East, Southeast and South Asia News

User avatar
keldon
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2044
Joined: Tue 16 Sep 2014 16:38
Location: Liebe Grüße aus Stuttgart
Contact:

Re: East, Southeast and South Asia News

Postby keldon » Thu 15 Sep 2016 00:09

LoneRifle wrote:What the US wants we already have.


Not everything and NK would not only enable possile US installations directly on Chinese borders but also to Russia. It is simply unthinkable for US to give up those bases they already have and whatever geopolitical gains it can possibly get from a united Korea under SK. Thats why i say there is no chance for SK to make such any promise to China and thus the stalemate will go on.

Also i think if people objectivly look at the situation it is really unlikely for chubby to start something, he will bark and occasionally show he has the bomb and trie continually to blackmail for money so he can get a comfortable life in his kingdom. The first shot of an armed conflict would very likely be fired from a South Korean rifle.

I also think you underestimate the social/cultural/economic ties and dynamic between SK/China, especially in the recent past, with better opportunities for SK and the possible blessing of pacifiying chubby. There are of course very nationalistic South Koreans who do blame China as contributor of NK still existing, but many other Koreans also do understands that China will be much more friendly to SK if US troops leave, also let's not forget that US supported the dictatorship on SK till he got assassinated (cause he did pretty much what US wanted him to do) which the Koreans also remember. So for most people who look at this objectivly it is power struggle between 2 great powers and the situation on the peninsula is kinda a result of it.

I'll post this from 2015, there are opinions of SK about the position of China in terms of economy. And nationalism goes only so far before a good offer brings the emotions down and people start to look objectivly at options.

http://www.ibtimes.com/international-op ... ey-1981994

In the end, there is much to learn about east Asia and the dynamic/psyche of people in that region, and it is not so simple to just say US helped in the past 60 years and SK loves them.
Image
> Sources for tuning Red Dragons --- Sources for tuning Blue Dragons <
亲们!大国梦哦!
小钱钱,真心甜,鼓钱包,放腰间,大国梦,早日圆 。啷个哩个啷♪

User avatar
LoneRifle
Major-General
Posts: 3569
Joined: Wed 3 Jul 2013 17:11
Location: Cackalacky
Contact:

Re: East, Southeast and South Asia News

Postby LoneRifle » Thu 15 Sep 2016 17:13

Doesn't matter whether or not people think chubby will or won't attack anyone. The fact that he has them makes him a massive danger. Nations like North Korea developing WMD's are a huge threat to any an everyone around them. If he can't be cowed by sanctions, military options cannot be ignored. Said options being a ROK/USA intervention of some kind. Waiting until North Korea has a stable of ICBM's pointed at LA, Seoul, and Tokyo is not any of those nations interests.

I find it funny that you term South Koreans who say it is "China's fault for North Koreas existence" "very nationalistic". Because you know, it really is China's fault that they exist. It has nothing to do with nationalism.

And A "good offer" being a democratic country selling out its biggest ally that it owes its entire existence to for the "opportunity" for improved relations with the dictatorship next door? I think you overstate the cultural and trade ties. Improved relations are impossible so long as North Korea exists. And I doubt China is going to be proactive on that front anytime soon.
Image

User avatar
keldon
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2044
Joined: Tue 16 Sep 2014 16:38
Location: Liebe Grüße aus Stuttgart
Contact:

Re: East, Southeast and South Asia News

Postby keldon » Thu 15 Sep 2016 18:01

LoneRifle wrote:Doesn't matter whether or not people think chubby will or won't attack anyone. The fact that he has them makes him a massive danger. Nations like North Korea developing WMD's are a huge threat to any an everyone around them. If he can't be cowed by sanctions, military options cannot be ignored. Said options being a ROK/USA intervention of some kind. Waiting until North Korea has a stable of ICBM's pointed at LA, Seoul, and Tokyo is not any of those nations interests.

I find it funny that you term South Koreans who say it is "China's fault for North Koreas existence" "very nationalistic". Because you know, it really is China's fault that they exist. It has nothing to do with nationalism.

