|
Post by poetinahat on Dec 11, 2017 2:27:20 GMT -5
linkGulp. "Still hope for peace". This issue might be the most critical one we face (or it might not -- please see the poll). So why don't we talk about it more, instead of any number of other issues?
|
|
|
Post by prozyan on Dec 11, 2017 5:47:35 GMT -5
Trump gets a lot of crap for his infantile tweets, but NK is really the escalator here. They are literally defying the entire international community and continue to fire off test ICBM's like it is their own personal firework display.
I don't know what is going to happen, but any armed conflict will have to occur before NK develops reliable nuclear weapons. China will allow conventional intervention despite having a mutual defense treaty, especially since NK is ignoring China's calls to back off, but there is no way China would allow any sort of nuclear conflict to arise without retaliation. Once NK has reliable nuclear weapons and the ability to deliver those warheads the option for a conventional armed conflict basically disappears.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Dec 11, 2017 6:35:38 GMT -5
I am fully as terrified of North Korea as I was of the USSR for several decades. That is to say, not at all. There's always some boogieman out there to justify the war machine. That it's gone from the mostly-believable lies about the USSR to this comedy sketch makes it even more ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 11, 2017 6:36:47 GMT -5
China will allow conventional intervention despite having a mutual defense treaty, especially since NK is ignoring China's calls to back off, but there is no way China would allow any sort of nuclear conflict to arise without retaliation. I would not assume China is going to roll over, in the event of some kind of actual hot war between the US and NK. Conventional arms vs. nuclear arms shouldn't much matter, because either way, the fall of NK would be a disaster for them. They've been investing in preventing exactly that outcome ever since the Korean War.
|
|
|
Post by poetinahat on Dec 11, 2017 18:47:25 GMT -5
I am fully as terrified of North Korea as I was of the USSR for several decades. That is to say, not at all. There's always some boogieman out there to justify the war machine. That it's gone from the mostly-believable lies about the USSR to this comedy sketch makes it even more ridiculous. I'm not convinced that actual missiles count as 'bogeymen', or that MAD is a lie, or that the UN is actually in on the gag. I would love for that to be true, so I hope you're right. I also believe that it won't actually come to nuclear war - and I mostly believe that the US won't test China's restraint by striking first. And I don't really think that Kim Jong-Un will start an apocalypse. I think he's like the guy who's happiest screaming LEMME AT 'EM as long as his bigger, wiser buddy is holding him back, but would disappear when the buddy goes home. I have no evidence to back this up.
|
|
|
Post by poetinahat on Dec 11, 2017 18:50:46 GMT -5
I forgot to add these options to the poll:
[ ] We actually do talk about it plenty. [ ] This isn't even news. It's been going on for years, and nothing's changed.
|
|
|
Post by prozyan on Dec 11, 2017 19:08:51 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure of this as well. That said, I don't doubt that if NK continues to escalate that China won't give the "ok" to the US to strike. China doesn't particularly want a nuclear NK either.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Dec 11, 2017 20:36:45 GMT -5
I am fully as terrified of North Korea as I was of the USSR for several decades. That is to say, not at all. There's always some boogieman out there to justify the war machine. That it's gone from the mostly-believable lies about the USSR to this comedy sketch makes it even more ridiculous. I'm not exactly here, but pretty close. I don't understand why it is so terrifying for NK to have nuclear weapons (which is, I think, inevitable). I don't think they're going to start using them, they just want to be a player on the world stage, to have respect. (Is that what's terrifying?) As opposed to threatening or carrying out destruction and world domination, I mean. I heard or read something about NK selling the weapons to terrorists--is that a valid concern? I do want as much money as necessary to be spent on our own defense programs (as opposed to funding "the war machine"). I think a strong defense is paramount. Being the world's police, not so much. Though I wouldn't want the U.S. to become walled off and ambivalent, either. *wanders off to find the "it's really complicated" poll option*
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 11, 2017 21:00:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 11, 2017 21:07:39 GMT -5
I don't understand why it is so terrifying for NK to have nuclear weapons (which is, I think, inevitable). I agree, it's going to be a reality we'll have to deal with. That said, while I dunno if I'd use the word terrifying, I think there are some pretty clear issues with North Korea having nuclear weapons. Even if you assume they're not willing to use them pre-emptively, why wouldn't they be willing to use them in the event of a war? And even then, even if one assumes they wouldn't use them in a war, what would happen to these weapons in the event that the regime collapses at some point farther down the road? It seems to pose issues for the whole region (China, Japan, South Korea, etc.), not just the US.
|
|
|
Post by prozyan on Dec 11, 2017 21:35:06 GMT -5
That is an opinion piece and while it is well written by an "expert" I could refute with an equally well written opposition opinion written by an "expert". In the end they are just opinions. You hold to one, I hold to the other. Fair enough. China wants two things: Stability along it's southern border and a reduction of US military forces on the Korean peninsula. NK developing into a full nuclear power does not further either of those goals.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 11, 2017 21:46:45 GMT -5
That is an opinion piece and while it is well written by an "expert" I could refute with an equally well written opposition opinion written by an "expert". In the end they are just opinions. You hold to one, I hold to the other. Fair enough. Could you? I dunno. But there's more here than just an opinion. North Korea's possession of a mobile transporter for nuclear warheads is hardly an opinion. It's a significant step in their nuclear ambitions, because it makes it much more difficult to take out their arsenal as opposed to stationary silos. I agree, North Korea presents challenges for China, but the evidence is there, that China is supporting North Korea. No reason to ignore that, as far as I can see.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Dec 11, 2017 22:06:14 GMT -5
I agree, it's going to be a reality we'll have to deal with. That said, while I dunno if I'd use the word terrifying, I think there are some pretty clear issues with North Korea having nuclear weapons. Even if you assume they're not willing to use them pre-emptively, why wouldn't they be willing to use them in the event of a war? For the same reasons other countries that have nuclear weapons don't? It kind of gets back to Don's point about the Soviet Union. Do we think Kim Jong Un et al have, essentially, a death wish? Why would they use nuclear weapons? As far as I can tell, they'd have to be crazy. But maybe (a) they are or (b) there's a possibility we wouldn't retaliate and they'd "win" something? Or (c) the threat would be enough? This is where I'm even more out of my depth so I'll take your word that even if the current regime isn't nihilistic, there's a reasonable possibility some other regime that is could take over. I agree. Whatever the issues, they are more crucial to South Korea, Japan, and China than to the U.S. I'm reading with interest your and others' views on China.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 11, 2017 22:30:48 GMT -5
Crisis fatigue, it's terrifying, and I feel truly helpless with regard to it.
I feel the way I did on a bus in Greece hurtling down steep hills on narrow roads while the driver drove one-handed with a lit cigarette in his wheel hand, his other hand holding a cell phone pressed into his ear, screaming in Greek at whoever was on the other end. I did not think I'd make it to my destination alive, but there wasn't any getting off the bus and I couldn't do a damn thing to make the driver slow down and put both hands on the wheel.
I would feel a lot better if Trump would not pointlessly insult and threaten Kim Jong Un. But as with the bus driver, I don't speak his language and he wouldn't listen to me even if I did.
On the plus side, I did eventually make it alive to Olympia, my jaw clenched so tight it hurt all evening.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 11, 2017 22:51:36 GMT -5
For the same reasons other countries that have nuclear weapons don't? It kind of gets back to Don's point about the Soviet Union. Do we think Kim Jong Un et al have, essentially, a death wish? Why would they use nuclear weapons? As far as I can tell, they'd have to be crazy. But maybe (a) they are or (b) there's a possibility we wouldn't retaliate and they'd "win" something? Or (c) the threat would be enough? Well, I'm talking about a situation where the US and North Korea are already at war. Let's say Trump decides he's going to pursue a regime change in North Korea. So Kim Jong Un realizes he's on his way out of power. Is it really so unthinkable he might use nuclear weapons in such a scenario?
|
|