More Players in the North Korean area?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jpietrzak8, Apr 21, 2017.

  1. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #1
    An interesting, if not entirely unexpected development:

    MOSCOW — Russian authorities are denying reports that they are moving troops to the border with North Korea over growing tensions in the Korean peninsula.

    The Interfax news agency on Friday quoted Alexander Gordeyev, spokesman for the Far Eastern Military district, as saying that the movement of heavy weaponry, caught on film and widely distributed on social media, is part of “absolutely scheduled maneuvers of combat readiness.” Gordeyev said the military hardware was on its way back from drills elsewhere and denied any connection to the tensions around North Korea’s nuclear program.​

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...624539060e8_story.html?utm_term=.e29bcb1700c2

    This is, I think, the problem of the current US administration (a) having no policy while (b) doing everything to stir up conflict in the region. As Trump plays "strongman", talking up his hard lines and his "Armada" while not taking any actual steps to achieve a solution, other players are moving their pieces across the board. Trump may think that a military strike is one of his options, but the more time he spends showing off his assets and crowing about them to the world, the more time he gives his opponents to prepare countermeasures. (That is, assuming Putin isn't moving to back Trump up. ;) )

    What ever happened to "being unpredictable"? To the "element of surprise"? Trump is daily running his mouth off, while around the world other leaders are acting.
     
  2. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #2
    The only question is who is going to finally light this tinder box?
     
  3. robotica macrumors 6502a

    robotica

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Location:
    Edinburgh
    #3
    The blond haired one I think
     
  4. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #4
    I did not realize (or had forgotten ;)) they shared a border, but yes, 17km along the Sea of Japan shore.
     
  5. jpietrzak8 thread starter macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #5
    The United States doesn't share a border with them. Heck, we're on the other side of the planet from them. Why are we trying to stir up that hornet's nest? :(
     
  6. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #6
    I fear that President Macho Egotist who was handed more power than he ever imagined by the (expletive deleted) Trumpets and Anarchists wants to flex his new found muscle and be the hero of the Western World, although I don't see how that is supposed to happen if we end up with a smoking ruin of a planet. :oops:
     
  7. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #7
    I fear that Trump saw the approval increase after the Syria bombing and wants another boost. Presidents have done this very often (I'm looking at you Bill Clinton, hello, Bosnia). The US has waged these small wars very often when the interests of individuals or companies are considered rather than the safely and best interests of the nation.

    North Korea is a tough situation. It seems like they need to be dealt with now but is that due to Trump stirring things up, or the media perhaps? I think there are a lot of different factors f****** America right now:
    1. Trump tweeting
    2. Media bias that cares more about hurting Trump than report just the news
    3. People brutally pushing a Russian connection that may or may not be an issue. Did anything come out of all those hearings last month?
    4. Dems caring more about hurting Trump than helping the country
    5. Repubs and Dems that care more about getting reelected than helping the country
    6. Industrial Military Complex that has ties and relations to members of congress
     
  8. jpietrzak8, Apr 21, 2017
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2017

    jpietrzak8 thread starter macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #8
    Hey, on that very subject, Trump has just today dumped out another tweet ratcheting up the pressure on China:

    China is very much the economic lifeline to North Korea so, while nothing is easy, if they want to solve the North Korean problem, they will​

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/855406847200768000?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet

    At this point I've gotta wonder if China believes NK is the problem, or Trump is? Both seem to be warmongers; both seem to be just a tad unhinged; both have nuclear weapons. The only difference is that Trump has more nukes, and unlike Jung-un, Trump has already shown that he's quite willing to cross international borders and bomb countries at the drop of a hat. :(

    EDIT: Oh, and by the way, it turns out that Trump now believes that Korea used to be a part of China (after being told that by Xi Jinping):

    "And you know, you’re talking about thousands of years … and many wars. And Korea actually used to be a part of China. And after listening for 10 minutes I realized that … it’s not so easy"​

    http://globalnews.ca/news/3393765/donald-trump-korea-china/

    So I guess the new Trump policy is "Korea used to be part of China, so it should be again."
     
  9. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #9
    Well, when you have a country that talks about reducing us to ashes and is working on a nuclear bomb and ballistic missles to do just that, what should we do, nothing? Just let it happen?

    I'm curious where people think we should draw the line and do something:

    A. When nukes are being developed?
    B. When nukes are developed and deployed already on land and submarines and aimed at us?
    C. When the nukes are in flight inbound to our cities where we would likely not catch them all?

    When is the appropriate time to act?
     
  10. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #10
    It certainly is OK to act AFTER launch. I don't think anyone is going to argue with that. I struggle with these questions all the time. How do you weigh the risk of avoiding innocent death and acceptable collateral damage?

    I am 100% war weary. I'm done with it. I guess after North Korea made the ashes threat you could justify bombing them. Perhaps dropping a M.O.A.B. on every launch pad they have would cripple their ability to launch from land. And we sink their loud diesel subs in the pacific.
     
  11. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #11
    well if he can figure out where NK is.
     
