How will tensions between NK and US unfold?

Quoting Question

For the matter, why have we let NK get so far, shouldn't something have been done earlier under Bush Jr.?

Like what?

Reply to Michael

I'll let you figure that out. X-)

Reply to Question Nobody knew [s]healthcare[/s] foreign policy could be so complicated

We have some really bright minds on our side.

Here's what I think. The US never considered NK a threat, in the past, present, or future. We will always have an absolute advantage of whatever technology they copy from the Russians or Chinese. Which means that despite our assurances of honoring past agreements with South Korea and Japan, we do not take their safety in as high an esteem as ours (US').

Now call me a liar.

Quoting Question

...to the dismay of China and Russia

I wouldn't be too sure about that. It would be incredibly ignorant of you to assume their lack of influence in existing and potential proxy wars along with the US. It is economics and, indeed, SK and Japan were the primary impetus behind the deterrence of war, but it is not safety that the US esteem above all else. It is profiteering.

Reply to TimeLine
That's understandable. I never assumed the US was even capable of defending both Japan and let alone South Korea against someone like China and Russia.

As for Russia and China, there's no doubt in my mind that they stalled any peace agreements and UN resolutions against NK along with, I think - without a doubt - helping NK acquire technology and expertise to assemble a nuclear bomb and make the uranium fuel.

It might be that NK was always a bargaining chip over diplomatic issues between the three powers. Now, it seems things have grown out of control.

Yes, America-above all- exports capitalism, in many forms.

The US nudges China to start dealing with it. China will start dealing with it.

Quoting Question

War seems on the horizon

How so?

What is so different now from earlier times?

That the US has Trump? Nah.

If the cease-fire has held since the 1950's, a part a few incidents, what is now so different?

1990s

March 1990: The fourth North Korean infiltration tunnel is discovered, in what may be a total of seventeen tunnels in all.
May 1992: Three Northern soldiers in South Korean uniforms are killed at Cheorwon, Gangwon-do; three South Korean soldiers are wounded.
December 17, 1994: A US Army OH-58A+ Kiowa helicopter crosses 10 km into North Korean territory and is shot down. Of the crew of two, one dies and the other is held for 13 days.[22][23]
May 1995: North Korean forces fire on a South Korean fishing boat, killing three.
October 1995: Two armed North Koreans are discovered at the Imjin River; one is killed.
April 1996: Several hundred armed North Korean troops enter the Demilitarized Zone at the Joint Security Area and elsewhere on three occasions, in violation of the Korean armistice agreement.
May 1996: Seven Northern soldiers cross the Demilitarized Zone, but withdraw after warning shots are fired.
May & June 1996: North Korean vessels twice cross the Northern Limit Line and have a several-hour standoff with the South Korean navy.
April 1997: Five North Korean soldiers cross the Demilitarized Zone in Cheolwon, Gangwon-do, and fire on South Korean positions.
June 1997: Three North Korean vessels cross the Northern Limit Line and attack South Korean vessels two miles (3 km) south of the line. On land, fourteen North Korean soldiers cross 70 m south of the center of the DMZ, leading to a 23-minute exchange of fire.[24]
July 1998: A dead North Korean frogman was found with paraphernalia on a beach south of the DMZ.
June 1999: The First Battle of Yeonpyeong, a series of clashes between North and South Korean vessels, takes place in the Yellow Sea near the Northern Limit Line.

