Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

'Close your eyes'

That's what I'm going to do when the ends comes. I also plan to have Richard Wagner's Tristan und Isolde, Prelude playing as the warheads detonate around me (at least I hope I will be vaporized).

Do we even have 30 days left? I wonder.

thomasglee wrote: > The norKs purposely sabotaged a meeting they never intended on
> taking place. As I have said before, the norK's and Chicom are in
> cahoots and up to no good.

That seems right. I constantly have the feeling that NK is being
outplayed diplomatically, over and over.

They thought that they had won a significant diplomatic victory
with their charm offensive during the Olympics.

But then they were shocked when Trump immediately accepted
their invitation to meet. I'm almost certain that they expected
Trump to refuse, and then blame him for refusing the seek peace.
Instead, as you say, they're stuck with having to back out
of a meeting that they proposed but never wanted.

Now in the last week, NK has resumed using the extremely bellicose
language that has been the norm until a few months ago. I believe
that their objective was to incite Trump into returning to
the "little rocket man" language, so that they could cancel
the meeting on the grounds that Trump had been bellicose himself.

But now Trump has shoved that in their faces by very diplomatically
canceling the meeting, and blaming it on NK rhetoric.

NK's core diplomatic objective is to get the sanctions lifted while
continuing nuclear missile development. They succeeded at that
several times before, most recently in 2008, and they're desperately
looking for a way to do it again. And I believe that China's role is
to try to help them do that. Every step they've taken -- every lie,
every ploy, every misleading statement, even destroying the Mantap
test site -- every step has been to force Trump to lift the sanctions
and allow them to continue weapons development.

But Trump has completely outplayed them at every turn. NK is now in
the position of having proposed a meeting and having it accepted,
destroying the Mantap test site they didn't need anyway, and then
getting the meeting canceled with the blame falling on NK. It's a
diplomatic disaster for NK, and they're nowhere near repeating their
2008 diplomatic success.

Now NK has a choice -- a humiliating diplomatic backdown, or risking
war by resuming weapons development -- and leaving the harsh
sanctions in place.

A few weeks ago, when it was all still in the honeymoon state, I wrote
that I believed the meeting would end in accusations and
recriminations, since there were two core objectives that could not be
resolved: NK will not give up its nuclear missile development, having
tortured their own population for three decades, and the US will not
allow NK to achieve a nuclear weapon that can strike the US. These
are core, uncompromisable objectives that cannot be resolved without
war.

Nobody is considering North Korea opting to wage a military assets vs military assets war with the US with the Nork objective being to conquer territory in south korea.

CH86 wrote: > Nobody is considering North Korea opting to wage a military assets
> vs military assets war with the US with the Nork objective being
> to conquer territory in south korea.

Many people claim that a military strike on NK is impossible, because
they would launch a massive attack on Seoul.

The US could make a limited strike on NK nuclear and missile
development sites, and tell NK that if they retaliate, then the next
US strike would flatten Pyongyang, gambling that NK won't retaliate
after all.

John, do you think some kind of military attack is imminent? Couldn't this just be more brinkmanship?

Guest wrote: > John, do you think some kind of military attack is
> imminent? Couldn't this just be more brinkmanship?

No, there are many more steps to go through before military
action.

Doing a "save Seoul" objective in a strike is an impossibility, armies exist to win the war, not to do the impossible.

CH86 wrote:Doing a "save Seoul" objective in a strike is an impossibility, armies exist to win the war, not to do the impossible.

No one expects anyone to 'save Seoul', not even the average Korean.

thomasglee wrote:

CH86 wrote:What is the Chinese objective in Korea then? A Nuclear armed Korea is quite risky to have for China. There is the danger that the Norks might turn on their backers as well as the danger of Japan and South Korea going nuclear and re-militarizing. Also the North Korean threat gives the US reasons to continue maintaining forces in the Region. A demilitarized Korea on China's terms makes far more sense than the current situation. How does China somehow expect to achieve such an arrangement in Korea. The North Korean threat and arsenal seems to lead straight to War or at the very least a general militarization of the region. Any Chinese aggression becomes much harder under such circumstances.

The region is already generally militarized heavily or have you forgot about the DMZ?

Also, more than likely the Chinese will Push the North Koreans to start a war with America at the same time they invade at least Taiwan if not other regions America’s tire down in a war in Korea, it will be difficult for us to also respond and if in Taiwan. There are a lot of reasons why the Chinese want to keep us mired on the Korean Peninsula.

China invading Taiwan would be much easier without the US being involved in Asia than it is with the US in Asia. The North Korean threat gives the perfect Justification of self-defense for US involvement in Asia and a beefing up of US capabilities adjacent to China. Without North Korea we likely would have dismantled most of our bases there long ago.

CH86 wrote:

thomasglee wrote:

CH86 wrote:What is the Chinese objective in Korea then? A Nuclear armed Korea is quite risky to have for China. There is the danger that the Norks might turn on their backers as well as the danger of Japan and South Korea going nuclear and re-militarizing. Also the North Korean threat gives the US reasons to continue maintaining forces in the Region. A demilitarized Korea on China's terms makes far more sense than the current situation. How does China somehow expect to achieve such an arrangement in Korea. The North Korean threat and arsenal seems to lead straight to War or at the very least a general militarization of the region. Any Chinese aggression becomes much harder under such circumstances.

The region is already generally militarized heavily or have you forgot about the DMZ?

Also, more than likely the Chinese will Push the North Koreans to start a war with America at the same time they invade at least Taiwan if not other regions America’s tire down in a war in Korea, it will be difficult for us to also respond and if in Taiwan. There are a lot of reasons why the Chinese want to keep us mired on the Korean Peninsula.

China invading Taiwan would be much easier without the US being involved in Asia than it is with the US in Asia. The North Korean threat gives the perfect Justification of self-defense for US involvement in Asia and a beefing up of US capabilities adjacent to China. Without North Korea we likely would have dismantled most of our bases there long ago.

You can't follow a discussion very well, can you?