Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: Taking away Kim Yong Un's toys

  1. Top | #1
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    9,106
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    14,852
    Rep Power
    61

    Taking away Kim Yong Un's toys

    North Korea regularly struggles to feed it's people. Which is bizarre in a world where poor people typically struggle with the problems of obesity, not a lack of food.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-56685356

    How bad does it need to get before the global community invades it and shoots Kim Yong Un in the head? It's not like there'll be a massive problem with reintegrating it into the modern world afterwards. South Korea is working out just fine and dandy. It'll be a repeat of the German re-unification. That went well.

    It won't be a repeat of the Korean war, because that was a proxy war between the west and the two communist super powers of that age. While China will want to protect North Korea (they see it as within their sphere of influence). But they're in no way allied. Since the end of the cold war relations between them has been strained. Likewise, relations with Russia has also become strained. Russia isn't going to defend them unless Putin gets something out of it. N Korea has nothing Russia wants.

    I get the impression that both China and Russia thinks their historical close ties to North Korea is somewhat of an embarrassment now.

    I can see a scenario where the entire world leans on North Korea and there's an engineered swift and bloodless coup. And the UN comes in to clean up the mess afterwards.

    I can see many scenarios for this. The only unacceptable one is for the rest of the world to idly stand around twiddling our thumbs while the North Korean people starve. I find that unacceptable.

  2. Top | #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Back in the Kingdom
    Posts
    194
    Archived
    730
    Total Posts
    924
    Rep Power
    58
    Hi Zoidbrg

    Historically China always reacted against any interference in what they considered their sphere of influence. Interfering in Korea would be a massive stupidity worse than the extension of the Nato Pact in Poland, bordering Russia, while the Warsaw pact was dissolved.

    Besides : interfering in a country with a nuclear force seems rather delicate. I dont believe a swift and bloodless coup has good enough odds to prevent a detonation of a nuclear device on the border of China and Japan.

    We simply dont know that Korea did not set up a last ditch contingency plan with a few fanatics to detonate a device in case of exactly a palace revolution.

    And yes, that geopolical realism is dramatic for the population of North Korea. As always is for the people on the bottom of the food chain.

  3. Top | #3
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    4,735
    Rep Power
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Cycad View Post
    Hi Zoidbrg

    Historically China always reacted against any interference in what they considered their sphere of influence. Interfering in Korea would be a massive stupidity worse than the extension of the Nato Pact in Poland, bordering Russia, while the Warsaw pact was dissolved.

    Besides : interfering in a country with a nuclear force seems rather delicate. I dont believe a swift and bloodless coup has good enough odds to prevent a detonation of a nuclear device on the border of China and Japan.

    We simply dont know that Korea did not set up a last ditch contingency plan with a few fanatics to detonate a device in case of exactly a palace revolution.

    And yes, that geopolical realism is dramatic for the population of North Korea. As always is for the people on the bottom of the food chain.
    True. North Korea is toast. The west would be wise to be very careful prodding China - the next super invader. The world should rally around soverign countries being threatened by China - not North Korea.

  4. Top | #4
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    30,823
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    73,296
    Rep Power
    100
    If the entire political infrastructure solely hung around Kim Jong Un's neck, then killing him would magically save North Korea. But as with all things, it isn't that simple, and the guns aimed at Seoul, South Korea also add a sort of "don't screw with North Korea in such violent ways' vibe to 'em. North Korea went through this before, and 'survived'. Look at Myanmar, and that junta has survived. Despot authoritarian governments manage to get away with this stuff if 1) they lack resources we want and 2) have something to keep others out. North Korea has both of those going for it. The Kim dynasty is solely about sustaining the Kim dynasty, screw the nation. And the nation has thusly been screwed for decades.

  5. Top | #5
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    9,106
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    14,852
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    If the entire political infrastructure solely hung around Kim Jong Un's neck, then killing him would magically save North Korea. But as with all things, it isn't that simple, and the guns aimed at Seoul, South Korea also add a sort of "don't screw with North Korea in such violent ways' vibe to 'em. North Korea went through this before, and 'survived'. Look at Myanmar, and that junta has survived. Despot authoritarian governments manage to get away with this stuff if 1) they lack resources we want and 2) have something to keep others out. North Korea has both of those going for it. The Kim dynasty is solely about sustaining the Kim dynasty, screw the nation. And the nation has thusly been screwed for decades.
    But in Myanmar's case, wasn't it the fact that Aung San Suu Kyi sucked as a leader? She was just as authoritarian as the Junta she was supposed to replace. Tried to reform and modernize a country and just ended up creating a massive mess instead. Robert Mugabe springs to mind. Eventually the armies patience ran out over her mismanagement and they had her removed. Based on what I've seen, that's how it looks like to me. The junta in power before, were a junta, and a dictatorship, but in retrospect they weren't kleptocratic. They seemed to have done a decent job in running the country (as well as communist dictators can do). Something Aung San didn't do.

    Kim Jong Un is a lunatic

  6. Top | #6
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    9,106
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    14,852
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Bosch View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cycad View Post
    Hi Zoidbrg

    Historically China always reacted against any interference in what they considered their sphere of influence. Interfering in Korea would be a massive stupidity worse than the extension of the Nato Pact in Poland, bordering Russia, while the Warsaw pact was dissolved.

