Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 121 to 131 of 131

Thread: Is North Korea's Leader losing it?

  1. #121

    Default Re: Is North Korea's Leader losing it?


    Last edited by Shaka_Khan; 08-03-2017 at 04:02.
    Wooooo!!!

  2. #122
    master of the pwniverse Member Fragony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The EUSSR
    Posts
    30,680

    Default Re: Is North Korea's Leader losing it?

    North Korea is a running joke that isn't really funny. Seeing the great leader run would be though, I bet he would win the olympics the first time tried

  3. #123

    Default Re: Is North Korea's Leader losing it?


    Wooooo!!!

  4. #124
    master of the pwniverse Member Fragony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The EUSSR
    Posts
    30,680

    Default Re: Is North Korea's Leader losing it?

    Oh things heating, theatening to attack a US-basse, suicidel very. I still think that fattie isn't in control at all, It's the type would have bullied when I was younger and more sstupid

  5. #125
    Praefectus Fabrum Senior Member Anime BlackJack Champion, Flash Poker Champion, Word Up Champion, Shape Game Champion, Snake Shooter Champion, Fishwater Challenge Champion, Rocket Racer MX Champion, Jukebox Hero Champion, My House Is Bigger Than Your House Champion, Funky Pong Champion, Cutie Quake Champion, Fling The Cow Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Virus Champion, Solitaire Champion, Worm Race Champion, Rope Walker Champion, Penguin Pass Champion, Skate Park Champion, Watch Out Champion, Lawn Pac Champion, Weapons Of Mass Destruction Champion, Skate Boarder Champion, Lane Bowling Champion, Bugz Champion, Makai Grand Prix 2 Champion, White Van Man Champion, Parachute Panic Champion, BlackJack Champion, Stans Ski Jumping Champion, Smaugs Treasure Champion, Sofa Longjump Champion Seamus Fermanagh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Latibulm mali regis in muris.
    Posts
    11,450

    Default Re: Is North Korea's Leader losing it?

    Frags:

    NK has no downside from this. NK is allowed to be a hyperbolic, tantrum-throwing, 'drama-queen' state. If the said they were going to nuke Japan tomorrow, the vast bulk of the world would presume it is just NK being its usual noisy self. NK is allowed to be obstreperous, because nobody expects them to behave. The rest of the world, outside of China, SK, Japan, and the USA, doesn't much care how much noise they make just so long as they actually shoot a nuke AT somebody.

    Nobody, but nobody, is willing to attack NK and defeat them. Terrain and the hyper-militarization/Stalinization of NK would make any conventional attack a ghastly blood-letting for anyone capable of defeating them.

    Their nuclear program is the last key element of security for NK. If they have a deployable nuke or 5, the USA and its allies cannot nuke them without losing a USA or Japanese city or more as the price for slagging NK (which, by the way, would give us 15+ years of reduced global temperatures). Same with any special operations effort to whack the current 'fragrant leader.' Can't do it if you know he would nuke a few hundred thousand someones on your team.

    And we know he would. We don't think he is crazy enough to strike first and start a nuclear war, but we are pretty sure he would strike back to punish any effort that truly threatens him. He has the willpower for that.

    Trump is, apparently, NOT allowed to be obstreperous in kind. Suggesting an actual threat to NK makes them think the 'fragrant leader' will get nervous and blow up somebody -- and more of our allies are in easy range than US targets proper. So our Allies, and our media, are all....a-twitter...over it.
    "The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken

  6. #126

    Default Re: Is North Korea's Leader losing it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
    Frags:

    NK has no downside from this. NK is allowed to be a hyperbolic, tantrum-throwing, 'drama-queen' state. If the said they were going to nuke Japan tomorrow, the vast bulk of the world would presume it is just NK being its usual noisy self. NK is allowed to be obstreperous, because nobody expects them to behave. The rest of the world, outside of China, SK, Japan, and the USA, doesn't much care how much noise they make just so long as they actually shoot a nuke AT somebody.

    Nobody, but nobody, is willing to attack NK and defeat them. Terrain and the hyper-militarization/Stalinization of NK would make any conventional attack a ghastly blood-letting for anyone capable of defeating them.

