|
Some Guy TT posted:A couple of posts ago you were arguing that military installations on the outskirts were completely useless for defending a city in urban combat. I said on outskirts on the North side, actually. There are bases ringing the city, many of them well within the metropolitan area. The bases don't defend the city, the troops deploying from those bases do - hence the importance of them existing in the city rather than outside along evac routes.
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 01:46 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/YonhapNews/status/1203497268734619648?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet https://twitter.com/W7VOA/status/1203345160546992134
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 05:45
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:https://twitter.com/YonhapNews/status/1203497268734619648?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet i am curious how trump will react to this poo poo. i feel like genuinely likes licking kims boots(like he does with putin and other monsters) because he legit thinks kim is his friend and he legit admires opressive regimes. plust he knows a war wouldnt end well and more importantly (to him) it would make him look bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 05:53
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:https://twitter.com/YonhapNews/status/1203497268734619648?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet That's the art of the Deal Kid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 05:54
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:i am curious how trump will react to this poo poo. i feel like genuinely likes licking kims boots(like he does with putin and other monsters) because he legit thinks kim is his friend and he legit admires opressive regimes. plust he knows a war wouldnt end well and more importantly (to him) it would make him look bad. Trump will go on Twitter and bitch and moan about it. That's it. Won't stop people from being alarmist about it https://twitter.com/NarangVipin/status/1203530492479447042 https://twitter.com/nktpnd/status/1202698147908259840
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 06:01
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:Trump will go on Twitter and bitch and moan about it. That's it. oh yeah, i am not worried, its just amusing embarrassing how the US soft/hard power poo poo the bed since trump got in. trump wont do poo poo because kim has him wraped around his finger. dude will probably just gurgle about that imaginary letter again. like no poo poo, they will do another missle test. hell they might do a nuclear one. but they arnt gonna loving blow up NYC.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 06:03
|
|
|
You write that as if the Obama policy of simply pretending like North Korea didn't exist at all was providing better results.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 11:26
|
|
|
Strategic patience! Waiting patiently whilst North Korea perfected its strategic weapons.
mediadave fucked around with this message at 14:29 on Dec 8, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 14:27
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:You write that as if the Obama policy of simply pretending like North Korea didn't exist at all was providing better results. mediadave posted:Strategic patience! Waiting patiently whilst North Korea perfected its strategic weapons. Tell me what you all would've done. The best option is containment. North Korea will NEVER accept us having a nuclear umbrella with South Korea and Japan, and they aren't going to EVER denuclearize
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:Seoul being in an outrageously impossible to defend position has actually been an issue for as long as anyone can remember. Usually when people talk about moving it they're referring to the administrative capabilities or at least the military stuff. The Yongsan military base in particular, in addition to being a crime-attracting eyesore, effectively used all of Seoul as a giant human shield. 1. The US didn't originally build Yongsan, just built it up after taking it over. 2. The US is leaving Yongsan anyway. It still may take another 10-20 years but most people/positions stationed at Yongsan have already moved. 3. A ROK military HQ is still right next to Yongsan. 4. Having families in and around Yongsan, while has hurt with crime has also been a guarantee that US families were in the area and A) the US would support Korea if nK attacked Seoul and B) the US generally would try to avert war when possible because of how hard it is to get US families / civilians out prior to war starting due to the logistics involved.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 19:50
|
|
|
https://www.thoughtco.com/the-creeping-barrage-of-ww1-theory-and-practice-1222116 Read up on that article for how NK will reek havoc with no jukes used.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 20:00
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:Tell me what you all would've done. Negotiate a freeze for (some) sanctions relief, then negotiate with the aim of a peace deal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:Tell me what you all would've done. Use our space lasers to draw dickbutts in the grass outside Kim Jong-un's house and places of business obviously.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 12:14
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:The best option is containment. North Korea will NEVER accept us having a nuclear umbrella with South Korea and Japan, and they aren't going to EVER denuclearize What does containment even mean in this context? North Korea has zero ambitions for expansion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 14:31
|
|
|
CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:What does containment even mean in this context? North Korea has zero ambitions for expansion. In theory they want to expand into South Korea, I guess. But I assume Willo means stopping them from shooting missiles at other countries, not stopping them from literally annexing other countries.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
Not even in theory. North Korea's official policy for reunification has been a confederation slowly melting both sides into each other for something like forty years. Just one reason why I tend to tune out when the thread starts playing wargames. You might as well be talking about Cuba invading Florida.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 15:55
|
|
|
A unified Korea is desired by both people in some ways. North Koreans however see and hear pass down stories more so of china than they do SK. In that they are desire the chinese dream of wealth and upward movement more.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 05:28
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:A unified Korea is desired by both people in some ways. This younger generations in SK are heavily against it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 06:49
|
|
|
yeah people just want the whole dumb rhetoric fight to end. People were in favor of NK slowly opening up to trade and other things if the US talks went well but lol Trump.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 07:15
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:This younger generations in SK are heavily against it. Well nuclear tests and resulting propaganda will do that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 07:26
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:Well nuclear tests and resulting propaganda will do that. No, it's about FYGM. They know how much they'd have to spend to bring the North up to the South's standards and they don't want to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 07:30
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:No, it's about FYGM. Which is why the confederation plan put forth by NK makes the most sense. Kind of like 1C2S but on a nation-state level.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 07:31
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:No, it's about FYGM. Yes agreed this is major aswell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 07:47
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:No, it's about FYGM. This is what I hear a lot when I talk to younger Koreans too. It's a shame really. Not that they should only want to help people similar to them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 08:25
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:Tell me what you all would've done. After what Obama did to Gadaffi，no dictator will ever stupid enough to give up his WMD. And this is not just an Obama problem. US has no long term， consistent and trustworthy foreign policy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 10:07
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:This younger generations in SK are heavily against it. Can't blame them. They already have to pay for their own retirement due to dwingling birth rate. Now they are asked to pay for the cost of reunification too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 10:16
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:Tell me what you all would've done. The only way to make fat Kim stop nuking S Korea is have something he care about in S Korea. Therefore president Moon must exchange his son with Kim's son as hostages. I have no solution for Nippon until Kim has another son.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 10:23
|
|
|
It makes sense that full reunification would be off the table, but that gradual engagement with the North especially in terms of economic cooperation has support. It is true that reunification right now would be both a messy and costly affair, but it does seem that peace and gradually opening trade with the north is also popular. I guess the real question is the US, and how long it directly veto further cooperation. South Korea is still reliant on the US, including US markets, but that is gradually unwinding especially as South Korean - Chinese trade is increasing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 10:33
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:No, it's about FYGM.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 13:09
|
|
|
Korean Reunification has actually been pitched as an investment, rather than a cost, ever since openly agitating for it stopped being illegal. The main reason young people are so skeptical of it is because the expansion of South Korea's economy writ large was sold under the same pitch, and now they're suffering the same late stage capitalism problems as the rest of us where it's impossible to get a decent job and the government would sooner implement austerity measures than try taxing the people who have actually been reaping all the financial rewards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 13:53
|
|
|
If China and the US pitched in along with the IMF, the Human Development Fund (sp? I know there's something along these lines), and the World Bank all pitched in as a sort of Neo-Marshall plan I think it would have promise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 14:53
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:If China and the US pitched in Not sure they would ever do that, since both China and the US benefit from the certainty of a divided Korea. A unified, nationalist Korea is not beneficial to either country and would return the region into the unstable triad it has been for hundreds of years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 15:01
|
|
|
CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:Not sure they would ever do that, since both China and the US benefit from the certainty of a divided Korea. A unified, nationalist Korea is not beneficial to either country and would return the region into the unstable triad it has been for hundreds of years. China would benefit *massively* from a unified Korea, especially if they played a major role in it coming about; it would be one of the most historic and prestigious events in modern history on par with the Berlin Wall coming down and they'd benefit massively from it; imagine all the ways they could probably insure their influence in Korea in less overt ways; through their firms, business interests not just in the north but by necessity in the south as well. ALL of the kickbacks they could ever ask for. "Peace is good for business". China could also ask for, and reasonably be expected to get, the US withdrawing troops from South Korea; since a unified Korea would have nothing to fear from China (they have reasonably decent relations and a shared history of dealing with multiple rounds of Japanese aggression to reminisce regarding). A unified South Korea from Beijing's perspective is very likely to turn into something like Finland. The US benefits from no longer having to worry about NK nukes, can withdraw forces and spend less money; it loses some influence but the US is probably running out of time or patience to thread the needle between Japan and Korea for much longer; and would let it just pick Japan and let Korea align with its more natural and historical ally and patron. It benefits China way more than the US, but denuclearizing the peninsula and having a new permanent peace and stability are within the US's ostensible interests; especially if it can also secure a slice of the reconstruction pie; US companies benefited a lot rebuilding Iraq, Haliburton would probably love a shot at North Korea even if it has to share the pie with Chinese, and Korean firms.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 15:32
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:withdraw forces and spend less money