And A "good offer" being a democratic country selling out its biggest ally that it owes its entire existence to for the "opportunity" for improved relations with the dictatorship next door? I think you overstate the cultural and trade ties. Improved relations are impossible so long as North Korea exists. And I doubt China is going to be proactive on that front anytime soon.


Well, i'm not here to try to change your opinion, but to offer some points people tends to overlook or just don't take seriously.

And the Korean divide happened in the grander scheme of post WW2 ideology mud slinging, mixing in that countries do have national interest and concerns, this involves like i said all participants in that region, it is unfortunate but nothing suprising. Trying to solve the problem by just the usual American way without a deep understanding of the region will only invite further troubles.

Also, you really should look past the ideology labels and get more familiar with the region, it is not as one-dimensional as you would like it to be. But like i said, not here to change your opinion, if you think the best course of action is to start shooting then be my guest, its your opinion. However you should understand that pounding chubby may seem satisfying first, but the diseases you contract from doing him in the arse will stick with you far longer, and the most likely case is that Koreans will suffer from this action.

In the end it is a lose lose situation, there are few ways to "resolve" it, but none of them are truly fool-proof.

btw. Piett, i'll stop visit the thread from now on and stop contributing. You are being neutral enough, so i don't think this will be a big issue.
Image
> Sources for tuning Red Dragons --- Sources for tuning Blue Dragons <
亲们!大国梦哦!
小钱钱,真心甜,鼓钱包,放腰间,大国梦,早日圆 。啷个哩个啷♪

User avatar
LoneRifle
Major-General
Posts: 3569
Joined: Wed 3 Jul 2013 17:11
Location: Cackalacky
Contact:

Re: East, Southeast and South Asia News

Postby LoneRifle » Thu 15 Sep 2016 18:50

The "usual" American method of dealing with North Korea had been 60+ years of unending frustration and enduring petty insults and attacks that have cost American lives. Id say we have been more then patient dealing with them. How much longer should we be patient with them when they are building weapons that render our conventional deterrent useless? And threatening to attack our cities with them?

Of course I understand that the fall of the North Korean regime would result in a humanitarian and economic crisis worse then what we are seeing in the Middle East, but the other option of allowing the Kim dynasty to threaten nuclear attacks with impunity is worse. A regime as unstable as that one with the most destructive weapons ever devised. What would the result be of a nuclear attack on Seoul and Tokyo? Possibly Cali? Such an outcome is unnacceptable so long as the ROK and USA have the power to prevent it.

You are right in the fact that both China and the USA have geopolitical interests that the Koreans are caught in the crossfire over. And that it is likely a lose lose situation. However, what I think China doesn't understand or want to believe is that the limit of patience the USA and ROK have for the current situation is paper thin. And that if the North Koreans continue down their current path, the ROK and by extension the USA will do whatever they feel is necessary to remove the North Korean threat, without Chinese input or approval.

Frosty mentioned that the decision to retaliate against North Korean provocations had been given to local command. It wouldn't take much to go from incident to full on war. This isn't some situation where China can sit on the sidelines and call for restraint.
Image

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12409
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: East, Southeast and South Asia News

Postby Mike » Thu 15 Sep 2016 19:00

keldon wrote: And the Korean divide happened in the grander scheme of post WW2 ideology mud slinging, mixing in that countries do have national interest and concerns, this involves like i said all participants in that region, it is unfortunate but nothing surprising.


China attacked once the UN forces got close to Chinese border. They kept the nation alive. However, I don't know what would've happened if China didn't attack nor do I know enough to speculate what could've happened.
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

User avatar
LoneRifle
Major-General
Posts: 3569
Joined: Wed 3 Jul 2013 17:11
Location: Cackalacky
Contact:

Re: East, Southeast and South Asia News

Postby LoneRifle » Thu 15 Sep 2016 19:13

The Chinese decision to intervene was made the moment when MacArthur said he was nixing the old UN plan of just shoving the Norks back to their side of the line and was going to cross the 38th parallel and unite both Koreans.