    Their nuclear program is the last key element of security for NK. If they have a deployable nuke or 5, the USA and its allies cannot nuke them without losing a USA or Japanese city or more as the price for slagging NK (which, by the way, would give us 15+ years of reduced global temperatures). Same with any special operations effort to whack the current 'fragrant leader.' Can't do it if you know he would nuke a few hundred thousand someones on your team.

    And we know he would. We don't think he is crazy enough to strike first and start a nuclear war, but we are pretty sure he would strike back to punish any effort that truly threatens him. He has the willpower for that.

    Trump is, apparently, NOT allowed to be obstreperous in kind. Suggesting an actual threat to NK makes them think the 'fragrant leader' will get nervous and blow up somebody -- and more of our allies are in easy range than US targets proper. So our Allies, and our media, are all....a-twitter...over it.
    Of course we prefer that our leaders not speak on the same level as the tinpots of the world. Taking vacuous stands degrades credibility. North Korea has less credibility to lose.

    Plus if it is or reaches "truly threatening", then Kim will arguably be justified in a pre-emptive conventional attack or nuclear strike.

    Now an small but interesting question, given that:

    1. The United Nations Command was the formal leader of the war effort on South Korea's behalf, with troops under US operational control
    2. NATO members could be obliged to support America in the event of renewed hostilities in Korea.
    3. Non-NATO members of the UNC included Australia/New Zealand, Thailand, the Philippines, Columbia, South Africa, and Ethiopia (Scandinavia and India provided humanitarian aid)

    Are the countries named as part of the UNC all technically still at war with North Korea, and would they be obliged they reaffirm their commitment in that capacity to the coalition in the event of renewed hostilities?
    Last edited by Montmorency; 08-10-2017 at 21:17.
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



  7. #127
    Member Member Greyblades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,408
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Is North Korea's Leader losing it?

    Their nuclear program is the last key element of security for NK. If they have a deployable nuke or 5, the USA and its allies cannot nuke them without losing a USA or Japanese city or more as the price for slagging NK (which, by the way, would give us 15+ years of reduced global temperatures). Same with any special operations effort to whack the current 'fragrant leader.' Can't do it if you know he would nuke a few hundred thousand someones on your team
    .
    Thats the thing: he cant, but he's close.

    Thats what the drama over the missile tests has been about. Until the north koreans can place a nuclear bomb on top of a long range missile they are limited to 1945 style bomber deployment. Once air superiority is lost they can only detonate them on the ground in a semisuicidal fasion.

    Once the north koreans can put a nuke on a missile it is a short jump to load that missile on a submarine and once that is done the entire world is a target and it becomes a more absolute deterrant. It doesnt need to be big it just needs to hit DC.

    This is the last opportunity to prevent them becoming dangerous to everyone not bordering it.
    Last edited by Greyblades; 08-10-2017 at 22:33.
    Being better than the worst does not inherently make you good. But being better than the rest lets you brag.


    Quote Originally Posted by Strike For The South View Post
    Don't be scared that you don't freak out. Be scared when you don't care about freaking out
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  8. #128
    Praefectus Fabrum Senior Member Anime BlackJack Champion, Flash Poker Champion, Word Up Champion, Shape Game Champion, Snake Shooter Champion, Fishwater Challenge Champion, Rocket Racer MX Champion, Jukebox Hero Champion, My House Is Bigger Than Your House Champion, Funky Pong Champion, Cutie Quake Champion, Fling The Cow Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Virus Champion, Solitaire Champion, Worm Race Champion, Rope Walker Champion, Penguin Pass Champion, Skate Park Champion, Watch Out Champion, Lawn Pac Champion, Weapons Of Mass Destruction Champion, Skate Boarder Champion, Lane Bowling Champion, Bugz Champion, Makai Grand Prix 2 Champion, White Van Man Champion, Parachute Panic Champion, BlackJack Champion, Stans Ski Jumping Champion, Smaugs Treasure Champion, Sofa Longjump Champion Seamus Fermanagh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Latibulm mali regis in muris.
    Posts
    11,450

    Default Re: Is North Korea's Leader losing it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    ...

