Offical Korean War Thread (2 Viewers)

[Gawain]

At what point do we decide we've had enough of the threats from this lunatic and just go in and gut his military? If he's ever going to actually do something, at some point it could be too late for us to act...

About the same time China wouldn't go absolutely ape#### if we acted without some sort of over-the-top provocation.

 

[GroveDiesel]

At what point do we decide we've had enough of the threats from this lunatic and just go in and gut his military? If he's ever going to actually do something, at some point it could be too late for us to act...

So you still think the Iraq War was a good idea?

 

[Otis]

At what point do we decide we've had enough of the threats from this lunatic and just go in and gut his military? If he's ever going to actually do something, at some point it could be too late for us to act...

So you still think the Iraq War was a good idea?

At what point do the threats here become serious enough? Or so we just wait until there are warheads in the air? I mean we have to be sure, right?

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

At what point do we decide we've had enough of the threats from this lunatic and just go in and gut his military? If he's ever going to actually do something, at some point it could be too late for us to act...

So you still think the Iraq War was a good idea?

At what point do the threats here become serious enough? Or so we just wait until there are warheads in the air? I mean we have to be sure, right?

He would have to get them close enough to launch. As soon as he mobilizes them he will be in our cross hairs. Until then we call his bluff. He's just an attention whore.

 

[Sinn Fein]

At what point do we decide we've had enough of the threats from this lunatic and just go in and gut his military? If he's ever going to actually do something, at some point it could be too late for us to act...

So you still think the Iraq War was a good idea?

At what point do the threats here become serious enough? Or so we just wait until there are warheads in the air? I mean we have to be sure, right?

Gonna have to see "Made in Korea" on those bad boys.

 

[jamny]

Where does China stand on all this? They're like the 800 pound gorilla in the room.

 

[johnnycakes]

Where does China stand on all this? They're like the 800 pound gorilla in the room.

DPRK is poor. China doesn't like poor right now. If I were Kum of Soom Yung Guy, I wouldn't be counting on much support from China, especially if doing so would make it more difficult for China to get its hands on more of our dollars.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

If North Korea and South Korea go to war, wouldn't they just cancel each other out?

 

[NCCommish]

At what point do we decide we've had enough of the threats from this lunatic and just go in and gut his military? If he's ever going to actually do something, at some point it could be too late for us to act...

They have enough conventional firepower along the DMZ to wipe out thousands if not tens of thousands of South Koreans in minutes. Oh we'd win in the long run but it will be very, very bloody. 100's of thousands of casualties on both sides of the line. We need to be real damn sure before we kick that off.

 

[sporthenry]

What did Austin, Texas do?

 

[bills025]

North Korea is making a serious effort to build up it's naval strength too.

N Korea launches new battleship.

Check out the front end armament.

I'm impressed by the reenforcement of the stern that keeps it from sinking when you put weight in the back.

Picture #5 looks like the badguy's shooting from Commando. What kind of modern military doesn't aim?

 

[johnnycakes]

If 0bama really wanted to play the game, those stealth bombers should have dropped their dummy bombs a lot closer to Pyongyang, in DPRK territory.

 

[NCCommish]

If 0bama really wanted to play the game, those stealth bombers should have dropped their dummy bombs a lot closer to Pyongyang, in DPRK territory.

The real issue here is junior doesn't have much experience and may not understand how one really plays the brinkmanship game. He has already used a big threat by cutting off the direct line. Too early for that. And now they are saying they are in a state of war with SK. Again way too early for that. And the new guy in SK, along with the people, seem to be tired of the crap they aren't going to beg them to back down. So jr Dear Leader has already used all his provocation points up. He really doesn't have anywhere to go. Now he is going to have to either get a deal or do something bigger. If he goes bigger he may bite off more than he can chew and China will have to pretty quickly make up it's mind on what is in their best interest. Keeping the idiot in power or trading with the west? I'm thinking money wins that argument. If their economy takes a hit and the bubble bursts they will have a real crap storm on their hands domestically. Not sure they like junior enough to chance it.

 

[johnnycakes]

If 0bama really wanted to play the game, those stealth bombers should have dropped their dummy bombs a lot closer to Pyongyang, in DPRK territory.

The real issue here is junior doesn't have much experience and may not understand how one really plays the brinkmanship game. He has already used a big threat by cutting off the direct line. Too early for that. And now they are saying they are in a state of war with SK. Again way too early for that. And the new guy in SK, along with the people, seem to be tired of the crap they aren't going to beg them to back down. So jr Dear Leader has already used all his provocation points up. He really doesn't have anywhere to go. Now he is going to have to either get a deal or do something bigger. If he goes bigger he may bite off more than he can chew and China will have to pretty quickly make up it's mind on what is in their best interest. Keeping the idiot in power or trading with the west? I'm thinking money wins that argument. If their economy takes a hit and the bubble bursts they will have a real crap storm on their hands domestically. Not sure they like junior enough to chance it.

I think it's not even close. If push comes to shove, China will side with us over DPRK.

 

[NCCommish]

If 0bama really wanted to play the game, those stealth bombers should have dropped their dummy bombs a lot closer to Pyongyang, in DPRK territory.

The real issue here is junior doesn't have much experience and may not understand how one really plays the brinkmanship game. He has already used a big threat by cutting off the direct line. Too early for that. And now they are saying they are in a state of war with SK. Again way too early for that. And the new guy in SK, along with the people, seem to be tired of the crap they aren't going to beg them to back down. So jr Dear Leader has already used all his provocation points up. He really doesn't have anywhere to go. Now he is going to have to either get a deal or do something bigger. If he goes bigger he may bite off more than he can chew and China will have to pretty quickly make up it's mind on what is in their best interest. Keeping the idiot in power or trading with the west? I'm thinking money wins that argument. If their economy takes a hit and the bubble bursts they will have a real crap storm on their hands domestically. Not sure they like junior enough to chance it.

I think it's not even close. If push comes to shove, China will side with us over DPRK.

That's a big bet to make but I do agree with you.

 

[johnnycakes]

If 0bama really wanted to play the game, those stealth bombers should have dropped their dummy bombs a lot closer to Pyongyang, in DPRK territory.

The real issue here is junior doesn't have much experience and may not understand how one really plays the brinkmanship game. He has already used a big threat by cutting off the direct line. Too early for that. And now they are saying they are in a state of war with SK. Again way too early for that. And the new guy in SK, along with the people, seem to be tired of the crap they aren't going to beg them to back down. So jr Dear Leader has already used all his provocation points up. He really doesn't have anywhere to go. Now he is going to have to either get a deal or do something bigger. If he goes bigger he may bite off more than he can chew and China will have to pretty quickly make up it's mind on what is in their best interest. Keeping the idiot in power or trading with the west? I'm thinking money wins that argument. If their economy takes a hit and the bubble bursts they will have a real crap storm on their hands domestically. Not sure they like junior enough to chance it.

I think it's not even close. If push comes to shove, China will side with us over DPRK.

That's a big bet to make but I do agree with you.

Yup. Things in China have changed A LOT since the Korean War. China was a fairly new country back in the early '50's under Mao's leadership against an establishment that did not provide any hope or opportunity to millions in the lower class. Back then, it was easy for China to sympathize with the North because the perception was the North was fighting a similar battle. That is absolutely not the case any more. China now has a lot to lose by taking up sides against us... I just don't see it happening so they can help a dirt-poor country whose own citizens aren't even welcome in China.

 

[Fennis]

Would China go to war over North Korea? Probably not. Would they retaliate in other ways? Absolutely. I think they would likely provoke other Asian countries (Taiwan, Japan, Philippines -take your pick) and cause some level of economic retaliation.

 

[Fennis]

At what point do we decide we've had enough of the threats from this lunatic and just go in and gut his military? If he's ever going to actually do something, at some point it could be too late for us to act...

