The Student Room Group

**The "North Korea Watch 2013" Update Thread**

Scroll to see replies

Original post by HumanSupremacist
In light of the recent news that China is massing troops etc on the North Korean border, what do you guys think the purpose is for?

Some say it is simply a precaution in light of North Korea's escalating threats - i.e. to stop waves of refugees fleeing into China in the event of an attack by NK/an invasion by outside forces. So, that's one reason.

Another reason - albeit questionable and apparently lacking credibility according to some - is that China is preparing to enforce its defense pact with North Korea should North Korea be attacked. But such would mean China would go up against South Korea and more shockingly, the United States. This reason is questionable, especially given the modern relationship between China and the United States and how little benefit China derives from having North Korea as an ally (except for providing a buffer against encroaching US influence and power).

There could be a lot more reasons, such as another speculative one - namely, that China is fed up and is going to invade its ally itself. It is interesting because it is highly doubtful that in the event of an invasion by China (which should be shocking to and unexpected by NK) that North Korea would dare attack China. But then again, if China wanted to swiftly and neatly solve the situation, instead of a mass invasion of NK, it could surely *take out* Kim Jong-Un and certain "problem" generals, no?

What do you guys think?


I think North Korea deserves our tolerance, forgiveness and understanding.
Original post by green.tea
I didn't say its a secret I said its being played down and it is. You have two of the worlds two most powerful armies amassing at either end of a peninsula and the media is barely bothering to mention that one of them is there. I'd say its a pretty significant omission. When they do get mentioned we get this rubbish about how China doesn't like NK anymore and is probably just sending tanks to run over the NK refugees. Therefore its being played down by the media, which is what I said.


See my post just above about possible reasons.

China's massing of troops may not be to repel the US (which is highly unlikely). It could be to scare NK, to invade NK, to stop any potential refugees etc etc (see post above for more).
Original post by democracyforum
I think North Korea deserves our tolerance, forgiveness and understanding.


What are you on about? In what way? :curious:
Original post by HumanSupremacist
See my post just above about possible reasons.

China's massing of troops may not be to repel the US (which is highly unlikely). It could be to scare NK, to invade NK, to stop any potential refugees etc etc (see post above for more).


Your basing this on what China has said not what China has done/is doing. What happened to that aircraft carrier they bought from Russia that they said they were going to turn into a casino?

You don't need aircraft carriers for casinos and you don't need tanks for refugees.
Original post by green.tea
Your basing this on what China has said not what China has done/is doing. What happened to that aircraft carrier they bought from Russia that they said they were going to turn into a casino?

You don't need aircraft carriers for casinos and you don't need tanks for refugees.


Yes, that's precisely why I also put other possible reasons in that post above the quoted. :yes:

I wasn't saying that that was by far the only reason or indeed the reason for the massing of Chinese troops on NK's borders.
(edited 11 years ago)
green.tea
x


By the way, you don't still seriously think that China will enter a direct conflict with the US, do you? That's as likely as ancient astronauts "returning" to Earth on Monday. There will be nothing to gain on the part of both sides - all such would result in is a massive loss of life and economic apocalypse.
Reply 466
Original post by green.tea
Your basing this on what China has said not what China has done/is doing. What happened to that aircraft carrier they bought from Russia that they said they were going to turn into a casino?

You don't need aircraft carriers for casinos and you don't need tanks for refugees.


It was bought as a casino but the company didn't get a license. It sat [well, floated] derelict for 7yrs before the PLAN took it on and started to refit it.

It's being used to train their navy. They're using the experience gained from running it and putting that towards carriers they are building that will work 'fully'.
Original post by HumanSupremacist
Yes, that's precisely why I also put other possible reasons in that post above the quoted. :yes:

I wasn't saying that that was by far the only reason or indeed the reason for the massing of Chinese troops on NK's borders.


But still this stuff about China not liking NK anymore is based on words and little else. Their saying they're pissed off with them now hasn't resulted them exercising much leverage. They say NK has really done it this time, agree with the international community should really try to do something and in terms of action this translates into sending Jim Jong a cheaper brand of cigarettes. China doesn't need tanks to stop a country that is pretty much totally reliant on them for supplies.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by advice_guru
I don't see why everyone is passing off North Korea as a joke when it comes to their threats.

1) They have nuclear weapons around 5-7 kilotons, this is small for a nuclear weapon but large enough to use in an EMP
2) North Korea can hit the US, they launched a satellite into space. If you can get a satellite into Space you can hit the US.

Now for people not aware of what an EMP does, let me explain. EMP or Electro Magnetic Pulse is generated when a Nuclear Bomb is denoted high up in the atmosphere. An EMP can wipe out ALL ELECTRONICS.

So an EMP detonated over the US would wipe out the National Grid, your Mobile Phones, your TV, your Cars (supposedly the car battery would be effected).

This ultimately would lead to mass looting and a breakdown of society in general.


Firstly, NK have no proven inter-continental ballistic missile capability. The ICBMs the claim the credibility of, and to have attached nucleatr warheads to, are medium-range and - by implication - cannot hit the U.S. mainland (not that the relevant target makes any morally relevant difference). Secondly, the recent mounting rhetorical exchange of threats is merely a mis-managed affirmation of mutual deterrence gone awry under NK's excessive rhetoric and Kim's attempt to bolster his position domestically through conjugating an immanent external threat (a political strategem not uncommon). No one is going to purposefully compel their own destruction.
Original post by green.tea
But still this stuff about China not liking NK anymore is based on words and little else. Their saying they're pissed off with them now hasn't resulted them exercising much leverage. They say NK has really done it this time, agree with the international community should really try to do something and in terms of action this translates into sending Jim Jong a cheaper brand of cigarettes. China doesn't need tanks to stop a country that is pretty much totally reliant on them for supplies.


So what exactly do you think the massing of Chinese forces on the border are for then? :holmes:
Original post by HumanSupremacist
So what exactly do you think the massing of Chinese forces on the border are for then? :holmes:


I think SK and the US are squaring up to NK, China and possibly also Russia. You talk as tho only China would lose out if it went to war with the US and the US would remain unscathed. Trade is a two way thing.
Original post by green.tea
I think SK and the US are squaring up to NK, China and possibly also Russia. You talk as tho only China would lose out if it went to war with the US and the US would remain unscathed. Trade is a two way thing.


Yes, but the difference is that the US would be going against North Korea, not China.

This is exactly why neither the US or China will not go to war against each other - I thought I'd made that clear earlier. Both nations realise that their economies are so interlinked together that warring against each other would ensure mutual destabilisation and downfall.

Also, this isn't so much East vs. West anymore - such relationships have softened a lot since then. These nations (i.e. US, China, Russia) are "friendlier" towards each other now due to money, trade etc etc.
Original post by HumanSupremacist


Yes, but the difference is that the US would be going against North Korea, not China.

This is exactly why neither the US or China will not go to war against each other - I thought I'd made that clear earlier. Both nations realise that their economies are so interlinked together that warring against each other would ensure mutual destabilisation and downfall.

Also, this isn't so much East vs. West anymore - such relationships have softened a lot since then. These nations (i.e. US, China, Russia) are "friendlier" towards each other now due to money, trade etc etc.

If theres no way the US would go to war with China, and China makes it clear that war with NK would mean war with China, the US wont go to war with NK will they? Of course in order for this to act as sufficient deterrent they would have to mean it. You think US army strategists are planning on those tanks being there for refugees? Or planning a trip to China's new casino with their Chinese friends after this is done with?
Original post by green.tea
If theres no way the US would go to war with China, and China makes it clear that war with NK would mean war with China, the US wont go to war with NK will they? Of course in order for this to act as sufficient deterrent they would have to mean it. You think US army strategists are planning on those tanks being there for refugees? Or planning a trip to China's new casino with their Chinese friends after this is done with?


And if NK attacks SK/US/Japan?
Original post by HumanSupremacist
And if NK attacks SK/US/Japan?


Same would apply to them. Lets just hope nobody gets assassinated.
Original post by advice_guru
I don't see why everyone is passing off North Korea as a joke when it comes to their threats.

1) They have nuclear weapons around 5-7 kilotons, this is small for a nuclear weapon but large enough to use in an EMP
2) North Korea can hit the US, they launched a satellite into space. If you can get a satellite into Space you can hit the US.

Now for people not aware of what an EMP does, let me explain. EMP or Electro Magnetic Pulse is generated when a Nuclear Bomb is denoted high up in the atmosphere. An EMP can wipe out ALL ELECTRONICS.

So an EMP detonated over the US would wipe out the National Grid, your Mobile Phones, your TV, your Cars (supposedly the car battery would be effected).


This ultimately would lead to mass looting and a breakdown of society in general.



Lool I stopped at point 2, what do you want us to do about it ? The people who need to be taking it serious ( Politicians and The army, defence minstry etc) are probably taking it seriously. This is probably one of those decisions thats shouldn't involve the mass population of a country and just those who are assigned to deal with it in the correct manner.

