By 2029, is war with N. Korea inevitable?

According to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090525/ap_on_re_as/as_koreas_nuclear, they apparently have the ability to process enough nuclear fuel to possess an hiroshima type of nuclear weapon and their long-range air-delivery capabilities has been increasing. Do you think this can be resolved by a "U.N. show-down" or will this inevitably culminate in war? Or will it just fizzle out? Or something else?

Where's the "Ionoh" option? :?

Link said:

Where's the "Ionoh" option? :?

Click to expand...

That'd be the "other" option.

Why 2029?

julesa said:

Why 2029?

Click to expand...

20 years seemed like a good political timespan for these kinds of things. I have my doubts someone like Obama would support a declaration of war in what is likely going to be an 8 year administration, but I wouldn't hold my breath that another Bush wouldn't. Also, 20 years seems to give N. Korea just enough time to develop its offensive capabilities to the point of being reckoned with.

Meh. Who knows, it could happen. Or Kim Jong B. Illin' could keel over dead and leave the country to a progressive egalitarian economist with aspirations to making N. Korea a tier one trading partner with the EU. :lol:

The spirits are unfortunately silent on this matter. :lol: :lol: :lol:

One obvious response not in the poll:

Dude, we're still technically at war with them.

Well, let's say the poll options are more "realistic" than "technical" in nature.

I voted UN success based on history. After all we are still here

The UN will start sending even more strongly-worded letters and then they'll back down for sure.

After the war on drugs and the war on terror, War on koreans will soon take over it's respective places and we will have a new boogie man to fear. Imagine having a legitimate war. Like a war on poverty.

julesa said:

The UN will start sending even more strongly-worded letters and then they'll back down for sure.

Click to expand...

Yea, once the UN plays the "Please" card it's all over. :lol:

Bigger problems will emerge, and N. Korea will be small potatoes in light of those.

Cackalacka said:

One obvious response not in the poll:

Dude, we're still technically at war with them.

Click to expand...

There has been an Armistice since 1953, but people are still getting shot along the 38th parrallel. We still have American troops in Korea. the Koreas have been at war and still are since 1950.

I don't see anything beyond a possable surgical strike against there nuke facilities. I think China will swallow them up as a puppet state even more than they are now in the next 5 years.

set said:

After the war on drugs and the war on terror, War on koreans will soon take over it's respective places and we will have a new boogie man to fear. Imagine having a legitimate war. Like a war on poverty.

Click to expand...

I've actually heard of this, no kidding. I think it was during the last presidential election or something.

As for N Korea, I think China has a vested interest in keeping American's alive, we buy their products, by the ____ load. So if N Korea ever started killing Americans, China would stand to profit from obliterating them from the face of the earth, sadly I doubt S Korea would survive the fallout. And there's the other problem of at least one US carrier battle group in the way, a million man army is a million man wide target for US long range stealth cruise missiles.

North Korea is starting to become a world power, it has access to weapons grade nuclear technology and it has a ready and easily deployable platform to use it. They continually improve their current infrastructure and they are currently doing it all by themselves. I think it is possible that war could break out in some way but it is a wonderful idea that another country could become a world player without blood shed. Will that happen, more then likely not. To many of the current world powers are way to threatened. Threatened economic pros parity mixed with an already set if itchy trigger fingers waiting for a go to "Beat them like we where supposed to last time" mentality is far to prevalent. It would be like Vietnam becoming a more prominent with the same set of criteria. Imagine the uproar in certain circles if that happened. That would tip over the tea cart and bruise too many ego's. Imagine a former enemy not just rolling over and dieing but actually gaining some ground and making their own way with no help from the west. Scary thought when people like that start making it harder and harder to say there is something wrong with them when it all starts to work for them even against the wishes of former enemies. That would have to be stopped in some way, maybe a war or maybe something else. That sort of behavior would not be tolerated, only way to save face and show how wrong it is for places like that to upset the status quo. It also shows how much the grip the west has is starting to slip and how far behind it's starting to fall, economically speaking.

Dictatorships do not transition well after the death of the dictator...

I doubt we'll hot up the N. Korea situation regardless of what they do. Unless they find massive petroleum deposits or some other strategically valuable resources. Otherwise, we are far more likely to be expanding our wars in the Middle East, Afghanistan, South America and perhaps Africa as all of those places have more of the resources we want to control.

Finally, well before 2029 our creditors will demand we auction off our military on Ebay to keep up with our debt service obligations and not have our credit revoked.

I think the coordinated World Body has eyes on them, and contained; the regime is running on minus empty. The whole point of their nuclear fizzle was to be a scare tactic: that certainly melted into the absurd. Recent patterns indicate actual outreach amid the colic tone beginning with Clinton’s visit to fetch the two journalists. I expect collapse from within well before 20 years is out. The danger is what comes next after the fall or coup…

Worries: Certainly the Million-Man Army could wreck havoc, but it would not last very long. No.

Reviewing their history and ideology: I suspect a strong general or a ruling cadre to emerge and wrest control; it’s a toss whether they will downgrade their ambitions or go for broke/zero-sum. The North and South have a very long history of going for each other’s throat. It could get viscous before it gets nice: Maybe a night or two of the long knives, and then years to assimilate, though not as fast as East Germany.

Amusing to consider they’d become absorbed by China; a capitalistic provincial canton: Free North Korea!
Then again they may not be worth taking.

