North Korea Situation

[Sackett]

Seems like an obvious solution to this.

China uses it's contacts in N. Korea to engineer a coup/invasion with minimal losses. Hands control over to South Korea, putting them on the hook for the economic renewal of N. Korea (and neutralizing S. Korea as a threat while they spend all their resources on N. Korea). But make a condition of that handover a large demilitarized zone south of the Yalu river.

China gets a bufferzone, plus several decades of S. Korea being involved in a recovery of N. Korea, during which China can try to entice them away from the US and Japan.

[Toukairin]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Regardless, your list of problems are easy to solve. China can simply shoot anyone who tried to cross the river, and in the mean time set up a new government in North Korea after their invasion. There is no reason why China needed to let anyone cross their boarders, and they have no problem machinegunning anyone who tries. China would do that to their own people, never mind foreigners.

To put it in crude words, the Chinese don't give a **** about humanitarian aspects of a war.

Regardless, China's only choice to maintain serious control over North Korea is to kill the Kims, and then put forward as many puppet leaders as they need until the situation calms down. After all, China created a monster in North Korea, and they better slay the beast now while it's still possible.

[Blueknight78]

Originally Posted by Sackett

Seems like an obvious solution to this.

China uses it's contacts in N. Korea to engineer a coup/invasion with minimal losses. Hands control over to South Korea, putting them on the hook for the economic renewal of N. Korea (and neutralizing S. Korea as a threat while they spend all their resources on N. Korea). But make a condition of that handover a large demilitarized zone south of the Yalu river.

China gets a bufferzone, plus several decades of S. Korea being involved in a recovery of N. Korea, during which China can try to entice them away from the US and Japan.

yeah that could be a good option for both chine and south korea, while chine can get more "land" for his peoples south korea also can get some land and finally get ridle of they really ugly/crazy brothers and honestly i really doubt china could want do a war against south korea later or even other country since they are not "that important anyway and don't really want to do that crazy things like the north korea.

[Kakurin]

Originally Posted by Toukairin

To put it in crude words, the Chinese don't give a **** about humanitarian aspects of a war.

If the US is seriously thinking about military action against North Korea, neither do they.

Originally Posted by Toukairin

Regardless, China's only choice to maintain serious control over North Korea is to kill the Kims, and then put forward as many puppet leaders as they need until the situation calms down. After all, China created a monster in North Korea, and they better slay the beast now while it's still possible.

China created nothing over there. You guys seriously overestimate the influence China wields and has wielded in North Korea. Both the Soviet Union and China tried to replace Kim Il-sung in 1956 - which failed. And between Mao's death and the collapse of the Soviet Union North Korea's guarantor power was actually the Soviet Union.

Originally Posted by Sackett

Seems like an obvious solution to this.

China uses it's contacts in N. Korea to engineer a coup/invasion with minimal losses. Hands control over to South Korea, putting them on the hook for the economic renewal of N. Korea (and neutralizing S. Korea as a threat while they spend all their resources on N. Korea). But make a condition of that handover a large demilitarized zone south of the Yalu river.

China gets a bufferzone, plus several decades of S. Korea being involved in a recovery of N. Korea, during which China can try to entice them away from the US and Japan.

If it would be so easy China would've done that already and not have allowed the Kims to embarrass China with their continued nuclear tests ever since 2006.

Moreover, the only way China would approve of a South Korean takeover is if South Korea agrees to leave the US-Japanese alliance. From Beijing's point of view the US is encircling China by maintaining a strong military presence, and supporting secondary powers, right along China's access points to the oceans. That's why China won't agree to a South Korean takeover for the prospect of a possible re-alignment of Korea somewhere in the future. If China could manage a takeover of North Korea as you described, which I doubt, the result would either be a re-unified Korea exiting the US-Japanese alliance or China maintaining a North Korean puppet state.

[Toukairin]

Originally Posted by Kakurin-san

If the US is seriously thinking about military action against North Korea, neither do they.

I was adding to the part where Vallen said that the Chinese military have no qualms in killing civilians en masse from point blank. After all, the PLA still has the ghost of Tienanmen lurking over them.

Originally Posted by Kakurin-san

China created nothing over there. You guys seriously overestimate the influence China wields and has wielded in North Korea. Both the Soviet Union and China tried to replace Kim Il-sung in 1956 - which failed. And between Mao's death and the collapse of the Soviet Union North Korea's guarantor power was actually the Soviet Union.

China created the current mess in North Korea from the very moment they stepped in the Korean War in 1950. If you read historical accounts, Stalin declined to intervene with the Red Army even when what was left of North Korea was about to collapse to UN forces. The North Korean regime should have died in its infancy if it wasn't for Mao, especially with the strong opposition from within the Chinese government back then.

As much as some people call out the US for creating a monster with Israel (which is true to many regards when right-wing nuts rule over there), I don't think it's unfair to do the same with China.

[Kakurin]

Originally Posted by Toukairin

I was adding to the part where Vallen said that the Chinese military have no qualms in killing civilians en masse from point blank. After all, the PLA still has the ghost of Tienanmen lurking over them.

Tiananmen even in the worst case was a few thousand people. In case of a refugee stream we are talking about a tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousand. That's not exactly comparable.

Originally Posted by Toukairin

China created the current mess in North Korea from the very moment they stepped in the Korean War in 1950. If you read historical accounts, Stalin declined to intervene with the Red Army even when what was left of North Korea was about to collapse to UN forces. The North Korean regime should have died in its infancy if it wasn't for Mao, especially with the strong opposition from within the Chinese government back then.

That's not exactly how it went. Stalin declined to intervene with Soviet forces because he didn't want a world war over the Korean issue. But he was very much involved in the Korean war. Before launching the war Kim Il-sung went to Stalin for permission, who gave it on the condition that in case something went wrong the Chinese would provide the men to support North Korea, while the Soviet Union would provide the Chinese with a certain measure of material aid. And when the UN forces crossed the 38th parallel Stalin requested China to send troops into Korea.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Kakurin-san

Tiananmen even in the worst case was a few thousand people. In case of a refugee stream we are talking about a tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousand. That's not exactly comparable.

You are assuming refugees would run into gunfire. The whole point isn't to murder people, but to keep them on the other side of the river. Frankly China hates wasting more bullets than they need to. It was once tradition that those who were given a death sentence had to pay for the ammunition used for their own execution.

Fire enough shots and the refugees would turn back. There would not be a need to kill thousands. Hundreds, tops.

[monir]

I've been waiting all day at how N. Korea will celebrate the founding leader's anniversary... well....

North Korean Missile Launch Fails, and a Show of Strength Fizzles

shizzle ma nizzle and a whole lot of fizzle....

What a let down.

[Key Board]

what's the likelihood that this is internal sabotage

[monir]

Originally Posted by Key Board

what's the likelihood that this is internal sabotage

Wouldn't rule it out, but it only delays the inevitable.

[Urzu 7]

What's the 'inevitable'?

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

What's the 'inevitable'?

North Korea will eventually collapse. It is already not self sustaining and is only kept functional by China. The question is HOW it will collapse. Internally? Coup d'etat? Externally by military invasion from China? North Korea actually striking the South first? One of these will happen.

[Ithekro]

Sometimes you wonder, do we have a functioning orbital anti-missile laser battery setup specifically to disable North Korean missiles to make them think they aren't getting anywhere?

[Eisdrache]

All this talk about a reemergence of the Korean war. I haven't really kept up with the news but I did visit my family in SK last month and they aren't worried about the situation any more than last time I was over there in 2008. Currently Koreans are more bothered by their president than their neighbours.

How realistic is it really to expect NK to collapse in say the next two decades any more than it was in the last two? I would very much like a reunion of the two Koreas but whoever expects it to happen in the near or medium future is simply delusional.

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

My two brothers and I and a friend are going on a trip to Japan from May 9th to May 25th...should we reconsider the trip? Or should we go anyways? I don't know how dicey things are over there right now. Should we be pretty worried? Should we be worried about a nuclear strike on Japan?

I really hope I am just missing the irony here. There is zero reason for you to be worried.

[Marcus H.]

Originally Posted by monir

I've been waiting all day at how N. Korea will celebrate the founding leader's anniversary... well....

North Korean Missile Launch Fails, and a Show of Strength Fizzles

shizzle ma nizzle and a whole lot of fizzle....

What a let down.

Their missiles have a success rate reminiscent of Kerbal Space Program.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Eisdrache

How realistic is it really to expect NK to collapse in say the next two decades any more than it was in the last two? I would very much like a reunion of the two Koreas but whoever expects it to happen in the near or medium future is simply delusional.

Obviously there is still a possibility of North Korea outliving everyone who posted in this thread. There isn't an actual countdown anywhere. But just as Venezuela had finally gone to hell in the last few months, after holding on for so long, keeping a nation functioning isn't easy.

In the end the main worry was Trump and Un getting into any kind of argument. Neither side are the type to back down in public. The personalities involved are just not rational.

[Eisdrache]

I don't disagree with you, although I doubt that Trump while being unpredictable will be able to truly instigate a military conflict in East Asia. A twitter fight won't turn into much more than the usual saber-rattling and the US attacking NK will not happen either. Military exercises have happened regularly before Trump and haven't resulted in more than tensions.

It's reasonable to observe the situation carefully, even more so now that there's a loose cannon in the white house but he'd have to do a LOT before anything truly happens. Possible? Yes. Likely? No.

[monir]

Originally Posted by Eisdrache

How realistic is it really to expect NK to collapse in say the next two decades any more than it was in the last two? I would very much like a reunion of the two Koreas but whoever expects it to happen in the near or medium future is simply delusional.

You probably have a better grasp of the situation in Korea better than a layman like me who gets his information from reading. I can, however, opine on the fact we've a pretty unpredictable leader in Trump who may change his mind from minute to next minute. All the indication right now is N. Korea is moving ahead with the next nuclear test pretty soon. How Trump will react after another nuclear test is anyone's guess, but for our (US) own vested interest in Asia and our own security demands we have to actively get involved at solving this problem. Before Obama left, he let Trump administration also know that N. Korea will pose immediate challenge that will test resolve. With the nuclear threat growing, I don't think we can overlook N. Korea any longer.

I personally think US will respond in some way if there is another N. Korea nuke test. The Chinese move to station 130k soldiers to guard their own border is another indication that US might do something like poking the hornets nest. How measured or how asinine that response will be all depend on Trump's whim. Whatever it is, the people of South Korea will be affected the most.

[SeijiSensei]

My sense from reading and watching coverage is that the general staff has no interest in fighting on the Peninsula. They know it will cost millions of lives and have horrible consequences for Korea's neighbors and ultimately the whole world. Civilians are often more willing to leap into military actions than generals. I don't see the generals advising Trump like McMasters and Mattis all that eager to attack the DPRK.

However I did wonder about the signaling implicit in the MOAB blast in Afghanistan. We know that many of Kim's missile and nuclear facilities are underground . Displaying an American "bunker-buster" type of bomb might threaten similar actions against Kim's assets. Still, this bomb is deployed from the back of a cargo plane. Dropping it into an empty part of eastern Afghanistan where the US has air superiority is not the same thing as trying to deploy them against a country with air defense capabilities like North Korea's. For that reason the MOAB seems like a silly weapon. It might be why we only built fifteen of them.

I wouldn't underestimate the US's ability to use cyber methods to interfere with Kim's missile launches either. Large missiles depend for stability on tiny alignments that can be attacked with cyber tools. The US and Israel significantly delayed Iran's nuclear program by introducing jitter into its centrifuges. From the article monir cited:

Over the past three years, a covert war over the missile program has broken out between North Korea and the United States. As the North’s skills grew, President Barack Obama ordered a surge in strikes against the missile launches, The New York Times reported last month, including through electronic-warfare techniques. It is unclear how successful the program has been, because it is almost impossible to tell whether any individual launch failed because of sabotage, faulty engineering or bad luck. But the North’s launch-failure rate has been extraordinarily high since Mr. Obama first accelerated the program.

You wouldn't want to interfere with every test launch either. You'd want to instill confidence in Kim and his scientists that their program is working. Then on the day advertised around the world as the one when the DPRK will show off its new prowess on the world stage, the device explodes in everyone's view. I wonder if any literal heads are rolling among the missile program's staff.

[Renegade334]

^--- I don't want to be a nag, but the GBU-43/B is not a bunker-buster, even if it was shoehorned into such a role in Afghanistan with help from the local topography (the rock walls contained and amplified the fireball and shockwave into a relatively tight spot, forcing the overpressure wave into the tunnels, where it wreaked absolute havoc). The MOAB was created as a replacement for the BLU-82 Daisy Cutter, which was used in Vietnam not only to wipe out suspected Vietcong groups in the jungle but also clear out large swaths of forestry so that transport helicopters could land closer to their objective (when no practicable landing zone was available to them).

The MOAB is a pure surface effect weapon. The bunker-buster you're thinking of is the GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator, which was specificially designed to punch through heavily reinforced, subterranean structures. The US Air Force was not so surreptitiously throwing pointed looks at Iran when they developed and unveiled the MOP, using data gleaned from the 2003 invasion of Iraq (where some of the JDAMs and other Paveways didn't always achieve full armor penetrator, thus causing USAF to want something deeper-reaching).