Also i'm pretty sure, no matter what N Korea has the US will have IMMENSE ANTI Ballistic Missle capability.....And actual nuclear weapons themselves.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Calpurnia
I'm constantly amazed/surprised/scared by the popular notion that the reflex of the US, in the face of such an attack, would be to massacre an entire country. I'm pretty sure that's not how the world works, and certainly not how it should work.



I think if the situation called for it, they'd do it; remember japan to two bombs there destroyed a city of innocent people.(That's not me passing judgement)

However they'd probably try and destroy infrastructure first and try to "level" the country.
Reply 477
Original post by ss_s95
Well I highly doubt they'll nuke border areas (they might seize control but certainly won't nuke them, that's where victims of the North's status system are - as well as labour camps), if they're going to deploy nukes it'll most probably be within Pyongyang, where many kim-supporting government loyalists reside, as well as the fatso himself.

Nuclear radiation in Pyongyang shouldn't go as far as Chinese border towns up north, or the DMZ down south.


If you honestly believe that then you really haven't read about Chernobyl and that was an accident...

The explosion [Chernobyl] at the power station and subsequent fires inside the remains of the reactor resulted in the development and dispersal of a radioactive cloud which drifted not only over Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine, but also over the European part of Turkey, Greece, Moldova, Romania, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Finland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Austria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Poland, Estonia, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, Ireland, France, and Corsica.), Canada and the Kingdom (UK).
Original post by intstud29
This is a very naive analysis on your part.

1) Minimum loss of life for whom? The U.S. ?

USA would have absolute air supremacy after a few days. The problem is, what North Korea can do after 3-4 days? The answer is, a LOT of damage.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0104/North-Korea-military-has-an-edge-over-South-but-wouldn-t-win-a-war-study-finds

2) North Korea
har between 180,000 and 200,000 Special Forces. They are Kim's private elite guard. In addition to another 1 million soldiers, North Korea has between 6 to 7 million strong paramilitary force.

So even though the U.S. and South Korea can repel any North Korean attempt taking Seoul, that doesn't mean that North Korea can't do a lot of damage to civilian infrastructure. Remember, North Korean forces are 50 kilometers (31 miles) north of Seoul.

South Korean forces are about 140 kilometers from Pyongyang.

3) Most citizens in Pyongyang are the most regime-loyal ones. In order to get permission to live in Pyongyang, you have to be one of the most loyal ones. As North Korean citizen, you can't just move to Pyongyang. You would need permission to do so. In order to get permission, you need to prove yourself over a period of several years.

Furthermore, there is nothing that indicates that any North Korean citizen would "roll out the red carpet" for any U.S. or South Korean forces. This never hapened in Somalia, it never happened in Afghanistan, it never happened in Iraq and it's not happening in Libya either. On the contrary, extremist groups are gaining ground. That's no wonder since U.S. is bombing their country to hell.

Based on the U.S./Western interventions since early 1990s, there is not one single country that is "working" properly as a country.

The Balkans, Haiti, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Libya, and now Mali - none of them are working properly. And there is no indication that Syria or North Korea will work "properly" after the West kills Assad or Kim.

4) China does not want U.S./South Korea troops near it's borders. That itself can definitely provoke an attack.

China might not defend North Korea, but China might easely be forced to create a buffer zone a few miles across the North Korean border, in order to still keep some kind of buffer against U.S. and a "new Korea". There is nothing U.S. can do to stop China creating such a smaller buffer zone, close to Chinese border.

I wish people stop using the word "trade". Countries are not more peaceful, just because they are trade partners. It's a matter of national security and "trade" will always LOSE against that, and trade will lose against geo-strategic interests.



I think your comment about the invaded counties are unfair, I think it will take possibly the best part of a 3 generations to determine whether invasion has worked.

I think our western countries maybe have been naive to think that quick start demcracy would work anywhere because is simple doesn't....Democracy takes time, it takes population learning from its mistakes to realise collectivily that certain routes shouldn't be take, and that can take the best part of a century, this century is something countries like Britain have has and arguably our system isn't perfect.

But I believe this people have a better future under demcoracy where they are the power than under dictatorship where individuals control everything.
Original post by green.tea
Same would apply to them. Lets just hope nobody gets assassinated.


No. I said and what if NK attacked - clearly the country that is attacked will have the right to retaliate and China would clearly see that, no?

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending