Korea

[Calax]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/11/2...T1&iref=BN1

 

Basics are: N. Korea fired about 200 rounds of arty onto a S Korean island, killing one injuring 15 others (two civies).

 

It's in about the same area that a S. Korean ship sank under suspicion that it was a N. Korean torpedo attack.

[RPGmasterBoo]

Same as in the last 50 years...

[Nepenthe]

I'm sure NKs will write it off as a capitalist provocation, in the best peace-loving communist tradition.

[Gorgon]

And I guess they will get away with it as per usual.

 

 

Sometimes I do miss having a TV.

[Humodour]

**** this **** can we get rid of their leaders with some tacticals yet or is the Western world still too lazy?

[Humodour]

Oh, and surprise North Korea announced a secret uranium enrichment facility has been operational for quite a while just a few days back. Oh they're just big bundles of joy aren't they.

[Walsingham]

**** this **** can we get rid of their leaders with some tacticals yet or is the Western world still too lazy?

 

Can't do that, Krez. Not without a UN resolution. Because we all know that the UN is a pure and noble institution and would never haver over such an important issue.

[Malcador]

That and it'll be a bother to China, all that radiation.

[mkreku]

**** this **** can we get rid of their leaders with some tacticals yet or is the Western world still too lazy?

 

Can't do that, Krez. Not without a UN resolution. Because we all know that the UN is a pure and noble institution and would never haver over such an important issue.

There isn't a problem that more bombs won't solve, huh? Just look at Afghanistan! No, wait.. Just look at Iraq! No, wait.. Oh, right.

 

Why spend time and resources trying to actually solve the problem when you can just bomb ****?

[Malcador]

I'm not sure how one could solve the 'situation' with NK (this case it seems to be brinksmanship as usual), really, other than replacing their leadership or something drastic.

[Humodour]

**** this **** can we get rid of their leaders with some tacticals yet or is the Western world still too lazy?

 

Can't do that, Krez. Not without a UN resolution. Because we all know that the UN is a pure and noble institution and would never haver over such an important issue.

 

UN votes against protecting gays from execution

 

Uganda was among 79 countries that voted to remove the reference to sexual orientation from the resolution (condemning the arbitrary and unjustified executions). Among the other countries were Afghanistan, China, Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Most Western countries, including the US, voted in favor of keeping the reference to sexual orientation in place.

 

The US abstained from the final vote to approve the resolution, with diplomats telling the UN General Assembly the US was "dismayed" at the decision.

 

When undemocratic countries outnumber democracies in representation and authoritarian states like Russia and China have veto powers you've got a basically gutless and impotent institution.

 

mkreku: how many more decades should we give for diplomatic solutions to work in North Korea do you think? They have no economy, they subsist entirely on foreign aid from China - a country we have no leverage over on the matter, they've rejected diplomatic overtures for decades, what the **** else do you suggest? Letting them persist in this state of perpetual atrocity for another 50 years? 100 years? What do you suggest would catalyse change in North Korea when the new leader about to take over (****-face's son) is directing military strikes on innocent South Koreans to cement his power? Do you think we have peaceful diplomat in him or his military commanders?

Edited November 23, 2010 by Krezack

[Malcador]

I think that was his point, although that resolution is junk either way. If you're a gay guy they want dead in Saudi, you're dead.

[Gorgon]

**** this **** can we get rid of their leaders with some tacticals yet or is the Western world still too lazy?

 

Can't do that, Krez. Not without a UN resolution. Because we all know that the UN is a pure and noble institution and would never haver over such an important issue.

Didn't the Korean war have a signed letter to go kill things from the UN, or was it called something else back then.

[pmp10]

**** this **** can we get rid of their leaders with some tacticals yet or is the Western world still too lazy?

 

Can't do that, Krez. Not without a UN resolution. Because we all know that the UN is a pure and noble institution and would never haver over such an important issue.

Didn't the Korean war have a signed letter to go kill things from the UN, or was it called something else back then.

That worked only because USSR was boycotting UN meetings at the time.

[mkreku]

mkreku: how many more decades should we give for diplomatic solutions to work in North Korea do you think?

As long as it takes.

[Moose]

I think today is the last attack South Korea will be willing to take, but we'll see.

[Monte Carlo]

All I can think of is the last twenty minutes of Team America: World Police.

[Purkake]

[Volourn]

"Why spend time and resources trying to actually solve the problem when you can just bomb ****?"

 

"As long as it takes."

 

You know, peaceful negotiations works wonders but only if both sides are willing to do it and do it seriously. This, btw, is why Europe and the US mostly get along despite having major differences of opinions. Both sides want peace. Both sides want things done without violence.

 

However, the NK powers to be don't want to negotiate. They don't want peace unless it is under their terms and their terms are simple - they get everythingb including enslaving SK civilians the same way they control the NK civilians.

 

Stuff like this will continue to happen, and any deal negoatiated with NK will just be conviently ignored by the Nk leaders just has they have for the past 50+ years.

Edited November 23, 2010 by Volourn

[Wrath of Dagon]

We can't take military action against NK because China is protecting them. The main danger here is a real war will break out between the 2 Koreas, which could easily escalate into a nuclear war between US and China, since we'll probably have to use tactical nukes against NK artillery aimed at Seoul in case of an all out war. So we need to avoid escalation as far as possible. Taking sanction off NK was a big mistake though, we need to put those back.

[Humodour]

mkreku: how many more decades should we give for diplomatic solutions to work in North Korea do you think?

As long as it takes.

 

Meanwhile the loss of life and human rights atrocities NK commits on its own people as well as South Koreans over time is far larger than what would be produced by replacing their North Korean leadership.

 

That's peace to you?

 

We can't take military action against NK because China is protecting them. The main danger here is a real war will break out between the 2 Koreas, which could easily escalate into a nuclear war between US and China, since we'll probably have to use tactical nukes against NK artillery aimed at Seoul in case of an all out war. So we need to avoid escalation as far as possible. Taking sanction off NK was a big mistake though, we need to put those back.

 

China is not about to start a war with the world over a country that it knows is clearly in the wrong. It values its own stability far, far too much. And nuclear weapons would never be involved unless North Korea decided to launch the single nuke it is known to have (but not known to have a launching device for).

[pmp10]

China is not about to start a war with the world over a country that it knows is clearly in the wrong. It values its own stability far, far too much. And nuclear weapons would never be involved unless North Korea decided to launch the single nuke it is known to have (but not known to have a launching device for).

China does not need to start a war in defense of North Korea.

It's economical influence is such that it can punish those deemed responsible for undermining it's interests without resorting to warfare.

[Humodour]

China is not about to start a war with the world over a country that it knows is clearly in the wrong. It values its own stability far, far too much. And nuclear weapons would never be involved unless North Korea decided to launch the single nuke it is known to have (but not known to have a launching device for).

China does not need to start a war in defense of North Korea.

It's economical influence is such that it can punish those deemed responsible for undermining it's interests without resorting to warfare.

 

China can of course impose economic sanctions but the thing about that is reciprocity. Japan, America, the EU, Australia, can **** China over with reverse sanctions just as easily (which happened recently between China and Japan). If China uses economic manipulation too much, they'll risk isolating themselves economically in a rather detrimental way: countries and businesses will start to seek permanent alternatives with better investment certainty and stability (as happened with rare earths - America and Australia have reopened their old rare earth mines at the behest of Japan and Europe, so now China will lose its 97% monopoly on them due to using them as a political tool). Moreover, when China imposes economic sanctions it by definition is hurting it's own economic growth in the process, typically, as trade is self-evidently a mutual process.

 

The thing is, if North Korea is deemed as enough of a threat or problem, the West (including South-East Asian countries) will forge ahead no matter how many economic threats China throws around because of the sheer number of countries weighed against North Korea (and by extension China, if they deem it necessary to puff their chest up).

[pmp10]

The thing is, if North Korea is deemed as enough of a threat or problem, the West (including South-East Asian countries) will forge ahead no matter how many economic threats China throws around because of the sheer number of countries weighed against North Korea (and by extension China, if they deem it necessary to puff their chest up).

That is unfortunately a very big if, assuming this is even possible.

Just recently South Korean naval vessel was sunk and uranium enrichment plant was open in North Korea.

Neither action sparked international interest.

It will take a much more aggressive actions on the part of North Korea to get major powers to even consider opposing China on economic front, especially outside of UN.

Edited November 24, 2010 by pmp10

[Oblarg]

Where's Lof?