  12. jpietrzak8 thread starter macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #12
    I think we need a little context in this case, however. If you'll recall, we invaded Korea back in 1950 (admittedly on the side of the South Korean government, so at least half of the current Korean peninsula wouldn't call us invaders), sent our forces tromping through most of the North Korean lands, then got our butts kicked when China & Russia invaded on the other side. The general in charge of the operation then called for us to nuke North Korea.

    An armistice was signed in 1953, but there was never a peace. We are still a belligerent on the peninsula. Our troops still line the demilitarized zone. Our ships still patrol the region, our planes still fly from their bases, and yes, some of our nukes are surely pointed right at them.

    So, I've gotta wonder -- is North Korea not justified in their belligerent statements? Propaganda against the enemy is par for the course in war; and we have always positioned ourselves as the enemy of North Korea.
     
  13. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #13
    No. They are not. They would love to attack South Korea and make the entire peninsula one big oppressive place. They are jealous that the south has moved on and become prosperous and successful without them and of course see us as the roadblock to conquering the south.

    They should just live in peace and allow others to do the same and stop all the saber rattling. They would be much more successful and prosperous if they did.
     
  14. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #14
    Erm... I think you'll find that the US and other countries were acting on the behalf of the UN.

    Anyway, maybe the Russian troops are going to build a wall (or more likely machine-gun anybody attempting to cross their border). Can't have those pesky N Korean refugees flooding into Russia when the excrement finally hits the fan. *cough*
     
  15. jpietrzak8 thread starter macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #15
    As a people, they certainly would! Their leadership, however, probably wouldn't. :(
    --- Post Merged, Apr 21, 2017 ---
    Honestly, I think that the UN mostly acts on behalf of the US. (And in any case, the UN Security Council had been rigged in our favor at the time, as Taiwan had been given China's seat on the Council, and the Soviet Union was boycotting in protest. It was a perfect time for the US to ram through a resolution backing the war.)

    An interesting item from the Wiki page on the war:

    The Soviet Union challenged the legitimacy of the war for several reasons. The ROK Army intelligence upon which Resolution 83 was based came from U.S. Intelligence; North Korea was not invited as a sitting temporary member of the UN, which violated UN Charter Article 32; and the fighting was beyond the UN Charter's scope, because the initial north–south border fighting was classed as a civil war.​

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War#United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolutions

    Er, why do you think there would be any refugees? The last time the Russians sent forces over the Korean border, they did fairly well. (The MiG-15 fighter dominated the Korean skies for much of the war.) There's a reason why the US stopped trying to conquer Korea, and why the peninsula is divided somewhere in the middle, rather than way up at the northern border (where our forces had reached early in the war).

    Maybe Trump should be worried about a wave of South Korean refugees...
     
  16. oneMadRssn macrumors 68040

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #16
    Here's the thing. I fundamentally believe that it is impossible to bomb the world into peace. Should we do something? Absolutely! Should we do it with bombs? Absolutely not!

    I think there are still viable economic and diplomatic strategies that have not yet been attempted.

    I guess I agree with Tump on this in some ways. The right way is through China. China is powerful but still depends quite heavily on the almighty dollar. Incentives are there.

    I don't know how obviously, if I did I wouldn't be posting it here in detail anyway. But I have faith that there are non-violent ways to remove KJU from power, dismantle the prison camps, install a proper government, and turn NK into a peaceful ally.
     
  17. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #17
    1. Agreed.
    2. My perspective is that's not the the top priority of the press- hurting Trump. He hurts himself. They are critical of his actions and in just about every time they are justified in my opinion.
    3. There is a Russian Connection, look at the people associated with Trump and Russians who have left Trump's team. I too want an outcome to the investigations.
    4. I don't see that.
    5. Agreed. I won't debate about who the biggest liars are, but the value of truth expected of our leadership has plummeted since the 1960s.
    6. Agreed. War is big business and is a danger when it is over relied upon to solve problems.

    Korea is tough and dangerous. After twenty years of the Middle East fatiguing our military and draining our treasury I like sanctions. We may have to risk dealing with them using the MAD doctrine, but honestly even if Seoul was hit by a nuclear device, there'd be lots of people who would be exposed to nuclear fallout so I'd have problems with a counter nuclear strike in retribution which adds more poison to the atmosphere. I'd prefer waves of conventional munitions with fingers crossed N. Korea leadership has a survival instinct not to go nuclear in the first place.

    For Trump I'm reminded of the opposite of talk softly and carry a big stick. We have a big stick, but the Trump Administration has a ******* big mouth. Uping the ante, publicly calling them out, calling their bluff is exactly the wrong way to handle this situation imo.
     
  18. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #18
    Like what?

    One must understand that the reason North Korea is pursuing nuclear bombs is that is the only way that their leader thinks he can hold onto power and not end up like Saddam, Gaddafi, or soon even Assad. Thus normal economic incentives do not work. This is a country that goes without electricity at times. It's people don't have enough food to eat even. And yet, through power, brainwashing or both, the people still remain loyal. So, the calculation is much much different within North Korea and that is how the situation must be viewed.

    Putting the screws to North Korea economically only goes so far when they feel they have nothing to lose.
     
  19. jpietrzak8 thread starter macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #19
    Like working to prop up the mad dictator, rather than working to bring him down.

    No joke! I don't see why we should be supporting people like Assad (although Trump of course pulled a 180 and stopped supporting him) who are demonstrably more evil than Jong-un, and be working to take out Jong-un at the knees. The guy has a death-grip on the NK citizenry, otherwise they'd have turned on him and his family generations ago.

    Rather than continue the longest war in American history (technically we are still at war with NK), we should go ahead and recognize North Korea as a sovereign nation and declare a permanent peace. The entire rationale for the North Korean government today is that it is in an emergency, that the US is going to be dropping nukes on it at any moment. If we can remove that rationale, if we can somehow convince that country that they are no longer under imminent threat, I can't see how the NK government could survive such a move. Without the US as the boogeyman used to scare every NK citizen out of their wits, they might actually be able to construct a more amenable foreign policy...

    (Of course, the fact that both North and South Korea still officially lay claim to the entire peninsula is a problem. ;) Why oh why do we continue to involve ourselves in other people's wars?)
     
  20. oneMadRssn macrumors 68040

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #20
    I think this is a very good point. Maybe if the US tones down the threats, they might slow the roll on their own. Look, I think we're right and they're wrong, no debate there. But trying to be empathetic and picturing it through their eyes, we are behaving like big bad armed bullies / world police, and they aren't unjustified in trying to do everything they can do defend against our threats.

    As I said, we're in the right and they're in the wrong, but we are just as much responsible for flaming this fire as they are.

    Like I said, I don't know a winning strategy off the top of my head. If I did, I wouldn't be lurking on MacRumors but would be working at the state department.

    I just hate that we are so quick to resort to military escalation. It never ends well.

    How about these off-the-wall ideas?

    We offer China that we will relax some trade restrictions if they give asylum and safe passage to South Korea for all North Koreans that cross the border into China.

    We sell sabotaged weapons parts on the black market into North Korea.

    We stop conducting war games in South Korea, and begin inserting a rhetoric of peace and apathy. Worked for Cuba, mostly.
     
  21. shinji macrumors 65816

    shinji

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    #21
    If you are a North Korean and even hint that you would turn on a member of the Kim family, you get sent to a prison camp. There are two great books written by survivors who made it out. One was born in a prison camp and escaped, the other was from a high-ranking North Korean family who fell out of favor. They document stories of children watching their family members get executed, a little girl getting beaten to death for stealing food, the impossible work conditions done on starvation diets, etc.

    https://www.amazon.com/Escape-Camp-...492800718&sr=8-1&keywords=escape+from+camp+14
    https://www.amazon.com/Aquariums-Py...800702&sr=8-1&keywords=aquariums+of+pyongyang

    It would be impossible for North Koreans to overthrow the government because China would step in to keep the Kim family in power, lest the nation end up as an American proxy state on their border. They would've done it long ago if that were not the case.
     
  22. jpietrzak8 thread starter macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #22
    Which means that at least some of the police and prison guards are content with the current situation. In order to set up and maintain a police state, you must first set up and maintain a police force of sufficient size and strength to keep the citizens under control. This police force will have families of their own to feed and protect; so, at least some percentage of the country are living sufficiently well to maintain the state as a whole.

    And, if we remove the "end up as an American proxy state" from the equation? If we threw in the towel and gave up on the idea of Korea ever being reunited, what would happen? We could simply say that North Korea and South Korea are now two sovereign states, and treat them as such. I'm sure it would anger the South, but it would also completely knock the sails out of the North.

    And this is why I think we should really be mending fences with China at this point. I don't see why we have to constantly stick our own fingers into affairs on the other side of the planet; we entered into this war in the first place to try and keep Communism out of the Korean peninsula. Well, let's give in on that point; let China have North Korea, with our blessings. They can do with it what they want!
     
  23. PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #23
    No its not.
    NK has
    1. Kidnapped SK people, made them slaves
    2. Kidnapped Japanese people, made them slaves/puppets
    3. Planted spies in SK, and Japan, and China, and even USA.
    4. Defied every kind of international law.
    5. Broken all international treaties.
    6. Caused China to waste BILLIONS of $$, (look at China bridge to no where NKorea)

    China is worried about
    1. NK refugees
    2. US on boarder of China.

    Promise all NK will stay in NK and US leaves after NK is make whole with SK they would help US get rid of the Kim regime.
     
  24. madeirabhoy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2012
    #24

    but america reacts everywhere and to everything. how many countries has america tried to influence regime change in, in say the last 100 years. 50? 70? how many of them can be considered a good idea? world war 2 germany and.... thats about it.
     
  25. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #25
    And that's the problem. It kind of feeds on itself. The reason we have to be so many places now, was because of what we did 70 years ago. Past is prologue. I'm not sure how we break the cycle but our adventures do have a way of coming back to haunt us later on.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 21, 2017 ---
    I find that idea interesting but I am not sure how we could convince North Korea of our good intentions. Why would they believe us? Especially with Trump's flip flops.
     

Share This Page