So you still think the Iraq War was a good idea?

At what point do the threats here become serious enough? Or so we just wait until there are warheads in the air? I mean we have to be sure, right?

Gonna have to see "Made in Korea" on those bad boys.

You'll probably see made in Pakistan on them.

 

[Courtjester]

I think China's reponse would be very interesting as well. I could honestly see, if something broke out, China (under the guise they want to join with the USA and South Korea in getting rid of this guy) helping us out from the North and then using this as an excuse for some form of land grab.

Maybe the DMZ line is adjusted north a bit, but all you are left with is South Korea as being just all of Korea and most of the North now just being part of China.

The only thing that may stop this is they would have to ship all those poor people from the gulags to the South.

 

[johnnycakes]

Would China go to war over North Korea? Probably not. Would they retaliate in other ways? Absolutely. I think they would likely provoke other Asian countries (Taiwan, Japan, Philippines -take your pick) and cause some level of economic retaliation.

China isn't going to get Japan to do anything. Nor will they incite the Phillipines, nor Singapore. The worst I see China doing to us is currency manipulation, which they tend to do anyhow. But they aren't going to align any other countries against us, especially not one like Japan, and certainly not over DPRK.

 

[NCCommish]

Would China go to war over North Korea? Probably not. Would they retaliate in other ways? Absolutely. I think they would likely provoke other Asian countries (Taiwan, Japan, Philippines -take your pick) and cause some level of economic retaliation.

China isn't going to get Japan to do anything. Nor will they incite the Phillipines, nor Singapore. The worst I see China doing to us is currency manipulation, which they tend to do anyhow. But they aren't going to align any other countries against us, especially not one like Japan, and certainly not over DPRK.

I think he meant China would provoke those countries over things like disputed islands and such. But really I doubt they would and if they did it's because they intended to anyway and this just gave them cover.

 

[Fennis]

Would China go to war over North Korea? Probably not. Would they retaliate in other ways? Absolutely. I think they would likely provoke other Asian countries (Taiwan, Japan, Philippines -take your pick) and cause some level of economic retaliation.

China isn't going to get Japan to do anything. Nor will they incite the Phillipines, nor Singapore. The worst I see China doing to us is currency manipulation, which they tend to do anyhow. But they aren't going to align any other countries against us, especially not one like Japan, and certainly not over DPRK.

I think he meant China would provoke those countries over things like disputed islands and such. But really I doubt they would and if they did it's because they intended to anyway and this just gave them cover.

China is not going to let the US violate it interests in Asia, while they dont want a war with the US, they will not sit and do nothing while the US has troops heading towards it borders. They will HAVE to show their power and capacilities.

 

[johnnycakes]

Would China go to war over North Korea? Probably not. Would they retaliate in other ways? Absolutely. I think they would likely provoke other Asian countries (Taiwan, Japan, Philippines -take your pick) and cause some level of economic retaliation.

China isn't going to get Japan to do anything. Nor will they incite the Phillipines, nor Singapore. The worst I see China doing to us is currency manipulation, which they tend to do anyhow. But they aren't going to align any other countries against us, especially not one like Japan, and certainly not over DPRK.

I think he meant China would provoke those countries over things like disputed islands and such. But really I doubt they would and if they did it's because they intended to anyway and this just gave them cover.

China is not going to let the US violate it interests in Asia, while they dont want a war with the US, they will not sit and do nothing while the US has troops heading towards it borders. They will HAVE to show their power and capacilities.

See, I don't think China is still as tight with DPRK as people here seem to think. I think the Hermit Kingom is exactly that... Pretty much isolated right now and I don't see anyone lifting a finger to help them outside of possibly SELLING them weapons which they had better have cash money with which to pay. Further, I think the Chinese leaders realize they have a lot more to gain, both personally and as a country, by keeping as normal relations with us as possible. They may test the waters with us over territorial disputes with Japan, but the difference there is they are contesting their own territorial claims, not those of another country.

 

[Fennis]

Would China go to war over North Korea? Probably not. Would they retaliate in other ways? Absolutely. I think they would likely provoke other Asian countries (Taiwan, Japan, Philippines -take your pick) and cause some level of economic retaliation.

China isn't going to get Japan to do anything. Nor will they incite the Phillipines, nor Singapore. The worst I see China doing to us is currency manipulation, which they tend to do anyhow. But they aren't going to align any other countries against us, especially not one like Japan, and certainly not over DPRK.

I think he meant China would provoke those countries over things like disputed islands and such. But really I doubt they would and if they did it's because they intended to anyway and this just gave them cover.

China is not going to let the US violate it interests in Asia, while they dont want a war with the US, they will not sit and do nothing while the US has troops heading towards it borders. They will HAVE to show their power and capacilities.

See, I don't think China is still as tight with DPRK as people here seem to think. I think the Hermit Kingom is exactly that... Pretty much isolated right now and I don't see anyone lifting a finger to help them outside of possibly SELLING them weapons which they had better have cash money with which to pay. Further, I think the Chinese leaders realize they have a lot more to gain, both personally and as a country, by keeping as normal relations with us as possible. They may test the waters with us over territorial disputes with Japan, but the difference there is they are contesting their own territorial claims, not those of another country.

I agree China inst tight with North Korea. I am sure they wouldn’t mind a different government in North Korea. But it isn't about North Korea. It is about letting the US know it isn’t the only regional power in Asia and more importantly, the US cannot unilaterally do what it wants in China's backyard.In any case, without a significant first strike from North Korea, I don’t think we will attack North Korea. And I really hope it doesn’t come to that.

 

[timschochet]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese.

This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

 

[johnnycakes]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese. This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

 

[Fennis]

"The anti-missile issue has a direct bearing on global and regional balance and stability. It also concerns mutual strategic interests between countries," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei

They strongly condemn anti-missile deployments in South Korea. And you guys act think they will be supportive of an invasion/bombing of North Korea. There is no chance. Every country protects their interests and China is no different. The US attacking an Asian country, espeically a nominal ally, is the farthest things from Chinese interests.

 

[timschochet]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese. This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

 

[Fennis]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese. This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

you just disagreed with yourself one post apart

 

[timschochet]

"The anti-missile issue has a direct bearing on global and regional balance and stability. It also concerns mutual strategic interests between countries," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei They strongly condemn anti-missile deployments in South Korea. And you guys act think they will be supportive of an invasion/bombing of North Korea. There is no chance. Every country protects their interests and China is no different. The US attacking an Asian country, espeically a nominal ally, is the farthest things from Chinese interests.

If North Korea actually attacks South Korea, China's attitude will change. But until that extremely unlikely event, China will be vocally on the side of North Korea.But this is all a show anyhow. China will never let North Korea actually attack. And we won't do anything unless there is an attack. Nothing will come of any of this.

 

[timschochet]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese. This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

you just disagreed with yourself one post apart

How so?

 

[johnnycakes]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese. This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

We can agree to disagree, then. I would agree with your assessment if we were talking about a South Korean/American first strike, but not in response to a DPRK first strike. And I would also agree that China has probably also told us, in no uncertain terms, that any use of nukes by us, even in response to DPRK's first use of nukes, would be a game changer. So any speculation of us using nukes over there really is off base. But if we're talking about our use of conventional forces and weapons against a DPRK first strike... This ain't 1950 anymore with Mao having to flex his newly acquired muscles in order to show the world who's boss on that side of the world. If we could win with convention forces in response to a DPRK first strike, I think any objection by China would be more symbolic than anything.

 

[[icon]]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese. This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

People need to pay attention to these two. Johnnycakes bought a bride from china and Timmy ate at hunan palace last week. These guys know stuff.

 

[johnnycakes]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese. This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

People need to pay attention to these two. Johnnycakes bought a bride from china and Timmy ate at hunan palace last week. These guys know stuff.