    Besides : interfering in a country with a nuclear force seems rather delicate. I dont believe a swift and bloodless coup has good enough odds to prevent a detonation of a nuclear device on the border of China and Japan.

    We simply dont know that Korea did not set up a last ditch contingency plan with a few fanatics to detonate a device in case of exactly a palace revolution.

    And yes, that geopolical realism is dramatic for the population of North Korea. As always is for the people on the bottom of the food chain.
    True. North Korea is toast. The west would be wise to be very careful prodding China - the next super invader. The world should rally around soverign countries being threatened by China - not North Korea.
    I think democratic countries have a perpetual free pass to invade non-democratic countries, if the goal is to make it democratic. So I'm cool with it. The problem with China is that it's China. It'd be a fair fight. So WW3. That's going to hurt.

  7. Top | #7
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    4,735
    Rep Power
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Bosch View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cycad View Post
    Hi Zoidbrg

    Historically China always reacted against any interference in what they considered their sphere of influence. Interfering in Korea would be a massive stupidity worse than the extension of the Nato Pact in Poland, bordering Russia, while the Warsaw pact was dissolved.

    Besides : interfering in a country with a nuclear force seems rather delicate. I dont believe a swift and bloodless coup has good enough odds to prevent a detonation of a nuclear device on the border of China and Japan.

    We simply dont know that Korea did not set up a last ditch contingency plan with a few fanatics to detonate a device in case of exactly a palace revolution.

    And yes, that geopolical realism is dramatic for the population of North Korea. As always is for the people on the bottom of the food chain.
    True. North Korea is toast. The west would be wise to be very careful prodding China - the next super invader. The world should rally around soverign countries being threatened by China - not North Korea.
    I think democratic countries have a perpetual free pass to invade non-democratic countries, if the goal is to make it democratic. So I'm cool with it. The problem with China is that it's China. It'd be a fair fight. So WW3. That's going to hurt.
    Well, I think that WW3 will be started when China attacks a sovereign country, while the west is simply defending. I do not think that there is any chance that democratic countries will invade a Chinese protected country to "set it free".

  8. Top | #8
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    9,106
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    14,852
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Bosch View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post

    I think democratic countries have a perpetual free pass to invade non-democratic countries, if the goal is to make it democratic. So I'm cool with it. The problem with China is that it's China. It'd be a fair fight. So WW3. That's going to hurt.
    Well, I think that WW3 will be started when China attacks a sovereign country, while the west is simply defending. I do not think that there is any chance that democratic countries will invade a Chinese protected country to "set it free".
    I'm not so sure. China is playing the long game. They annoy everybody and make ridiculous territorial demands and then wait for the world to be in a crisis so it doesn't have the energy to resist China. And by the time they're ready to put up a fight, it's the new normal. Like what Putin did in Crimea. So I don't believe in that scenario.

    The way Great Britain took over India was for British private companies to invest heavily in India, and then when local princes threatened the company British troops would move in to defend British investments. I can see the same development in Africa now. We'll see how that plays out.

  9. Top | #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Back in the Kingdom
    Posts
    194
    Archived
    730
    Total Posts
    924
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    I think democratic countries have a perpetual free pass to invade non-democratic countries, if the goal is to make it democratic.
    The problem is that countries are seldom if never invaded in order to start democracy. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya pop in my mind.
    Besides that, who are we to decide what another country needs ? That is th opposite of democracy

  10. Top | #10
    Veteran Member funinspace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    3,758
    Archived
    10,245
    Total Posts
    14,003
    Rep Power
    67
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Bosch View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post

    I think democratic countries have a perpetual free pass to invade non-democratic countries, if the goal is to make it democratic. So I'm cool with it. The problem with China is that it's China. It'd be a fair fight. So WW3. That's going to hurt.
    Well, I think that WW3 will be started when China attacks a sovereign country, while the west is simply defending. I do not think that there is any chance that democratic countries will invade a Chinese protected country to "set it free".
    I'm not so sure. China is playing the long game. They annoy everybody and make ridiculous territorial demands and then wait for the world to be in a crisis so it doesn't have the energy to resist China. And by the time they're ready to put up a fight, it's the new normal. Like what Putin did in Crimea. So I don't believe in that scenario.

    The way Great Britain took over India was for British private companies to invest heavily in India, and then when local princes threatened the company British troops would move in to defend British investments. I can see the same development in Africa now. We'll see how that plays out.
    Any effort to topple the Kim dynasty, would take months of preparation, much like the US did with Iraq for 6 months. And if the US tried to do it rapidly, it would incur a casualty rate that most Americans would be upset by. Any invasion would also have get SK on board, which is unlikely.

    It would be painfully obvious to China what was going on, and it would only take them weeks to prepare their counter moves (what ever they would be). Even if NK is no longer important to China, they could perceive it as another backyard thing that they couldn't walk away from as the US stomps around once again. Additionally, the gap between the US and China in military capabilities isn't nearly so wide as it was in the 1950's.

    A better solution IMPOV, in the world of 'if I were king', would be to privately negotiate with China. And offer to remove all US forces from the peninsula if they topple the Kim dynasty and make sure their nuclear weapons programs are all removed.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •