Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Isambard Kingdom Brunel)
    Elizabeth Windsor Tweeted yesterday:

    "North Korea has blocked one on Twitter. This is the very final straw". #RAF

    Anyone know if this is the real Queen on Twitter. I have not heard any news agencies reporting the RAF flying over to the peninsular - and seems a very pernickety reason to go to war. Very unlike HM.
    I highly doubt the Queen would comment on the North Korean situation, much like she wouldn't comment on the issue of benefits in Britain - she's rarely political and rightly so.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HumanSupremacist)
    But maybe, just maybe, the United States has now become fed up and this situation could be sorted in a jiffy with an invasion - although that 1.1million-man army is not something to just quickly walk over...
    No but you could fly over and bomb it pretty easily.

    Regarding China - yes its an emerging super power but isnt pretty much all of its wealth situated in two maybe three cities whilst the rest of it still mostly very much second and third world stylings made up of farmers living off the land? Its not like the US which has massive industrial and business models all over the country. And i dont feel that China is going to throw in with a little fat man having an ego tantrum and risk itsself against the likes of the US?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HumanSupremacist)
    Not really. The Earthquake was much closer to the Sea of Japan than either North Korea or China. It deliberately mentioned China and North Korea in light of the current events...
    It's in the border region. It is close to all 3. You're reading far far too much into it.

    It would not say "Sea of Japan" any more than an earthquake off the Portuguese coast would say "in the Atlantic" - because that description covers a huge area. If it had said "in the Sea of Japan" then people could have thought it happened 5km from the coast of Japan, rather than 400 miles away.

    You're taking things far too literally for your own agenda of scaremongering.

    The situation's bad enough without you adding new posts like they're some wholey credible news source in their own right.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by silverbolt)
    No but you could fly over and bomb it pretty easily.

    Regarding China - yes its an emerging super power but isnt pretty much all of its wealth situated in two maybe three cities whilst the rest of it still mostly very much second and third world stylings made up of farmers living off the land? Its not like the US which has massive industrial and business models all over the country. And i dont feel that China is going to throw in with a little fat man having an ego tantrum and risk itsself against the likes of the US?
    You're not serous, are you?

    China is massively emerging - it knows what its doing. It wealth isn't situated in a small area and that's it. It is emerging - did you expect it to be exactly like the United States right now? The United States' success is steadily dropping, whilst the likes of China and India are rapidly increasing.

    China is a great emerging heavyweight - why on Earth do you think the United States is hesitant and pussy-footing about with North Korea? They invaded Iraq for much much less.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by silverbolt)
    Its not like the US which has massive industrial and business models all over the country.
    Maybe not on quite the scale of the US, but wonder around any part of urban China now on Google Earth and one cannot help but be struck by the sheer modernity and scale of the industrial complexes on display.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    It's in the border region. It is close to all 3. You're reading far far too much into it.

    It would not say "Sea of Japan" any more than an earthquake off the Portuguese coast would say "in the Atlantic" - because that description covers a huge area. If it had said "in the Sea of Japan" then people could have thought it happened 5km from the coast of Japan, rather than 400 miles away.

    You're taking things far too literally for your own agenda of scaremongering.

    The situation's bad enough without you adding new posts like they're some wholey credible news source in their own right.

    Dude, I'm not scaremongering. If there was to even be a war, it would be contained within the peninsula. The United States would not be attacked. Britain would not be attacked. The wider world would be generally unharmed and untouched. That is, of course, if North Korea hasn't got some secret cards up its sleeves which has been insinuated by Cameron and The White House - but I'm sure they just misspoke.

    This is an update thread - not a scare-fest, so calm the fork down.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by HumanSupremacist)
    You're not serous, are you?

    China is massively emerging - it knows what its doing. It wealth isn't situated in a small area and that's it. It is emerging - did you expect it to be exactly like the United States right now? The United States' success is steadily dropping, whilst the likes of China and India are rapidly increasing.

    China is a great emerging heavyweight - why on Earth do you think the United States is hesitant and pussy-footing about with North Korea? They invaded Iraq for much much less.
    The costs are far higher. Had Saddam the capacity to level Israel, and had developed chemical biological and nuclear weapons rather than just being suspected of having a development program I doubt we would have seen an invasion. The US is not holding back because of China, if they wanted to invade NK they would have done it back in the 90's when there was no great power patron or one powerful enough to provide meaningful support.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    lol NK will get ABSOLUTELY HAMMERED BY THE US.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    The costs are far higher. Had Saddam the capacity to level Israel, and had developed chemical biological and nuclear weapons rather than just being suspected of having a development program I doubt we would have seen an invasion. The US is not holding back because of China, if they wanted to invade NK they would have done it back in the 90's when there was no great power patron or one powerful enough to provide meaningful support.
    Well the United States will need to invade/attack anyway - so they might as well get it over and done with whilst they have the chance, otherwise they'll soon have a fully nuclear state on their hands, one which has threatened on several occasions to fire nukes at them.

    In my opinion - and in others - it's "now or never".
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Fidel Castro advises friend North Korea against war


    * Castro says Cuba, North Korea will always be friends

    * Calls Korean situation "incredible and absurd"

    HAVANA, April 5 (Reuters) - Former Cuban leader Fidel Castro warned ally North Korea against war on Friday and described the current tensions on the Korean Peninsula as one of the "gravest risks" for nuclear holocaust since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.


    Saying he spoke as a friend, Castro wrote in Cuban state media that North Korea, led by 30-year-old Kim Jong-un, had shown the world its technical prowess and now it was time to remember its duties to others.