2000s

October 26, 2000: Two US aircraft observing a ROK army military exercise accidentally cross over the DMZ.[22]
2001: On twelve separate occasions, North Korean vessels cross the Northern Limit Line and then withdraw.
November 27, 2001: North and South Korean forces exchange fire without injuries.
June 29, 2002: The second battle of Yeonpyeong leads to the deaths of six South Korean sailors and the sinking of a South Korean vessel. The number of North Koreans killed is unknown.
November 16, 2002: South Korean forces fire warning shots on a Northern boat crossing the Northern Limit Line. The boat withdraws. The similar incident is repeated on November 20.
February 19, 2003: A North Korean fighter plane crosses seven miles (11 km) south of the Northern Limit Line, and returns north after being intercepted by six South Korean planes.
March 2, 2003: Four North Korean fighter jets intercept a US reconnaissance plane over the Sea of Japan.
July 17, 2003: North and South Korean forces exchange fire at the DMZ around 6 AM. The South Korean army reports four rounds fired from the North and seventeen from the South. No injuries are reported.[25]
November 1, 2004: North Korean vessels, claiming to be in pursuit of illegal fishing craft, cross the Northern Limit Line and are fired upon by the South. The vessels withdraw 3 hours later.
May 26, 2006: Two North Korean soldiers enter the DMZ and cross into South Korea. They return after South Korean soldiers fire warning shots.
July 30, 2006: Several rounds are exchanged near a South Korean post in Yanggu, Gangwon.

Wikinews has related news: Korean navies exchange fire
October 7, 2006: South Korean soldiers fire warning shots after five North Korean soldiers cross briefly onto their side of the border.
October 27, 2009: A South Korean pig farmer, who was wanted for assault, cut a hole in the DMZ fence and defected to North Korea.[26]
November 10, 2009: Naval vessels from the two Koreas exchanged fire in the area of the NLL, reportedly causing serious damage to a North Korean patrol ship.[27][28] For more details of this incident, see Battle of Daecheong.

2010s

January 27, 2010: North Korea fires artillery shells into the water near Baengnyeong Island and South Korean vessels return fire.[29][30] Three days later, North Korea continued to fire artillery towards the area.[31]
March 26, 2010: A South Korean naval vessel, the ROKS Cheonan, was allegedly sunk by a North Korean torpedo near Baengnyeong Island in the Yellow Sea. A rescue operation recovered 58 survivors but 46 sailors were killed. On May 20, 2010, a South Korean led international investigation group concluded that the sinking of the warship was in fact the result of a North Korean torpedo attack.[32][33] North Korea denied involvement.[34] The United Nations Security Council made a Presidential Statement condemning the attack but without identifying the attacker.[35]
October 29, 2010: Two shots are fired from North Korea toward a South Korean post near Hwacheon and South Korean troops fire three shots in return.[36]
November 23, 2010: North Korea fired artillery at South Korea's Greater Yeonpyeong island in the Yellow Sea and South Korea returned fire. Two South Korean marines and two South Korean civilians were killed, six were seriously wounded, and ten were treated for minor injuries. About seventy South Korean houses were destroyed.[37][38][39] North Korean casualties were unknown, but Lee Hong-gi, the Director of Operations of the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), claimed that as a result of the South Korean retaliation "there may be a considerable number of North Korean casualties".[40]
October 6, 2012: An 18-year-old North Korean Army private defects to South Korea. He is apparently not detected as he crossed the DMZ and has to knock on an ROK barracks door to draw attention to himself. The soldier later tells investigators that he defected after killing two of his superiors.[41][42]
September 16, 2013: A 47-year-old man is shot dead by South Korean soldiers while trying to swim across the Tanpocheon Stream near Paju to North Korea.[43]
February 26, 2014: South Korean defense officials claim that despite warnings a North Korean warship has repeatedly crossed into South Korean waters overnight.[44]
March 24, 2014: A North Korean drone is found crashed near Paju. The onboard cameras contain pictures of the Blue House and military installations near the DMZ. Another North Korean drone crashes on Baengnyeongdo on March 31.[45][46]
October 10, 2014: North Korean forces fire anti-aircraft rounds at propaganda balloons launched from Paju. South Korean military return fire after a warning.[47]
October 19, 2014: A group of North Korean soldiers approach the South Korean border and South Korean soldiers fire warning shots. The North Korean soldiers return fire before retreating. No injuries or property damage result.[48]
June 15, 2015: A teenaged North Korean soldier walks across the DMZ and defects at a South Korean guard post in north-eastern Hwacheon.[49]
August 4, 2015: Two South Korean soldiers were wounded after stepping on landmines that had allegedly been laid on the southern side of the DMZ by North Korean forces next to a ROK guard post.[50] Kim Jin Moon of the South Korean-based Korea Institute for Defense Analyses, suggested that the incident was planned by members of the General Bureau of Reconnaissance to prove their loyalty to Kim Jong-un.[51]
August 20, 2015: As a reaction to the August 4 landmines, South Korea resumed playing propaganda on loudspeakers near the border.[52] In 2004 both sides had agreed to end their loudspeaker broadcasts at each other.[53] North Korea threatened to attack those loudspeakers, and on August 20 North Korea fired a rocket and shells across the border into Yeoncheon County. South Korea responded by firing artillery shells back at the origin of the rocket. There were no reports of injuries on either side.[52][54] Following threats of war from the North, and various troops movements by both North and South Korea and the United States, an agreement was reached on August 24 that North Korea would express sympathy for the landmine incident in return for South Korea deactivating the loudspeakers.[55]
January 3, 2016: South Korean soldiers fired warning shots at a suspected North Korean drone near the DMZ.[56]