    Are the countries named as part of the UNC all technically still at war with North Korea, and would they be obliged they reaffirm their commitment in that capacity to the coalition in the event of renewed hostilities?
    Arguable. The NK has publicly declared itself not bound by the agreement on several occasions. Moreover, the USA broke the agreement back in the late 1950s by introducing new weapons systems. So, while the UNC members might be morally obligated, at least the way I interpret things, there is more than enough legalistic grounds to tell the USA and SK that they are on their own.
    "The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken

  9. #129

    Default Re: Is North Korea's Leader losing it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Greyblades
    This is the last opportunity to prevent them becoming dangerous to everyone not bordering it.
    Exactly. Another (rough) way to present the logic up until now:

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
    Arguable. The NK has publicly declared itself not bound by the agreement on several occasions. Moreover, the USA broke the agreement back in the late 1950s by introducing new weapons systems. So, while the UNC members might be morally obligated, at least the way I interpret things, there is more than enough legalistic grounds to tell the USA and SK that they are on their own.
    Here's some comments from an old article on Canada's potential role:

    1. Canada has no real combat element in Korea and Japan (as of 2010), being represented in the relevant offices by a handful of COs and their staff.
    2. The legacy UN mission will probably not be given formal permission to do this or that, with Chinese and Russian intransigence on the SC to be expected.
    3.
    "I have a hunch that the UN role, whatever its formalities are now through the military commission and other things, are likely to be superseded almost immediately by a coalition of the willing that would be led by the United States and South Korea."
    4.
    Federal officials say there have been no "asks" to Canada for military support in the region.
    On the other hand, with challenges having grown on all ends over the past decade a desperate United States could come down to entreating or demanding various allies for boots on the ground.

    On the historical end, this essay points out that UN resolutions up to the war were intending to create a "Unified Command" designating the United States as executive agent, but the US did not like the appearance of acting unilaterally and so it began to be designated a "United Nations Command" as a sort of camouflage. This is despite the UN violating its own charter at least twice. First in accepting that there would be no UN political oversight of a mission under the ostensible auspices of the body. Second in that Harry Truman acted unconstitutionally by committing troops to the conflict in terms of a "police action" before getting Congressional approval, and UN members participating in UN military actions are required by the UN charter to act in accordance with their individual "constitutional processes".
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    Member thankful for this post:



  10. #130

    Default Re: Is North Korea's Leader losing it?

    Further to "China moving into the spaces vacated by the U.S."
    Besides the Pacific Rim, look to the U.N.. Trump's isolationist rhetoric and withdrawl from international engagement has opened up space for China.
    Brave New World with China in the lead? Not yet, but if China is willing to pick up the slack, I don't see much opposition from the U.N. membership:

    http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/10/06/...fill-the-void/
    Ja-mata TosaInu

    Member thankful for this post:



  11. #131
    Praefectus Fabrum Senior Member Anime BlackJack Champion, Flash Poker Champion, Word Up Champion, Shape Game Champion, Snake Shooter Champion, Fishwater Challenge Champion, Rocket Racer MX Champion, Jukebox Hero Champion, My House Is Bigger Than Your House Champion, Funky Pong Champion, Cutie Quake Champion, Fling The Cow Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Virus Champion, Solitaire Champion, Worm Race Champion, Rope Walker Champion, Penguin Pass Champion, Skate Park Champion, Watch Out Champion, Lawn Pac Champion, Weapons Of Mass Destruction Champion, Skate Boarder Champion, Lane Bowling Champion, Bugz Champion, Makai Grand Prix 2 Champion, White Van Man Champion, Parachute Panic Champion, BlackJack Champion, Stans Ski Jumping Champion, Smaugs Treasure Champion, Sofa Longjump Champion Seamus Fermanagh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Latibulm mali regis in muris.
    Posts
    11,450

    Default Re: Is North Korea's Leader losing it?

    No opposition is likely I agree. I suspect the bulk of the world leadership would prefer a second "Great Power" and would much prefer China to Russia in that role.
    "The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO