TheExecutive
Member
I get that it's propaganda but what does an analyst on Hannity have to do with coming to conclusions about the Trump admin?
I mean isn't there enough fodder for us to beat the Trump admin with without making shit up?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
China warns North Korea: Youre on your own if you go after the United States
- Thread starter Piecake
- Start date
I mean isn't there enough fodder for us to beat the Trump admin with without making shit up?
bonesmccoy
Banned
Friend, I'm with on you US/Western expansionism and aggression but MY JUCHE your statements about NK are idiotic.
Uhh, who exactly thinks this in this thread?
I promise you, whatever NK is now, it would be far worse after US invasion.
BlueLiquid
Member
North Korea's population is so impoverished and under-educated and their infrastructure nearly non-existent that estimates for unification range from $500 billion to $3 trillion. Nobody wants to even split that bill a few ways, let alone South Korea on their own.
Complistic
Member
China don't care
Chaos2Frozen
Member
So you got nothing? North Korea is still as bad as it sounds agree?
I am pretty confident in making the assumption because Trump has only made remarks about dropping devastation on the country, with no regard for any of the consequences of that action or of anything else that would follow.
Are we not discussing the invasion of North Korea as a possible solution to the Korean divide? Are you and others bringing up the human rights problems and crimes against humanity in North Korea not as a means of justifying such a scenario?
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Immediately afterwards? Almost certainly. Long-term for future generations? Almost certainly not.
Not that I think the U.S. should invade.
You should really stop assuming things and putting words people's mouths.
Where did I ever say that I was in favor of invading North Korea? Moreover, even if someone in this topic is in favor of invading North Korea to topple that horrible regime does not mean that they favor Trump and think he is doing this for humanitarian reasons.
Acknowledging that North Korea is an awful and horrible place does not mean that I favor regime change. While I do think North Korea would be better off with another government (I can't imagine any sane person thinking differently), I certainly don't want to pay the costs of making that happen.
I also think you are confused about the reason why we got on this topic. It wasn't because people here were coming up with justifications to invade North Korea. It was because a poster in this thread does not think that North Korea is an awful and horrible place, which I found rather shocking and wanted clarification.
Fair enough, sorry that I made that assumption. It comes up as a talking point, particularly because it was a major one too in the justification of the Iraq War, and my mind goes to making that connection.
I will repeat this as many times as necessary: If the U.S, South Korea, Japan, Australia and North Korea go to war, the chance for reunification of Korea will die along with millions of Koreans, both Northern and Southern, Japanese and potentially Chinese depending on who strikes first. No one will win anything unless one counts earning themselves one of, if not, the largest humanitarian crisis of the 21st century.
P.S. What the U.S. did in the past doesn't make North Korea any less egregious a country in 2017 with its countless abuse of human rights i.e, throwing "enemies of the state" into areas such as Camp 22 for the rest of their and their family's lives (and their kids who are born in said camps' lives) with punishment ranging from torture like waterboarding to death by firearm.
I'm just going to leave this here (You can substitute "Russia" with "North Korea"), Moral J. Equivalence.
P.S. What the U.S. did in the past doesn't make North Korea any less egregious a country in 2017 with its countless abuse of human rights i.e, throwing "enemies of the state" into areas such as Camp 22 for the rest of their and their family's lives (and their kids who are born in said camps' lives) with punishment ranging from torture like waterboarding to death by firearm.
I'm just going to leave this here (You can substitute "Russia" with "North Korea"), Moral J. Equivalence.
The point wasn't that the US doing something makes it ok for someone else to. It's that people want Kim out (again, not a fan of his) for what he's done while thinking the US isn't a terrible empire that needs to end.
There is no point. It's just as pointless as them threatening to nuke the White House. It's just that Guam is closer and more feasible.
We hate them, and they hate us. Therefore, we threaten each other.
The main reason we want to attack them is because they have/making a nuke. The main reason we aren't is because of China
Their whole reason for having a nuke is so they aren't invaded. Not having nukes didn't turn out very well for Saddam or Qaddafi. They know if they ever used one they'd be destroyed.
Once gain, I think people put too much value on Global Times op-eds. I mean -
I mean it's China, and if they wanted that article pulled it would've been gone, but China has ways to send its official positions through newspapers, this is not one of them.
Don't get me wrong, I would guess that China wouldn't go to bat for NK if it's started shit with the US, I think most people would guess that regardless of that article.
Who are those experts and why do they say that?
I mean it's China, and if they wanted that article pulled it would've been gone, but China has ways to send its official positions through newspapers, this is not one of them.
Don't get me wrong, I would guess that China wouldn't go to bat for NK if it's started shit with the US, I think most people would guess that regardless of that article.
The last thing China wants is to destabilize the region.
They're not actually going to attack Guam. It's just an American territory with a military base that's close enough to threaten. The point is to say something vaguely threatening.
Except that China's main goal in the Korean peninsula for the last few decades is to keep it as stable as possible.
It's an alternate way of relaying a message that China doesn't want to make too official. If it was an official communication, then they force North Korea to respond to it. By not making it so formal, they let their intentions known to all the players without upsetting anything.
Kim Jong Un views maintaining a presence as a nuclear threat as a survival strategy, as opposed to his father's use of the nuclear program as a bargaining chip. For the young Kim, being seen as erratic and dangerous is the only way to preserve the regime.
Shadow Puppetry
Member
Meanwhile, Trump just told the governor of Guam he's going to be very famous from the NK threat.
Mr. President, as the governor of Guam and as an American citizen, I have never felt more safe or confident with you at the helm, Gov. Eddie Baza Calvo (R) said, according to a video posted to his Facebook page.
Dont worry about a thing, President Trump responded. They should have had me eight years ago I have to say, Eddie, youre going to become extremely famous. All over the world theyre talking about Guam and theyre talking about you.
And your tourism, I can say this, your tourism is going to go up like tenfold with the expenditure of no money, so I congratulate you, Trump can be heard saying over the phone. It looks beautiful, you know Im watching its such a big story in the news. It just looks like a beautiful place.
Mr. President, as the governor of Guam and as an American citizen, I have never felt more safe or confident with you at the helm, Gov. Eddie Baza Calvo (R) said, according to a video posted to his Facebook page.
Dont worry about a thing, President Trump responded. They should have had me eight years ago I have to say, Eddie, youre going to become extremely famous. All over the world theyre talking about Guam and theyre talking about you.
And your tourism, I can say this, your tourism is going to go up like tenfold with the expenditure of no money, so I congratulate you, Trump can be heard saying over the phone. It looks beautiful, you know Im watching its such a big story in the news. It just looks like a beautiful place.
"Yeah, we overthrow foreign governments, torture, literally blow up entire cities, install fascist dictators but at least I can say what I want about the government and choose which member of the ruling class gets to run things!"
PoorChoices
Member
That makes sense.
Who the fuck wants to visit Guam now that it's a potential target for bombing?
I mean do people go :
NK : I will sink Guam into the ocean!
DJT : No, you won't
tourists : oh yeah, we can go on vacation in Guam!
Yeah, there are ways that China do it, to varying level of "officialness". This is not one of them. And they don't use that kind of language. They generally don't play games, when they put out a message, they want the people understand that.
Note that even the article kinda pussyfoot around the issue. Even the unnamed experts only say that it's "probably aligned", not that it's the official word of CPC on this issue. It's there because it's a nice quote, and that's the Global Times for you.
Me and the wife saw this on Nat Geo a couple months ago. Could not believe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlJUGZPanB8
Lyon N. Laap
Member
I honestly don't understand what you're trying to do here.
Like, I'm fine with criticizing the US. We've got a lot of problems, probably much more than most of other Western nations. We deserve to get called out for the terrible things we've done and are doing.
And I get that you're saying you don't like the North Korean government.
But you're dangerously close to using whataboutsim and personal interpretations of reality to defend one of the most repressive dictatorships on the planet. One, despite its every effort to conceal abuse and suffocate internal criticism, that has widely documented evidence and testimony on just how badly that treat their populace.
There's really no reason to do that when you can absolutely call out both countries for the sheer idiocy and disregard for human life that these threats are evidence of, even if neither country is seriously considering going through with anything.
Edit;
To make this post more on topic, even if this isn't a reliable source on the official position of the Chinese leadership, I agree that it probably isn't too far from what they actually think on the situation.
NK is far more useful to China as a buffer to South and subsequent Western influence. A buffer state isn't useful if it deliberately causes friction and outright starts a war. But on the same note, as it is now it still serves its role, and China would never stand for a US first strike on a strategic ally that sits right on its border.
So neutrality, potentially with occupation of parts of North Korea to promote "stability" during a war of NK aggression, makes sense. They lose a no longer useful tool at worst. Active hostilities against a US-prompted war also makes sense.
China will keep its options open for what is best for China.
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
If NK attack Guam the US couldn't just launch a nuke back, that's a war crime.
I think that the general idea is that if the paper wasn't reflecting the opinion of Beijing, then this editorial wouldn't have been published at all. China wants this problem to go away, but at the same time, they don't want to commit to any open criticism of Pyongyang. They already have an ongoing mess with India that's of higher priority so they'll want to concentrate their diplomatic resources there instead.
As I said, if Beijing didn't want that shit published it would have been pulled, but there's a rather big difference between "probably aligned" and "Beijing warns Pyongyang". This is not how China warn Pyongyang, this is not even how China let the western world know it warns Pyongyang. This is how the Global Times get traffic.
And China openly criticize Pyongyang all the time.
callhitman
Member
I feel China is more worried then people think. Everyone knows that even the best case scenario is all bad if there is war. Trump is stupid enough to still strike first.
EYEL1NER
Member
Yellow Dust season will feel like a year-round occurrence.
bengraven
Member
It wasn't going to happen anyway.
AlimNassor
Banned
China is Tsun_Tsun for the US. At the end of the day and they'll never admit such but, they love the US and don't want us as enemies.
An active insurgency across Asia would put everyone Regional Power in a cold sweat. China does not want this, China does not want America at it's door steps. This is going to cause China to hate us, South Korea to hate us too,
An active insurgency across Asia would put everyone Regional Power in a cold sweat. China does not want this, China does not want America at it's door steps. This is going to cause China to hate us, South Korea to hate us too,
Chaos2Frozen
Member
It's not 'dangerously' close, he's literally doing that:
Ask him what makes North Korea "Not as bad as it sounds" and he whataboutism straight into US.
If US gives up its bases China would just take over after we left.
China isn't going to invade South Korea (who would now controls the whole peninsula).
Their goal is to use their influence and might to dominate the region. It isn't to actually physically dominate and control other nations. I don't see how invading Korea benefits China at all. Not to mention that there would obviously be some sort of military or economic response from the US
Communism
Auto_aim1
MeisaMcCaffrey
As a major trading partner they shouldn't have let NK come this far wrt nuclear weapon technology. I feel like they have this strategy in place with North Korea and Pakistan to indirectly bully countries which are a threat to its dominance in the region. Destablize was probably not the right word to use but I feel like China is okay with NK advancing its missile tech and they don't want to do anything about it.
Dreams-Visions
Member
I'm sure Jeff6851 views this as simple western propaganda. Gotta keep apologizing for NK.
They are definitely not okay with NK having a nuclear bomb and missile technology. I am really not sure where would you get that idea. China has been very clear, both in statements and in action that it strongly oppose it.
Also, China didn't let NK have the bomb, I don't know, some people claim that they could've stopped them from getting it, but I'm not really sure how, well, short of attacking them I guess.
That second part has been true for 40 years so it would be pretty sneaky for the Americans to use that as a bargaining chip
Imperfected
Member
This and the Australian statement are basically just confirmation from the adults in the room that defensive treaties continue to operate the way they always have.
"If you attack another nation we are not beholden to defend you; if they attack you, we are," isn't exactly a sensational statement from any party involved, but I guess it's worthwhile to re-assert that, yes, this is the way a defensive alliance works.
"If you attack another nation we are not beholden to defend you; if they attack you, we are," isn't exactly a sensational statement from any party involved, but I guess it's worthwhile to re-assert that, yes, this is the way a defensive alliance works.
Frozenprince
Banned
Okay I keep seeing this. Every thread.
Yes. North Korea has many emplacements along the DMZ that can be pointed towards Seoul, estimates generally around 1,100.
But only around 400 or so actually function, most would be taken out before they could even fire a shot.
Yes people will die, yes they will get some shelling pff into the city.
But they are NOT capable of glassing the city. And they sure as shit are not using a nuke directly next to their OWN borders that would be madness.
The Korean War where Red China/Soviet Union fought a proxy war with the US in order to split the country. MacArthur wanted to conquer all of Korea and disobeyed Truman's orders to not risk nuclear catastrophe. Entering open conflict with the Chinese was dangerous, because they were outnumbered and also the Cold War. The USA was beaten back and bloodied in a horrible fashion with a force un-equipped and under-manned to fight China's increased support as they drew closer to the border.
That's my basic understanding.
Honestly, it's mostly because they largely inherited North Korea from the Soviet Union. For most of the Cold War the Soviet Union was North Korea's main ally whereas relations with China were more frosty. After the Cold War, there's a bit of pan-communist camaraderie going on, but it's more because North Korea acts as a buffer from the American bases in South Korea. Realistically, China doesn't actually want anything from North Korea; the status quo with lessened tensions would be the ideal state for them.