(Source, wikipedia)

Well, my only worry is that when do the NK's really want to strike us? I mean, they're been dreaming about it for a while now already.

Reply to Question

What would North Korea gain from using nukes offensively? They want to unify the Koreas, not blow them up...

They're also well aware that if they actually attacked anyone else with nukes every other nuclear armed country in the world would probably take the opportunity to test their submarine based nuke delivery systems (on North Korea).

Maybe we had a window to invade between the collapse of the Soviet Union and 2003, when NK supposedly developed usable nukes, but the ensuing war would have caused millions of North Koreans to die and possibly millions of South Koreans too as every weapon of mass destruction becomes a viable tactic to a collapsing government intent on keeping power by any means necessary.

Nope... We would rather just wait for it to economically collapse just like the soviet union did. Since it managed to get nukes we're pretty much forbidden from ever invading it, hence the cold war like atmosphere which presently engulfs North Korea.

Reply to VagabondSpectre I don't really know what the insular North Korean regime wants. I am certain that the collapse of the Soviet Union provided no window of opportunity because China would almost certainly have countered any invasion.

I also don't know what it will take for them to collapse economically. They have never been a robust economy to start with, and they have endured famine.

The problem is that post atomic era, war has become obsolete, which North Korea is finding it hard to accept. How far are they willing to go is the elephant in the room.

Quoting Question

The US never considered NK a threat, in the past, present, or future. We will always have an absolute advantage of whatever technology they copy from the Russians or Chinese.

Are you sure they are copying technology? Their missile development is pretty slow and steady for working from specs. They probably did get some basics from either China or the Soviet Union on nuclear technology, but again, the rate of development doesn't seem to be that rapid.

Is NK a threat? Well, sure they are. If they can miniaturize a reasonable-sized nuclear weapon so that it would fit on top of a reasonably powerful missile (intercontinental or not), and since they already have submarines that can launch a missile, and even if they can land one bomb successfully in the US, say on Washington, D. C., or Los Angeles, I think we would rather seriously resent having that happen.

Of course, we do have absolute superiority over NK, but NK is very, very close to Russia and the PRC. My guess is that both Russia and China would rather seriously resent us having bombed to smithereens a country on their borders. I don't think SK or Japan would be thrilled about it either.

Quoting Question

The problem is that post atomic era, war has become obsolete

Hardly. Regional wars have been going on continuously since the beginning of the atomic era. It isn't obsolescence that has prevented nuclear war from happening, it's mutually assured destruction.

Quoting Question

For the matter, why have we let NK get so far, shouldn't something have been done earlier under Bush Jr.?

Like what? North Korea isn't an island nation a thousand miles from anyone else; it butts up against China and Russia, is across the DMZ from Seoul, (which is far larger than New York and LA, combined) and is across the small sea of Japan. In other words, it's an international china shop that bulls can not operate in without causing a lot of wreckage.

My guess is that China will follow its own self interest, and take some form of 'guardianship' over its ally, NK. NK was historically a vassal of China.