The war would have been over by Christmas if not for chinese intervention. Irony of ironies, the Inchon landings started today 63 years ago. Chinese forces were actively engaging UN forces mid October. So less then a month. It would be an understatement to say that active DPRK resistance had essentially ceased by the time the Chinese intervened.
Image

User avatar
frostypooky
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4334
Joined: Thu 1 Aug 2013 14:12
Contact:

Re: East, Southeast and South Asia News

Postby frostypooky » Thu 15 Sep 2016 21:52

Clinton: "NK will not be permitted to possess a nuclear weapon, a deliverable warhead on a missile."

well, there's the red line. they have shown nothing credible in public as far as warheads go and they are still dicking around in Punggye with sub-Trinity tests. there is the possibility they are holding off in an aboveground warhead-on-missile demonstration because they are aware this is likely the US/ROK/Jp's breaking point.

User avatar
Admiral Piett
Colonel
Posts: 2910
Joined: Sun 12 Feb 2012 22:04
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: East, Southeast and South Asia News

Postby Admiral Piett » Thu 15 Sep 2016 22:27

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37315148

Stepping away from North Korea for the moment. This is an interesting article.

DrRansom
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat 14 Jan 2012 18:22
Contact:

Re: East, Southeast and South Asia News

Postby DrRansom » Fri 16 Sep 2016 00:47

frostypooky wrote:Clinton: "NK will not be permitted to possess a nuclear weapon, a deliverable warhead on a missile."

well, there's the red line. they have shown nothing credible in public as far as warheads go and they are still dicking around in Punggye with sub-Trinity tests. there is the possibility they are holding off in an aboveground warhead-on-missile demonstration because they are aware this is likely the US/ROK/Jp's breaking point.


How can she, or anyone, ensure that this line hasn't already been crossed? DPRK has more than enough tests of missiles and nuclear bombs to get a working system.

I don't think this is really credible at all, because it presumes perfect knowledge of DPRK nuclear program to enforce.

delfo
Major-General
Posts: 3735
Joined: Wed 6 Aug 2014 19:57
Contact:

Re: East, Southeast and South Asia News

Postby delfo » Fri 16 Sep 2016 01:59

DrRansom wrote:
frostypooky wrote:Clinton: "NK will not be permitted to possess a nuclear weapon, a deliverable warhead on a missile."

well, there's the red line. they have shown nothing credible in public as far as warheads go and they are still dicking around in Punggye with sub-Trinity tests. there is the possibility they are holding off in an aboveground warhead-on-missile demonstration because they are aware this is likely the US/ROK/Jp's breaking point.


How can she, or anyone, ensure that this line hasn't already been crossed? DPRK has more than enough tests of missiles and nuclear bombs to get a working system.

I don't think this is really credible at all, because it presumes perfect knowledge of DPRK nuclear program to enforce.


Now ask yourself what was Frosty's day job and why does he speak Korean.

Are you still questioning his info on the matter ? What could he see daily on maps and scans and feeds ?


But basically I have a few points regarding North Korea.

North Korea considers ground based missiles a no go in terms of second strike options. The recent tests and that they are moving towards building 2 Submarines classes designed for this ( one test class which has been built and one actual in the next 5 years ) should show how the resources are being spread. The ground based program is stalling. The resources for those subs would equal the production of 5 5000 ton ships. That's their entire prioritization capacity and then some.

North korea doesn't assume it can have control of the air. Mig 29s have been upgraded ( 2-3 airframes ) but that's more or less the extent of it. Their homebrew S300 version isn't progressing wildly. Prioritization of resources.

North Korea must thus believe it cannot hide its launchers on the ground. They have had access to the Iraqii plans and officers via Iran and Syria since 1992. They can adjust for the difference in the countries which are vast.

North Korea then must not have Nuclear warheads at this time as they will be already mounted on the missile. Given that they don't have a viable sub for patrols and they know they can't defend their launch sites within their restricted amount of suitable terrain. ( The anti scud missions in 1992 had a success rate of 10% versus a country that's much larger and doesn't contain almost any impassable terrain, they will have adjusted that with Iranian supplied data they got from 2003 and the cases of near misses and the density of vehicles and the amount of surveilance ) .

North Korea also does not believe it's ground based missiles are capable of launching a second strike. Their platforms are not reusable. The upcoming subs will be.

Combine all of that together and you get that they will not be willing to put thier nukes in anything but a sub as they have estimated everything else will be wiped out in the first salvo or will not be able to launch a secondary strike.

Return to “Off-Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests