW2 and my god the tsar bomb is almost comical in it's power. Truly a useless and horrible creation. Fun fact: the Soviets were initially trying to do a 100mt bomb, but it was guaranteed to kill everyone on board the plane when they dropped it and completely irradiate wherever they dropped it into a zone-esque state, so they scaled back to 50.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:Fun fact: the Soviets were initially trying to do a 100mt bomb, but it was guaranteed to kill everyone on board the plane when they dropped it and completely irradiate wherever they dropped it into a zone-esque state, so they scaled back to 50. Such compassion. I'm glad the pilot wasn't some annoying dick that the head honchos wanted to kill off.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 05:57
|
|
|
Burt Sexual posted:When does Saudi Arabia get their first nuke? IIRC, Pakistan promised to sell them some if Iran goes nuclear.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 07:13
|
|
|
What, they won't buy American? Some allies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 07:32
|
|
|
Okay serious question time. I had previously scheduled a vacation with some friends for South Korea on the 22nd of this month, long before the situation over there started going tits up. At this point would it be wise to make other arrangements? Or am I just being paranoid.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 07:34
|
|
|
Don't worry about it and go - always bear in mind that Kim knows that the moment things go hot, his rear end is glass.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 07:45
|
|
|
WarpedNaba posted:Don't worry about it and go - always bear in mind that Kim knows that the moment things go hot, his rear end is glass. Also the aforementioned ICBM is being moved toward the NK West Coast, and will probably be used for show (NK Founding Day is this Saturday) Grouchio fucked around with this message at 07:53 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 07:50
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:"Men have lived on the slopes of Volcanoes for centuries, and they have slept well at night. We can do the same thing." - Some guy on another forum I talked to. Eventually those volcanoes blow up and kill everybody though...
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 07:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 17:37 |
|
|
US has to make real consession to China in East Asian geopolitic in order to get China's cooperation on NK. In other words, get the US army base out of SK or stop selling arms to Taiwan from now on, or STFU on South China Sea forever etc. Otherwise China is not going to make an effort to help. As long as China won't go into NK first, China has very low chance of getting nuke by NK. NK basically has a capacity to get one nuke out before it gets destroyed. So if you look at it that way, Japan, or west coast are high in Kim's target list. Frankly I doubt NK has the capacity to shoot one out accurately right now. But if you kick the can down the road for a few years more, NK probably will have a working warhead then. I blame this on the previous two US presidents who were not able to recognize the raising power of China and aknowledge it peacefully and officially. They could have put a restrain on NK much easier 10 year ago. Again, China will not allow the US has higher geopolitic influence on the Korean peninsula, it's just simple geopolitic. China historically has gone into the Korean peninsula many time militarily to either defend Korea against Japan or put down civil war in the last two thousand years. There is no reason why the US should have an army base in Korea if and when Korea is unified, let along let a US general be the commander of the SK army. China can't get that assurance, not going to help. China knows a US president's words have very little weight too, the president can easily get out of a promise by letting congress veto it. whatever7 fucked around with this message at 08:11 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 08:06
|
|