Quoting Bitter Crank

I don't really know what the insular North Korean regime wants. I am certain that the collapse of the Soviet Union provided no window of opportunity because China would almost certainly have countered any invasion.

I also don't know what it will take for them to collapse economically. They have never been a robust economy to start with, and they have endured famine.

I know that China has used them for quite some time as an easily exploitable trading partner. Really China is probably the reason why they've been able to make it through extended famine(s) (smuggling gold out of NK is one example). The main weakness of their economy is that A, nobody is permitted to trade with them (China still does it outside of the humanitarian trades knowing it's too economically powerful to be severely sanctioned and they get away with some plausible deniability AFAIK), and B, most of their money seems to get spent directly on the military and their apparatus' of internal political control (preventing growth).

Perhaps china would have been strong enough in the early nineties to prop NK against American backed invasion (I hadn't considered China), but maybe not. We still would have had to face ridiculous casualty rates from the chemical warfare which surely would have been employed.

Side note: I'm sure from China's perspective, they would love for North Korea to grow economically so it could have a trading partner/ally in the region not beholden to western political influence.

Quoting Bitter Crank

Are you sure they are copying technology? Their missile development is pretty slow and steady for working from specs. They probably did get some basics from either China or the Soviet Union on nuclear technology, but again, the rate of development doesn't seem to be that rapid.

Well, you know, they have the GDP of some banana republic. There's only so much you can do with that much money to go around. Iran has only made so much progress due to having vast oil reserves? What does North Korea export? Counterfeit US currency (and probably European too), heroin, methamphetamine, and arms to rogue nations. Certainly the A.Q. Khan nuclear smuggling network helped them get to where they are; but, a certain amount of expertise is required to build centrifuges for uranium enrichment along with weapons design. Where do you get the brains to assist in building those? Most likely China helped with the scientific team needed to assemble said weapons and fuel. Soviet technology also proliferated considerably after the collapse. The technology is there, you just need human capital (scientists) and money to get the job done.

Quoting Bitter Crank

Is NK a threat? Well, sure they are. If they can miniaturize a reasonable-sized nuclear weapon so that it would fit on top of a reasonably powerful missile (intercontinental or not), and since they already have submarines that can launch a missile, and even if they can land one bomb successfully in the US, say on Washington, D. C., or Los Angeles, I think we would rather seriously resent having that happen.

I talked about this with a friend, and the consensus is that North Korea would need to build technology that is far beyond their capabilities to evade sonar detection to get close enough to our coasts to launch and strike a target successfully. They are FAR away from that ever happening, and Russia and China aren't crazy enough to give a modern stealth sub to North Korea just so that they can have their wet dream of starting another World War. I don't know the technicalities as this is some pretty top secret shit; but, I'm assuming stealth is still beating detection methods.

Quoting Bitter Crank

Of course, we do have absolute superiority over NK, but NK is very, very close to Russia and the PRC. My guess is that both Russia and China would rather seriously resent us having bombed to smithereens a country on their borders. I don't think SK or Japan would be thrilled about it either.

Well, the problem is the concentration of power in North Korea. Whereas the Soviets were in many regards totalitarian, there was some level of check and balances to be maintained within the regime. North Korea presents a problem with the unconditional support of one man, and thus a great chance for irrationality to go too far in saber rattling.

Quoting Bitter Crank

Hardly. Regional wars have been going on continuously since the beginning of the atomic era. It isn't obsolescence that has prevented nuclear war from happening, it's mutually assured destruction.

MAD no longer applies nowadays, not to the degree it did in the past with the balance of power between us and the Soviets. We have superiority in almost every regard. That's not to say that we wouldn't suffer casualties, just that any losses an enemy would incur would far outweigh our losses.

With North Korea, you just have them trying to increase their regional influence with threats against peaceful nations like Japan and to a lesser extent South Korea. The sad thing is that Japan, which is [s]one of[/s] the most technologically advanced country in the world has been prevented from developing anti-ICBM technology, which has always been inferior to delivery technology. I suspect, as the US usually does, we import the brightest minds from Japan and have them work for us and then sell them back their work to Japan.

Reply to Question

We dissallow Japan from having a standing army capable of invading another nation (or at least used to, do we still?) because of that whole deal from the 40's. Similarly, we disallow them nukes (we disallow nukes for anyone who doesn't already have any). I'm not entirely sure about the legality of developing anti ICBM technology, but if you're a nuclear armed nation and someone gives the ultimate ICBM countermeasures to your nuclear armed enemies, you're fucked. (but with the numbers of ICBM's available, combined with traditional bombers and nuclear armed subs, MAD is probably more guaranteed than ever before)

If we're talking about military technology though, Japan ain't the prodigy. The western military industrial complex as a whole has a firm grip on the ultimate weapons of today, with the U.S being it's main consumer.

Quoting VagabondSpectre

(but with the numbers of ICBM's available, combined with traditional bombers and nuclear armed subs, MAD is probably more guaranteed than ever before)

Not really, because there's nobody to assure destruction with. Possibly, if China and Russia ganged up together and came up with the bright idea of attacking us, then? Maybe. But, then there's France, Israel, UK, India, Pakistan (?), that would assist with the total annihilation of the known world. A desirable outcome for China and Russia, not at all. North Korea's wet dream? Yeah, for sure.

EDIT: You know a nation that has gone through famine and such poverty really doesn't see nuclear war as that bad a thing if you think about it.

Reply to Question

North Korea might be bat shit crazy as a nation, but they still must have sane military and economic strategists. They can barely stay afloat while in a perpetual 1984 state of faux war. A real war would likely exhaust them very rapidly.

If North Korea actually nuked someone then everyone else, including China and Russia, would lay waste to every strategic target inside of North Korea with nuclear attacks of their own, or they would at least stand by and bow their heads (China and Russia that is).

That said, North Korea cannot ensure the destruction of anyone but SK and themselves so far as I'm aware, and so only SK is really included in the "mutual destruction" resulting from NK aggression.

Quoting Question

but, a certain amount of expertise is required to build centrifuges for uranium enrichment along with weapons design.

I'm a little fuzzy about this... plutonium is produced in a uranium reactor, right? then the plutonium is chemically separated from the uranium--correct? It's U235 that is separated from U238 by gaseous centrifuges, true?

Reply to Bitter Crank
Plutonium is made in breeder reactors. Its a man made element last I recall. What's needed before that step is enriched uranium as far as I know. But you can have bombs made out of enriched uranium only. Just that theyre not as easy to miniaturize.

There are different methods of extracting the weapons grade plutonium from the breeder fuel. I think the most modern method is to use lasers as in some resonance exciting of gases to separate isotopes at certain frequencies. This is ultramodern and efficient as well as very dangerous due to ease of concealment. I don't think you can use centrifuges without giving away your hiding spot due to extremely sensitive satellite radioactive detectors.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotope_separation

Quoting Question

How will Trump proceed?

Nobody - not one single person - knows what Trump will say next, let alone do. Hopefully the adults are in charge of this issue, if not, god help us all.

Quoting Question

Well, my only worry is that when do the NK's really want to strike us? I mean, they're been dreaming about it for a while now already.

First and foremost: it doesn't want to do that.

What the rulers of North Korea want is simple: to remain in power. And in order to do so, they need the threat of an impending war with the US. That justifies the militarization of the whole country and why the military comes first in everything, the Songun policy.

As to the North Korean nuclear bomb, it is a rational and totally logical decision for a militarized country where the whole existence of the system and it's leadership depends on the army and the "threat" imposed by it's southern neighbour and the US.

North Korea simply cannot match in any way the sheer economic power of the First World country like South Korea. Hence it cannot compete with conventional forces, especially in air power, with the Republic of Korea and it's ally the US. And so the nuclear deterrent is far cheaper than to try to create a conventional force that could deter "US aggression". The next fact is that nuclear weapons are a great deterrent against any kind of "pre-emptive attack". This can be seen as how aggressive the US has been towards Iran compared to North Korea.