Alas, cue musical solo by Kim Jong II: “I’m So Lonely”

It appears that N. Korea's ability to launch a military campaign came and went years ago. The government appears to be little more than a small baby occasionally throwing their pacifier thru the bars of the crib trying to get attention. Unfortunately while the government continues to give the rest of the world the finger, their people are dying from malnutrition...

North Korea is lazy. They have nothing they produce that the rest of the world wants. Now that's laziness. China may claim to be communist, but they're not at all. Only the Amish are close. You can't have force communism; it's not possible. And it's certainly not possible on a national level. It was a bad idea from the get-go, and it produces a nation of slackers. Look at Cuba. They are the closest nation to communism, and even Fidel has admitted that their economic system is failed.

Communism isn't a social or political idea, contrary to what people think (although it depends on social and political support). It's economic. All those goofy communist countries say they are democratic, but that's baloney.

DPRK: Democratic People's Republic of Korea. It's not democratic. It's a dictatorship. So is Cuba. There's nothing democratic about it. Did you know that North Korea's constitution guarantees free speech and freedom of religion? But it's not put into practice. They have one of the most oppressive regimes in the world, and Cuba isn't far off.

What North Korea wants is handouts.

As far as their nuclear capabilities are concerned, you can thank Pakistan for that. A prominent nuclear scientist in Pakistan sold North Korea the bomb, and he was declared a hero. They put him on house arrest as punishment for his crime, but now his house arrest extends to the entire nation of Pakistan.

North Korea will languish in poverty until they do the right thing: Submit to South Korea.

My wife is Korean. South of course. North Korea is a very very sad situation. Most of the people dont have enough food to feed themselves because all the money the government has goes to the military. IF you are born in North Korea it is extremly hard to ever leave. So hundreds of thousands of children are born into a fail system.

The situation between east and west Germany was resolved recently. I think the situation in Korea will be resolved soon, in a peaceful way.

If I was in charge of the UN I would just take everybody who was in power in N Korea out of power and send them to rehabilitation, such as do volunteer work for the elderly for the rest of their lives. Either people in South Korea would take over running the north, or the UN would re-apoint different people from N Korea who actually cared about the country to run it.

I am Korean. South of course.

There are numerous opinions and thoughts. They largely fall amongst the following:

1) Continue as is but peacefully has 2 separate countries. Most South Koreans do not want unification due to the extreme financial burden of unification.

2) NK crumbles because it doesn't have any real trade with anyone (other than China). Country goes bankrupt, government crumbles, UN takes over with primarily China/USA/South Korea/Japan coalition to run the country.

3) NK has an internal revolution. Everyone thought this would happen when Kim Il Sung dies (because KJI is "crazy" right?). When KIS dies, there was a fairly smooth transition to KJI. Now everyone says that when KJI dies, it's over. I doubt it though. A revolution (e.g. Egypt, Libya, etc.) takes information and NK has very little information from the outside.

4) My solution? Well, it's never gonna happen but believe it or not I do have a really long, written out, well though out solution to this that I wrote up many years ago. It involves creating a peaceful unified country with a joint government involving both countries. It's never gonna happen though because there are way too many egos involved. As for the cost involved to South Koreans...I'm fine with South Korea having little to no economic growth for a decade as the cost for unification. I don't expect unification to be free.

5) War. Probably won't happen. Seoul will get bombed. Tokyo will get bombed. Pyongyang will get bombed. US (Hawaii? LA?) will get bombed. Lots of deaths. Lots of American deaths. It won't happen. This is no joke. The UN doesn't know where all of the nuclear facilities are in NK. Remember, the UN / US thought there were WMDs in Iraq.

RVD said:

I am Korean. South of course.
4) .... As for the cost involved to South Koreans...I'm fine with South Korea having little to no economic growth for a decade as the cost for unification. I don't expect unification to be free.

Click to expand...

im sure you know more about the situation than me.

Are you certain the South would be worse economically for 10 years? You would have more land, more resources, higher population, Im just a layman but I would have thought you would have been better off merging.

Really, who gives a f@ck? It is of no material difference to the US, Europe, or anywhere 99% of the people on this board come from.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour of humanitarian charities, NGOs and missions going in there and helping the population (who obviously need some help)

The N Korea regime is obviously a sorry state of affairs......

And it's a big issue for anyone actually in Korea, or related to anyone in Korea, for sure.

But there is very little strategic benefit from any of us getting involved. And for those who do have a legitimate interest...well sure, the US getting involved is significat, but with any support comes a price to pay. They're not unequivocally crying out for us to get stuck in....

it's all just turning the wheels of the military industrial complex. The people interested in getting involved in this are not interested in righting wrongs, that's for sure.

brisbanebikie said:

RVD said:

I am Korean. South of course.
4) .... As for the cost involved to South Koreans...I'm fine with South Korea having little to no economic growth for a decade as the cost for unification. I don't expect unification to be free.

Click to expand...

im sure you know more about the situation than me.

Are you certain the South would be worse economically for 10 years? You would have more land, more resources, higher population, Im just a layman but I would have thought you would have been better off merging.

Click to expand...

Most economists in South Korea believe that the cost of unification will be 10+ years of economic hardship. Must of this is modeled after the collapse of East Germany when Germany had unification in the early 90s. IIRC, it took Germany about 10 years but East Germany was actually in a much better state than North Korea today.

There would be more land and resources but there would also be a nation full of people without a lot of labor skills (other than manual labor), mass migration to the South, etc. Having a lot of unskilled labor isn't so great...it is one of the reasons why China and India are still poor countries (although they are much better now that they have focused on embracing and getting their people skilled in technology).