    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i feel any war on the south would go somewhat badly for the north koreans, not only because the south, japan, america etc. would stamp on them but imagine the soldiers reaction when they march on seoul and see the contrast... does anyone really think theyd liketo continue serving the fat little man with serious SMS when they see the wealth of the south? that being said i cannot fathom why on earth the south would ever want to join with the north even if it was on their own terms... theres no win in it for them but an armada of poor half starved loco locals joining them, plus imagine the costs of bringing them up to par!?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cl_steele)
    i feel any war on the south would go somewhat badly for the north koreans, not only because the south, japan, america etc. would stamp on them but imagine the soldiers reaction when they march on seoul and see the contrast... does anyone really think theyd liketo continue serving the fat little man with serious SMS when they see the wealth of the south? that being said i cannot fathom why on earth the south would ever want to join with the north even if it was on their own terms... theres no win in it for them but an armada of poor half starved loco locals joining them, plus imagine the costs of bringing them up to par!?
    But having gotten past such a barrier, a united Korea would be a massively successful state - South Korea is already the 12th largest economy and is already greatly successful.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Intresting article -

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...n-attempt.html

    Apparently Kim Jong Un was a target of an assassination attempt which suggests there could be a some kind of power struggle taking place.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AgentSushi)
    Intresting article -

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...n-attempt.html

    Apparently Kim Jong Un was a target of an assassination attempt which suggests there could be a some kind of power struggle taking place.
    Well that only makes the situation even more volatile and serious.

    In my opinion, the United States should invade immediately whilst they can still keep the situation contained.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HumanSupremacist)
    But having gotten past such a barrier, a united Korea would be a massively successful state - South Korea is already the 12th largest economy and is already greatly successful.
    May be but such a barrier, from where im sitting anyway, looks almostcompletely insurmountable... i mean germanys reunification wasnt the cleanest of sailing but compared to that it was love at first side... North Korea has seriously out dated infrastructure, a starving and incredibly poor population leaving aside theyre all brain washed to boot... the social and financial costs of such a merger would be unimaginably large. although as you said a united korea woulddefinitely have potential.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    The US would lose if they tried to invade North Korea. There over 1.1 Million North Korean Troops and Special Forces. There are only 675,000 combined South Korean and US troops in the Korean Peninsula. What we need is for the United States to launch a pre-emtive strike against Pyongyang and all known Nuclear facilities which North Korea have. If North Korea fire rockets at Guam, Japan or Seoul, then the US must proceed with a full Nuclear strike against Pyongyang and bring this to a end. The last thing the US needs is a ground war, over a million screaming Communist Koreans running amok in South Korea. Remember Vietnam. It is the time to destroy that Fat waste of space once and for all.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CelticSymphony67)
    The US would lose if they tried to invade North Korea. There over 1.1 Million North Korean Troops and Special Forces. There are only 675,000 combined South Korean and US troops in the Korean Peninsula. What we need is for the United States to launch a pre-emtive strike against Pyongyang and all known Nuclear facilities which North Korea have. If North Korea fire rockets at Guam, Japan or Seoul, then the US must proceed with a full Nuclear strike against Pyongyang and bring this to a end. The last thing the US needs is a ground war, over a million screaming Communist Koreans running amok in South Korea. Remember Vietnam. It is the time to destroy that Fat waste of space once and for all.
    Why would the U.S hit with a nuclear strike, level North Korea and lay waste to people with radiation for generations to come? They could destroy Pyongyang solely with a preemptive strike using cruise missiles.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CelticSymphony67)
    The US would lose if they tried to invade North Korea. There over 1.1 Million North Korean Troops and Special Forces. There are only 675,000 combined South Korean and US troops in the Korean Peninsula. What we need is for the United States to launch a pre-emtive strike against Pyongyang and all known Nuclear facilities which North Korea have. If North Korea fire rockets at Guam, Japan or Seoul, then the US must proceed with a full Nuclear strike against Pyongyang and bring this to a end. The last thing the US needs is a ground war, over a million screaming Communist Koreans running amok in South Korea. Remember Vietnam. It is the time to destroy that Fat waste of space once and for all.
    Quality over quantity. While the North has a hell of a lot more troops, I find it hard to believe that they have the upper hand with Soviet artillery that's probably older than our mums and dads.

    But I agree - an invasion would lead to a huge death toll for the US, even if they do succeed. Nuclear strikes seem like their best bet, before they invade.

    P.s. I think the Chinese may intervene, because US troops approaching their border with NK would be apparently be a strategic nightmare for them. Can't see how but that's one reason why they're constantly propping up the regime with luxuries
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HumanSupremacist)
    Well that only makes the situation even more volatile and serious.

    In my opinion, the United States should invade immediately whilst they can still keep the situation contained.
    It just seems like your desperate for conflict. Thank God you don't have your finger on the button.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ss_s95)
    Quality over quantity. While the North has a hell of a lot more troops, I find it hard to believe that they have the upper hand with Soviet artillery that's probably older than our mums and dads.

    But I agree - an invasion would lead to a huge death toll for the US, even if they do succeed. Nuclear strikes seem like their best bet, before they invade.

    P.s. I think the Chinese may intervene, because US troops approaching their border with NK would be apparently be a strategic nightmare for them. Can't see how but that's one reason why they're constantly propping up the regime with luxuries
    There are alot of reasons why the US wouldn't order a nuclear strike on Pyongyang or any other place in NK. Geographically it is too close to places like Dandong and Dalian which could be threatened by nuclear material etc.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 16, 2013
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.