FreeMason
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2005
- Messages
- 70
- Reaction score
- 0
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Over the years, it is often said "why haven't we done anything with North Korea"? My often reply was "are you crazy? You whine about 2,000 deaths in Iraq, imagine what fighting North Korea would be like!".
But this is actually a good question.
North Korea right now is unstable, they have no means to defend themselves, and they know it. Well they have a small means..."If you attack us, we'll damage South Korea!"
Kim Jong Il has been rather isolationist, that's somewhat a good thing concerning North Korea, it's better they just worry about being attacked, rather than worrying about attacking...however, when he goes, his legacy will be Nuclear Weapons.
The new leader will of course develope them further.
Eventually, it has to be hypothesised that North Korea would make a Nuclear Industrial Complex. This is more than their barganing chip.
With such a complex established, unlike now, they could freely sail the waters with no threat of attack.
This means they can import what they want, export what they want, and can threaten Nuclear War if this is not allowed.
It is learned from the Soviet Union, that a Conventional War would be possible without escalating to Nuclear War, but that no such Conventional War could be won by either side because they would resort to Nukes before losing...so some terms would be met or ... we'd have proxy wars, the latter was more common.
Thus, a North Korea, boldened by Nuclear Arms, might seek proxy wars to establish more control, probably motivated by their own needs of internal control than an idea of "global domination".
By causing communist revolutions, they can gain that region's resources through a trade agreement that exists outside UN sanctions.
Thus a new Cold War can begin.
The question then is, is there any other way than war before it is too late?
Post Script
In other forums I have already ran into tangential conversations concerning the extent of Soviet Doctrine, and Cuba's actual involvement of Africa. Since I'm for the evolution of discussion I'll leave my initial thread as is, but I'm aware of certain generalities in it that should be ignored or rather, not taken so absolutely. The premise of the thread is to begin discussion of future "what ifs" concerning North Korean foreign policy, where certain conditions are met.
These conditions appear to be met soon, possibly in the next few decades, and so the problem of a "Cold War" with North Korea is not a distant prospect in terms of nations, so it is our concern now to be able to deal with it while we can, in my opinion.
Other Sources
Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Known North Korea Missile Capabilities
North Korean Nuclear Weapons Statement
But this is actually a good question.
North Korea right now is unstable, they have no means to defend themselves, and they know it. Well they have a small means..."If you attack us, we'll damage South Korea!"
Kim Jong Il has been rather isolationist, that's somewhat a good thing concerning North Korea, it's better they just worry about being attacked, rather than worrying about attacking...however, when he goes, his legacy will be Nuclear Weapons.
The new leader will of course develope them further.
Eventually, it has to be hypothesised that North Korea would make a Nuclear Industrial Complex. This is more than their barganing chip.
With such a complex established, unlike now, they could freely sail the waters with no threat of attack.
This means they can import what they want, export what they want, and can threaten Nuclear War if this is not allowed.
It is learned from the Soviet Union, that a Conventional War would be possible without escalating to Nuclear War, but that no such Conventional War could be won by either side because they would resort to Nukes before losing...so some terms would be met or ... we'd have proxy wars, the latter was more common.
Thus, a North Korea, boldened by Nuclear Arms, might seek proxy wars to establish more control, probably motivated by their own needs of internal control than an idea of "global domination".
By causing communist revolutions, they can gain that region's resources through a trade agreement that exists outside UN sanctions.
Thus a new Cold War can begin.
The question then is, is there any other way than war before it is too late?
Post Script
In other forums I have already ran into tangential conversations concerning the extent of Soviet Doctrine, and Cuba's actual involvement of Africa. Since I'm for the evolution of discussion I'll leave my initial thread as is, but I'm aware of certain generalities in it that should be ignored or rather, not taken so absolutely. The premise of the thread is to begin discussion of future "what ifs" concerning North Korean foreign policy, where certain conditions are met.
These conditions appear to be met soon, possibly in the next few decades, and so the problem of a "Cold War" with North Korea is not a distant prospect in terms of nations, so it is our concern now to be able to deal with it while we can, in my opinion.
Other Sources
Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Known North Korea Missile Capabilities
North Korean Nuclear Weapons Statement