And let's face it. As I said, the primary goal of the ruling family is to stay in power. And if only some time ago there was widespread famine in the country, the truth is that without the army the ruling family wouldn't be in power. Hence for Kim Jong Un (and his father & grandfather) the real base of power and the real people that they have to please are the people in the armed forces. And at some level in those in the armed forces have to look at the prospect of war in real terms, what their true capabilities are against the true ROK & US forces. Then nuclear weapons is the only logical answer for the regime to be credible in the eyes of those most important to it: the North Korean soldiers and officers.

It seems to me that there is no doubt in my mind that NK has acquired technology from external sources as to how to build an ICBM that can carry a nuke.

If anything, that's an issue that has to be addressed.

What does Kim Jung Un want? Does he want to start WWIII and have his nation and rule destroyed in the process? Or does he think that the world will fold? If so, what does he get from it? Does he seriously believe he's going to extend his rule over South Korea? What kind of 'victory' is he imagining?

Quoting Wayfarer

What does Kim Jung Un want?

From what I gather, to maintain power and survival of his regime. The US is the devil incarnate for North Koreans. So, any rhetoric in regards to the US will always be in the form of vitriol and hatred.

Clearly, there's been a failure in foreign policy towards North Korea for letting them get this far. What would anyone attribute this failure to?

Exerting military power over or making specific military threats to NK doesn't bring the profits shamefully toppling regimes in countries like Iraq, Syria, and Libya does.

Reply to Thanatos Sand

Having China as your next door neighbor also has its perks.

Sure, and that's a great combination of having no financial incentive to try and cower NK--the military's main purpose is to keep banks and corporations rich--and no reason to think doing so would be successful.

Quoting Posty McPostface

What would anyone attribute this failure to?

The fact that the Western powers are humane enough not to have reduced the nation to ash anytime in the last 40 years or so.

Reply to Wayfarer

What would anyone attribute this failure to?
— Posty McPostface

The fact that the Western powers are humane enough not to have reduced the nation to ash anytime in the last 40 years or so.

The Western powers are far from humane. They joined with America to effectively destroy Iraq and kill millions of Iraqis, leaving the nation a disastrous training ground for ISIS. The United States alone have contributed to murderous coups in countries like Chile, where they--the CIA--oversaw Pinochet's death squads that murdered tens of thousands. They--and the CIA--contributed to murderous coups in Honduras and El Salvador as well. That doesn't even mention what they did to Vietnam and Cambodia and Laos with their carpet bombing and use of horrid weapons like napalm. And now Trump is continuing Obama's shameful bombing of Syria and Yemen.

That is far from humane activity.

I wish China could just take over North Korea and turn the country from a 3'rd world into the modern era. Or just make it a province of China. Problem solved?

Reply to Posty McPostface

The problem being that China has no reason to invade, as the costs outweigh the benefits. What does China get out of it besides a bunch of dead soldiers, expended resources, and potential international backlash? A wartorn undeveloped land with an extremely unpredictable population that does not want them? And that's not even including the nuclear threat.

Reply to Chany And yet NK has nuclear capability in part due to financial support from China. Instead of feeding their people, they build ICBMs. Surely China has some influence.

Quoting Posty McPostface

Clearly, there's been a failure in foreign policy towards North Korea for letting them get this far. What would anyone attribute this failure to?

Actually there's no real failure on the part of the US. You hear of the line that "Well, they saw what happened to Ghaddafi", but that's not the real reason here.

North Korea is a brutal dictatorship ruled by one family that desperately needs the threat of impending attack from the US to give the reason for it's own existence and the militarized society that the country is. It's truly an Orwellian country.

Just think about it if there would be a peace agreement: assume that North Korea would sign a peace agreement with the US and South Korea, the US would withdraw it's forces from South Korea (something that likely Americans wouldn't oppose) and both Koreas would agree on drastic reductions on the size of their militaries and military arsenal. Ok, then what for the Hermit kingdom? After peace, what would think this police state that punishes children and relatives of an individual that are deemed "enemy of the state" would do?