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:China would benefit *massively* from a unified Korea, especially if they played a major role in it coming about; it would be one of the most historic and prestigious events in modern history on par with the Berlin Wall coming down and they'd benefit massively from it; imagine all the ways they could probably insure their influence in Korea in less overt ways; through their firms, business interests not just in the north but by necessity in the south as well. ALL of the kickbacks they could ever ask for. "Peace is good for business". yea literally everyone benefits from a unified Korea except for the assorted military factions involved, China likely benefits 'most' since it's right there and China having a role in fixing it would be probably the greatest foreign policy win they've had in modern history, but the US, Japan, Korea, everyone involved in this poo poo wins unless they've got a military title and a massive pile of War Money to protect.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 17:06
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:yea literally everyone benefits from a unified Korea except for the assorted military factions involved, China likely benefits 'most' since it's right there and China having a role in fixing it would be probably the greatest foreign policy win they've had in modern history, but the US, Japan, Korea, everyone involved in this poo poo wins unless they've got a military title and a massive pile of War Money to protect. Right. But the US doesn't really have a lot of war money pinned to the hopes of conflict or sustained by tensions. There might be some individuals who are proverbial big fish kings of their little mountains of whatever discretionary spending is allocated there; but there's so many other interests at play that I don't think it on its own means much. Just look at how the neocon desires for war have been repeatedly stumped because Trump is a gullible fool who sees more in common with foreign dictators then with his "hand picked" advisors. The gravy train in a unified Korea seems so much larger compared to the perpetual stalled blue balled tensions that I think if push came to shove it could happen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 17:13
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Right. But the US doesn't really have a lot of war money pinned to the hopes of conflict or sustained by tensions. There might be some individuals who are proverbial big fish kings of their little mountains of whatever discretionary spending is allocated there; but there's so many other interests at play that I don't think it on its own means much. Just look at how the neocon desires for war have been repeatedly stumped because Trump is a gullible fool who sees more in common with foreign dictators then with his "hand picked" advisors. I agree but the biggest problem is the leadership of the US military is still a bunch of psychos who think the dastardly norks are one good month away from paradropping into DC and despite Trump being Too Dumb To War he's also too stupid for peace too. He, like the bloodthirsty psychos, views 'peace' as a binary thing the opponent has to flip. The US has no obligations in the process, North Korea has to do everything and beg forgiveness and then we'll allow them to hit the peace button, because anything else is 'weakness'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 17:16
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:I agree but the biggest problem is the leadership of the US military is still a bunch of psychos who think the dastardly norks are one good month away from paradropping into DC and despite Trump being Too Dumb To War he's also too stupid for peace too. He, like the bloodthirsty psychos, views 'peace' as a binary thing the opponent has to flip. The US has no obligations in the process, North Korea has to do everything and beg forgiveness and then we'll allow them to hit the peace button, because anything else is 'weakness'. I think this is overblown as I think by and large much of the leadership of the US military actually doesn't want war either; regardless though I imagine the ball gets rolling by S. Korea making the push, N. Korea agreeing, and China chiming in support; with the US and Japan dragged in by everyone else and then 180'ing to try to carve as big as a pie as possible once a certain threshold is reached.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 18:11
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:China would benefit *massively* from a unified Korea, especially if they played a major role in it coming about; it would be one of the most historic and prestigious events in modern history on par with the Berlin Wall coming down and they'd benefit massively from it; imagine all the ways they could probably insure their influence in Korea in less overt ways; through their firms, business interests not just in the north but by necessity in the south as well. ALL of the kickbacks they could ever ask for. "Peace is good for business". China only benefit massively if the entire new korea is demilitarized.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 09:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 01:46 |
|
|
whatever7 posted:China only benefit massively if the entire new korea is demilitarized. First, there is basically no question that the newly unified Korea would probably scale back its military considerably, first as a cost savings measure due to the financial stress of incorporating North Korea; but also because its obviously not needed. South Korea and the PRC have probably the most decent bilateral relations of all of China's neighbours except for maybe Pakistan. Having a new land border with the PRC isn't meaningful. Second, even if Korea maintained its military at its current level; or as a jobs program to keep people employed, just straight up folded in the entire DPRK military structure into their own; why the gently caress does China find it concerning and not say Japan? South Korea's relations with Japan are far rockier than SK's and China's. Again, its taken as a given that China would have so integrated itself as part of the reconstruction of North Korea that the idea of conflict in the near term, or China being worried about S. Korea, is just nonsense. There's no historical precedent. It'd almost certainly be contingent on the US military withdrawing though, or staying in the south half. China has no reason to be concerned with S.Korea acting on its own. In any case nearly all signs would point to S. Korea on its own gradually drawing down unless its disputes with Japan experience an uptick; in which case, a unified Korea with a strong military is a pretty good candidate to be a long term partner to the PRC.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 15:45
|
|