2017-04-15, 00:46 | Link #121 |
Cross Game - I need more
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: I've moved around the American West. I've lived in Oregon, Washington, Utah, and Oklahoma
Age: 45
|
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.
__________________
|
2017-04-15, 00:54 | Link #122 | |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: A city with a small mountain in the middle
|
Quote:
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. Last edited by Toukairin; 2017-04-15 at 03:49. |
|
2017-04-15, 01:30 | Link #123 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2017-04-15, 05:35 | Link #124 | |||
大佐
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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.
__________________
|
|||
2017-04-15, 12:39 | Link #125 | ||
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: A city with a small mountain in the middle
|
Quote:
Quote:
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. Last edited by Toukairin; 2017-04-15 at 13:07. |
||
2017-04-15, 17:20 | Link #126 | ||
大佐
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||
2017-04-15, 17:53 | Link #127 | |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
Quote:
Fire enough shots and the refugees would turn back. There would not be a need to kill thousands. Hundreds, tops.
__________________
|
|
2017-04-15, 19:07 | Link #128 |
cho~ kakkoii
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 3rd Planet
|
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.
__________________
|
2017-04-15, 21:29 | Link #132 |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
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.
__________________
|
2017-04-15, 21:30 | Link #133 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 47
|
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?
__________________
|
2017-04-15, 22:37 | Link #134 | |
Part-time misanthrope
Join Date: Mar 2007
|
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. Quote:
|
|
2017-04-16, 00:07 | Link #135 | |
Princess or Plunderer?
Join Date: May 2009
Location: the Philippines
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2017-04-16, 00:11 | Link #136 | |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
Quote:
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.
__________________
|
|
2017-04-16, 13:27 | Link #137 |
Part-time misanthrope
Join Date: Mar 2007
|
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. |
2017-04-16, 21:53 | Link #138 | |
cho~ kakkoii
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 3rd Planet
|
Quote:
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.
__________________
|
|
2017-04-17, 09:15 | Link #139 | |
AS Oji-kun
Join Date: Nov 2006
Age: 74
|
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: Quote:
__________________
Last edited by SeijiSensei; 2017-04-17 at 09:47. |
|
2017-04-17, 14:20 | Link #140 |
Sleepy Lurker
Graphic Designer
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nun'yabiznehz
Age: 38
|
^--- 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).
__________________
|
|
|