Families that rule countries with violence have a real difficulty of carrying out true reform as and kind of reform effort puts their grip on to power in question. That the present leader has to kill people close to him just underlines how shaky their powerbase is. Just look at Syria and it's Western educated son of a dictator, who earlier wanted to bring reforms to his country. Now he is fighting a brutal civil war that has nearly reaches (if not reached) a genocidal level in deaths and ethnic (or religious) cleansing.

Basically the Korean conflict is this frozen conflict were everybody wants things to stay as they are because they fear of things getting even worse.

Reply to Mongrel

I never said China doesn't have interests in the region. I said that China has no reason to invade or somehow take control over North Korea. They have little reason at all, in fact, to get involved that much. China's only interest is that war does not break out and cause economic damage.

North Korea, as pointed to above, operates under strict military power, constantly in a heightened state of war. Honestly, I think Kim Jung Un wants a MAD scenario with the United States because it gives North Korea a lot more bargaining power and leeway. With threat of nuclear war, North Korean leadership gets both more international power through threats and further support internally as it looks like North Korea is rubbing shoulders with the big countries on equal terms.

Reply to Chany China has been involved. It funds NK because it doesn't want a failed nuclear state on its border.

I think Kim is upset about that movie: The Interview. No, really.

Quoting Chany

China's only interest is that war does not break out and cause economic damage.

China can allways use the North Korea card:

Let's say that Trump gets angry at China for some reason and starts imposing something extremely annoying to the Chinese. The Chinese can wait that the tension on the Korean Peninsula gets really bad and when the US asks to China to use it's leverage over North Korea, then China can respond with "OK, but you have to get rid of this extremely annoying thing Trump did, then we help you".

Hence basically North Korea is a bargaining chip for China.

That's very interesting, but when exactly has China ever used its leverage to help out the US? They're one of our worst "allies" in both they're pirating and hacking of our computer/intellectual properties ands servers and their awful human rights record that is just as bad as North Korea's.

Quoting Thanatos Sand

That's very interesting, but when exactly has China ever used its leverage to help out the US? They're one of our worst "allies" in both they're pirating and hacking of our computer/intellectual properties ands servers and their awful human rights record that is just as bad as North Korea's.

Well, China didn't like the nuclear tests for one thing, even if the countries have been allies. Just to give one example, China has supported UN sanctions towards North Korea (Iike UN Security Council Resolution 1718). Just to refrain from using their veto is one way China can help the US and it can do more if it goes along with US initiatives. Of course the main thing is that North Korea is an bulwark against the US for China. Just think if the North Korean regime would fall and South Korea would swallow North Korea (just like East Germany was swallowed By West Germany). Then the Chinese would find US Troops and those Thaad-launchers on the Yalu-river. Not a nice scenario for the Chinese.

And really, you aren't an ally to China and China isn't your ally either. Even Vietnam is nowdays more of an "ally" to the US than China is.

Quoting ssu

And really, you aren't an ally to China and China isn't your ally either.

Who would our common enemy be? Aliens? Anyway, the US and China are joined at the hip economically. Kind of like Siamese twins... if one dies, the other is in big trouble.

Reply to ssu

That's very interesting, but when exactly has China ever used its leverage to help out the US? They're one of our worst "allies" in both they're pirating and hacking of our computer/intellectual properties ands servers and their awful human rights record that is just as bad as North Korea's.
— Thanatos Sand
Well, China didn't like the nuclear tests for one thing, even if the countries have been allies. Just to give one example, China has supported UN sanctions towards North Korea (Iike UN Security Council Resolution 1718). Just to refrain from using their veto is one way China can help the US and it can do more if it goes along with US initiatives. Of course the main thing is that North Korea is an bulwark against the US for China. Just think if the North Korean regime would fall and South Korea would swallow North Korea (just like East Germany was swallowed By West Germany). Then the Chinese would find US Troops and those Thaad-launchers on the Yalu-river. Not a nice scenario for the Chinese.