Well, at least I've been to China, quite a few times, and I am in regular contact with people on the mainland, and I get the buzz from Chinese innerwebs, too.

 

[Fennis]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese. This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

you just disagreed with yourself one post apart

How so?

you said if it gets out of hand, China stands with the US. You then say, they wont allow an invasion in North Korea. That doesnt sound like standing with the US.

 

[timschochet]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese. This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

you just disagreed with yourself one post apart

How so?

you said if it gets out of hand, China stands with the US. You then say, they wont allow an invasion in North Korea. That doesnt sound like standing with the US.

They will be on our side in ultimately preventing it from getting out of hand, and they will be on our side if it does get out of hand and we bomb North Korea (with conventional bombs). They may not say so publicly but they will privately go along with it. So long as we don't invade.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese.

This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

you just disagreed with yourself one post apart

How so?

you said if it gets out of hand, China stands with the US. You then say, they wont allow an invasion in North Korea. That doesnt sound like standing with the US.

They will be on our side in ultimately preventing it from getting out of hand, and they will be on our side if it does get out of hand and we bomb North Korea (with conventional bombs). They may not say so publicly but they will privately go along with it. So long as we don't invade.

I sure hope Obama has you on speed dial. Your insight into the Chinese governments private thoughts is uncanny.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

At what point do we decide we've had enough of the threats from this lunatic and just go in and gut his military? If he's ever going to actually do something, at some point it could be too late for us to act...

Yes, the wise course of action is obviously to start a war with North Korea that will almost certainly result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of South Koreans and would be viewed by China as a direct provocation. The alternative -- ignoring North Korea's bluster -- is just unthinkable.

 

[timschochet]

I sure hope Obama has you on speed dial. Your insight into the Chinese governments private thoughts is uncanny.

It ain't rocket science Cliff. Figuring out the Chinese is easy. Solving the Toronto Raptors- now that's difficult.

 

[Politician Spock]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese. This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

you just disagreed with yourself one post apart

How so?

you said if it gets out of hand, China stands with the US. You then say, they wont allow an invasion in North Korea. That doesnt sound like standing with the US.

They will be on our side in ultimately preventing it from getting out of hand, and they will be on our side if it does get out of hand and we bomb North Korea (with conventional bombs). They may not say so publicly but they will privately go along with it. So long as we don't invade.

China will go along as long as doing so doesn't impede their interests. China however is no fan of the US being the world police. If you recall, before 9/11, the biggest international issue at the time was the incident where the Chinese pilot Wong Wei was killed when our spy plane turned unexpectedly knocking his plane out of he sky and forcing an emergency landing of our spy plane in their country. The spying between the US and China today is far more active than it has ever been in history. Some would say that technically we are already at war with each other, but instead of firing bullets at each other, we are firing cyber code at each other.

 

[Otis]

At what point do we decide we've had enough of the threats from this lunatic and just go in and gut his military? If he's ever going to actually do something, at some point it could be too late for us to act...

Yes, the wise course of action is obviously to start a war with North Korea that will almost certainly result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of South Koreans and would be viewed by China as a direct provocation. The alternative -- ignoring North Korea's bluster -- is just unthinkable.

What if it's not just bluster this time?

 

[johnnycakes]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese.

This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

you just disagreed with yourself one post apart

How so?

you said if it gets out of hand, China stands with the US. You then say, they wont allow an invasion in North Korea. That doesnt sound like standing with the US.

They will be on our side in ultimately preventing it from getting out of hand, and they will be on our side if it does get out of hand and we bomb North Korea (with conventional bombs). They may not say so publicly but they will privately go along with it. So long as we don't invade.

China will go along as long as doing so doesn't impede their interests. China however is no fan of the US being the world police. If you recall, before 9/11, the biggest international issue at the time was the incident where the Chinese pilot Wong Wei was killed when our spy plane turned unexpectedly knocking his plane out of he sky and forcing an emergency landing of our spy plane in their country.

The spying between the US and China today is far more active than it has ever been in history. Some would say that technically we are already at war with each other, but instead of firing bullets at each other, we are firing cyber code at each other.

But I believe the quality of the spying is different between the Chinese and us. Our spying is primarily based upon national security interests. Theirs is more heavily tilted towards industrial espionage. That may be the best indicator right there of what each country's biggest priority is.

 

[Politician Spock]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese.

This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

you just disagreed with yourself one post apart

How so?

you said if it gets out of hand, China stands with the US. You then say, they wont allow an invasion in North Korea. That doesnt sound like standing with the US.

They will be on our side in ultimately preventing it from getting out of hand, and they will be on our side if it does get out of hand and we bomb North Korea (with conventional bombs). They may not say so publicly but they will privately go along with it. So long as we don't invade.

China will go along as long as doing so doesn't impede their interests. China however is no fan of the US being the world police. If you recall, before 9/11, the biggest international issue at the time was the incident where the Chinese pilot Wong Wei was killed when our spy plane turned unexpectedly knocking his plane out of he sky and forcing an emergency landing of our spy plane in their country.

The spying between the US and China today is far more active than it has ever been in history. Some would say that technically we are already at war with each other, but instead of firing bullets at each other, we are firing cyber code at each other.

But I believe the quality of the spying is different between the Chinese and us. Our spying is primarily based upon national security interests. Theirs is more heavily tilted towards industrial espionage. That may be the best indicator right there of what each country's biggest priority is.

If by industrial, you mean our banking industry, I agree with you.

 

[johnnycakes]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese.

This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

you just disagreed with yourself one post apart

How so?

you said if it gets out of hand, China stands with the US. You then say, they wont allow an invasion in North Korea. That doesnt sound like standing with the US.

They will be on our side in ultimately preventing it from getting out of hand, and they will be on our side if it does get out of hand and we bomb North Korea (with conventional bombs). They may not say so publicly but they will privately go along with it. So long as we don't invade.

China will go along as long as doing so doesn't impede their interests. China however is no fan of the US being the world police. If you recall, before 9/11, the biggest international issue at the time was the incident where the Chinese pilot Wong Wei was killed when our spy plane turned unexpectedly knocking his plane out of he sky and forcing an emergency landing of our spy plane in their country.

The spying between the US and China today is far more active than it has ever been in history. Some would say that technically we are already at war with each other, but instead of firing bullets at each other, we are firing cyber code at each other.

But I believe the quality of the spying is different between the Chinese and us. Our spying is primarily based upon national security interests. Theirs is more heavily tilted towards industrial espionage. That may be the best indicator right there of what each country's biggest priority is.

If by industrial, you mean our banking industry, I agree with you.

Banking industry for sure, but not just banking. They will steal any technology they can possibly get, be it computer technology, medical technology, defense technology. You name it. Companies like Raytheon and General Dynamics had better be super-secure because they're big targets for Chinese cyber hacking. So are all the major banks, as you mention.

 

[pittstownkiller]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese. This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

People need to pay attention to these two. Johnnycakes bought a bride from china and Timmy ate at hunan palace last week. These guys know stuff.

Well, at least I've been to China, quite a few times, and I am in regular contact with people on the mainland, and I get the buzz from Chinese innerwebs, too.

I got a happy ending from a girl from Seoul.

 

[johnnycakes]

China aided North Korea in 1950 because we were dumb enough to cross the Yalu river. China always defends herself against the biggest threat to her borders. She did the exact same thing in 1598 against the Japanese. This time around, it's not so much that China has changed, it's that warfare has changed. Back then the biggest threat to China was a hostile Uniyed States army on its border. Now the biggest threat to China's stability is North Korea. That's why NCCommish is correct; ultimately if this gets out of hand, China WILL stand by us.

China didn't enter the Korean conflict because it felt threatened. It was all about politics and much more recent history than what may have happened during the time of dynasty rule in China. And China has changed A LOT since the 1950s. It's still one-party rule... That's about the only similarity between today's China and that of the 1950's.

I disagree. Certainly China has changed a ton. But the basics of her foreign policy has not changed in over 1,000 years. If we sent a large army to North Korea and attempted to occupy it, China would attack us there, same as before. (This is also the main reason we never tried to invade North Vietnam). We can bomb all we want, but they won't tolerate foreign troops on the ground close to their borders. They never have and never will. It's their Monroe Doctrine, much much older than ours.

People need to pay attention to these two. Johnnycakes bought a bride from china and Timmy ate at hunan palace last week. These guys know stuff.

Well, at least I've been to China, quite a few times, and I am in regular contact with people on the mainland, and I get the buzz from Chinese innerwebs, too.

I got a happy ending from a girl from Seoul.

Ha ha. you're a very funny guy.

 

[Oracle]

My link

In Japan, this is how we view KJU

 

[datonn]

Late to the party...but wouldn't it seem that Kim Jong-un having a little "accident" might do more than ANY negotiations with the lunatic might accomplish? Related to insuring that war doesn't break out on the Korean peninsula. I realize that some despot could certainly rise to power and take his place! But isn't that whole family kind of considered "demi-gods" by the North Korean people?! And if the United States could turn that fat-### into sulfur, might it not have the same effect as us dropping two atomic bombs on Japan in WWII related to the Japanese Emperor having to come out and admit that:

A. He is/was not a "god," and

B. He could not protect the Japanese people from an unimaginable amount of pain, suffering, and death if the war in the Pacific had dragged on for years more into the future.

I'm just saying, if people revere that fat tub of goo as a god, and that god is basically blown into pieces smaller than your average-sized human tooth, might it cause millions of North Koreans to question what exactly they've been placing their "faith" in for the past ___ years?

 

[The Comedian]

Late to the party...but wouldn't it seem that Kim Jong-un having a little "accident" might do more than ANY negotiations with the lunatic might accomplish? Related to insuring that war doesn't break out on the Korean peninsula. I realize that some despot could certainly rise to power and take his place! But isn't that whole family kind of considered "demi-gods" by the North Korean people?! And if the United States could turn that fat-### into sulfur, might it not have the same effect as us dropping two atomic bombs on Japan in WWII related to the Japanese Emperor having to come out and admit that:A. He is/was not a "god," andB. He could not protect the Japanese people from an unimaginable amount of pain, suffering, and death if the war in the Pacific had dragged on for years more into the future. I'm just saying, if people revere that fat tub of goo as a god, and that god is basically blown into pieces smaller than your average-sized human tooth, might it cause millions of North Koreans to question what exactly they've been placing their "faith" in for the past ___ years?

You're the guy that believes he jumped 50 feet when he was a 7 year old, right?

 

[datonn]

Late to the party...but wouldn't it seem that Kim Jong-un having a little "accident" might do more than ANY negotiations with the lunatic might accomplish? Related to insuring that war doesn't break out on the Korean peninsula. I realize that some despot could certainly rise to power and take his place! But isn't that whole family kind of considered "demi-gods" by the North Korean people?! And if the United States could turn that fat-### into sulfur, might it not have the same effect as us dropping two atomic bombs on Japan in WWII related to the Japanese Emperor having to come out and admit that:

A. He is/was not a "god," and

B. He could not protect the Japanese people from an unimaginable amount of pain, suffering, and death if the war in the Pacific had dragged on for years more into the future.

I'm just saying, if people revere that fat tub of goo as a god, and that god is basically blown into pieces smaller than your average-sized human tooth, might it cause millions of North Koreans to question what exactly they've been placing their "faith" in for the past ___ years?

You're the guy that believes he jumped 50 ~16 feet when he was a 7 year old, right?

Fixed. Though what does that have to do with anything related to this topic? You are The Comedian though...so I'm sure that type of material keeps you working 2-3 nights/week in powder blue tuxes down at airport bars. Let me guess...you just flew in from Pittsburgh, and BOY are your arms tired!