What does this SOP actually get North Korea, though? Just a consolidation of power for the regime, because there is an omnipresent outside threat?
This time it gets them fucked.
True, but this last statement isn’t more of a “Oh yeah?!? You can’t tell us what to do, we’re testing anyways!”. It’s basically setting themselves up for war if their bluff ( which I’m thinking it is, I agree on the SOP part ) is called. Basically going from “I’m gonna buy a gun if you don’t give me money” to “I’m gonna shoot your ass if you don’t give me money”.
Pretty odd words that I think they’re hinging on the fact that the US is spread pretty thin right now, IMHO. But the US ain’t passing sanctions now, it’s a pretty perturbed UN with some PO’d nearby nations (even China).
Gawd, wtf is going on? :)
Gordon: basically. Kim’s overriding goal is maintaining the power of his regime. There’s no evidence he really particularly wants to use a nuke, and there’s every reason to believe he doesn’t want war - he just wants to stay in power.
croman: here’s the thing - we won’t call their bluff. We might pass some sanctions, but they won’t be very big ones - China and Russia will see to that. We certainly wont’ retaliate with any form of military action - not even just a quick bombing campaign.
What will Russia and China do if stiff sanctions are passed? I don’t think they can do anything. Russia especially.
North Korea’s rhetoric is ALWAYS that finger-poking-in-the-eye bad. That’s not even unusual for them. They constantly threaten hot death for such horrible crimes as troop maneuvers, a carrier arriving in the general area, or Japan continuing to exist (they REALLY hate Japan). At this point I don’t think they realize (or care) how such stupid statements come across. However, diplomats who’ve dealt with North Korea are so used to such talk it’s just background noise. “Yes, yes, you want to kill us all and dine on our bones, next question.”
http://www.nk-news.net/ has recaps of some of their more bloody-minded public statements.
They can stop them from being passed Theodore.
Just a question asking for opinions, but if/when we don’t call their bluff and the UN passes some light sanctions that we (USA) are a part of… a month from elections… where the government is generally distrusted… where Iraq is compared to the current situation… when the current administration line is against ANY forms of appeasement… a foreign government threatens war… and has nuclear weapons…
Won’t we call their bluff?
But nobody cares about the UN. Even UN-sympathetic nations (ie. everybody but the US) would only unwillingly go along with any UN resolutions that bar sanctions against NK. If no proposal for sanctions gets passed, I think a lot of people will go ahead anyway, albeit in more sneaky ways. Maybe I’m just dreaming at this point, I don’t know.
I am not quite so sure the political calculus for a North Korean initiated war would be so easy to examine. It would probably be fair to assume that South Korea would be targeted, and that would immediately involve the US. But beyond that would China really want to send troops into NK short of being specifically targeted themselves? Would the Japanese be welcome on the pennisula in any capacity even if they had a standing army? While the UN is already involved, does it have the mandate and the capacity to prosecute a war in any meaningful way? Would the UN member states really want to get themselves involved in what is largely a regional war. Personally, I doubt that many member nations are commited enough to nuclear nonproliferation to send troops and resources in a Afgan/Desert Storm sort of way. Considering the inaction in regard to India and Pakistan, and the possibility of having to deal with Iran in the near future, I would bet that it would be difficult for most nations to have such a determined resolve. The Russians may be able to come through in a pinch, but I imagine that it would be a logistical hardship unless otherwise aided by its neighbors.
Doing nothing feels a whole lot like appeasement to me – same basic “it would be painful to do anything else” mindset. But the situation keeps getting worse.
Very very true, given the current status-quo with North Korea I don’t think ANYthing big will be done with any kind of UN force. Hell, you could have Kim and Bush fist fighting in the middle of a UN security meeting and most member states would just shrug. Any Iraq-style resolution would just present those issues. The Japanese will not be welcomed on the penisula, member states will ( more than understandably ) worry about their own, etc…
The thing I’m referring to is the North’s ‘Declaration of War’. Which in my mind means 'The bombardment of Sueol ( How the Fuck do you spell that word!?!! <:< ) . Then, all chips are down. Kinda brings to mind Flavor Flaves song “9-11 is a joke in your town”.
If I’m North Korea, I’m not as worried about U.N. forces. I’m worried about telling George Bush, “If you do X (sanctions or press us any harder), then we will take military action.”
Your basically telling someone who wants an excuse to drop bombs on you that if they take a nonmilitary action, you take military action that gives them an excuse that the world will recognize to drop bombs on you.
Arguments that the U.S. is spread to thin are quite risky in my mind; the U.S. may be spread too thin to engage in another “They didn’t attack anyone, but let’s go police their country,” type of action ala Iraq, where use of force is limited in part due to the nature of the conflict and our inability to justifyably use full scale carpet bombing. Part of why we are spread “too thin” is because we are too thin to do the Iraq-like tasks that our military is not designed for. If North Korea attacks South Korea, for example, I’m not sure there would be any limitations on the savagery we would inflict on North Korea (i.e. the gloves would come off a hell of a lot more than they did in Iraq, what our military is historically designed for), and the South Koreans would also be manning the lines in a volume that simply is not present in Iraq.
It just seems a bit goofy.
Sorry I missed this bit of idiocy.
If someone posts two links to a weath of data about an aspect of the topic, I am somehow wrong for asking for a synopsis? I did not qualify my request - I simply don’t have time to read and digest that material.
RichVR’s response was perfect. I don’t think it was necessary to go as in-depth as those links, but his point (I think) that nukes can be made quite small and the science behind it demonstrates that is well-taken.
Thank you Rich.
Just my opinion, but the US will never engage in carpet bombing. Ever. Again.
We’re spread to thin. Period.
Wow, there’s a MEMRI for everything.
Well, to be fair, I don’t think we will honestly engage in carpet bombing ever again because the political reaction now is not what it was 60 or 30 years ago. I do not think it is because we are spread too thin.
Again, having to fight a controlled war in some ways is more difficult and manpower consuming than just pounding the snot out of someone. We’re spread too thin, for example, to police Iraq, Afghanistan, and North Korea. I’m not sure we’re spread to thin to knock the snot out of North Korea in a real, honest to god, the South Koreans are pouring over the border while the North Koreans pour over in the other direction war. I really do not know the answer (as if it is “knowable” for sure by most civilians), but it seems to me the difference in the type of conflict would lead to a difference in the type and amount of force required, including the amount of boots needed on the ground for the next 5-10 years.
Of course, I suppose in real world, absolute global power terms, we’re also not as worried about going too far and having Iran get into the struggle as we are having 10 million Chinese soldiers pour over the border when we go too far. Or maybe I just saw that on an episode of MASH. I’m starting to get confused.
I don’t think croman knows what carpet bombing means.
Actually I doubt that we have the hardware to conduct conventional carpet bombing of the scale of the Vietnam War ( more tonnage than WW2, who knew! 2,756,941 tonnes!). Heck I wonder if we even have the hardware to conduct the same level of operation as in Gulf War I ( 136,755 bombs ).