But all these things were to China's benefit, not just to ours. So, my point still stands that China has never really done anything for our benefit as an ally, as some of our actual allies have. I'm aware no ally does something solely out of altruism, but many--like England, Germany, or Canada--have come to our aid with the awareness of their benefit from both our benefit and our alliance. China has never shown itself to think in those terms, as they continue to wage piracy/hacking warfare against at us and laugh at our pathetic attempts to make them adhere to some semblance of a human rights standard.

And I agree with Mongrel that we're joined at the hip, but more like Siamese cat twins joined at the hip, constantly hissing at each other and working to be the strongest one in the "joining."

Quoting Thanatos Sand

And I agree with Mongrel that we're joined at the hip, but more like Siamese cat twins

Sounds like we need a surgeon. :D

:)

I can just imagine the conversation:

'Jim, we don't we nuke him? Pumped up little prick, doesn't he know who he's messing with? Yes....I know the Chinese will freak out, but fuck them....nobody can make threats like that to us and get away with it. I want to nuke 'em, that will wipe the smile of that idiot's face....'

Quoting Thanatos Sand

But all these things were to China's benefit, not just to ours. So, my point still stands that China has never really done anything for our benefit as an ally, as some of our actual allies have. I'm aware no ally does something solely out of altruism, but many--like England, Germany, or Canada--have come to our aid with the awareness of their benefit from both our benefit and our alliance.

China being onboard with UN resolutions that the US has pushed for is clearly to the benefit of the US. Because I'm not convinced that North Korea poses any threat to China in any way (other than some misguided missile test hitting their countryside).

Besides, more proper term for China and the US would be that they are rivals. And rivals can have mutual agendas that benefit both of them. Rival countries don't have to enemies. Furthermore, that you have strong economic ties basically means that the relationship isn't seen only through the prism of national security and defence policy.

Reply to ssu its also to the great benefit of China, so you're not even reading my posts. And they are a significant threat to China, both because of nukes and erratic leader and their being much more Communist than China.

And your second paragraph neither counters nor addresses my post.

Does game theory have anything to say about possible options? If we assume both sides are rational, it seems to rule out war.

2013 article: http://www.newyorker.com/news/evan-osnos/north-koreas-nuclear-game-theory

Thanatos Sand, North Korea is not a threat to China. China has it's own nuclear deterrence and the North Korean nukes aren't there against them. These two countries have good relations. They have been allies. It's the US that is the possible threat for both countries.

Is the UK a threat to the US? Or France? Both have nuclear weapons. Yet if they would be quarreling with Russia and using similar rhetoric against Russia (as North Korea has against the US), the US likely would be pissed off. But they themselves are not a threat to the US. And neither is North Korea to China.

An article in The Diplomat puts it well:

in essence, the bilateral ties between China and North Korea are not challenged by any major, hard-to-bridge differences, especially ideological differences, such as those China has with the United States, South Korea, and Japan. Relations between the two countries are only beset by North Korea’s nuclear development – a multilateral dispute.

China and North Korea will not turn away from each other over North Korea’s nuclear programs. In fact, the political and pragmatic logic behind China-North Korean relations remain unchanged.

See whole article here

Furthermore, it's important to look at the crisis from the viewpoint of China:

To begin with, China sees the U.S. and South Korea as the main instigators of the conflict, not the North, so it is up to us to lower our guns before we can expect Pyongyang to do the same. More important, for China, the main security risk posed by North Korea is the potential collapse of the Kim regime, not the development of ICBMs. Accordingly, while China could theoretically strangle the North Korean economy with a total blockade, it has no desire to do so, as it fears this would precipitate that collapse.

See here

If Trump wants to be tough, then just should up and do an underground nuclear test. After all, the US hasn't ratified (even if it has signed) the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Then just watch how terrified people would be.

After that it would be great to sit down with the North Koreans.

I've read that the NK plan to fire 4 missiles towards Guam. They study the US well enough to know that the US will react, but not by starting a war, but perhaps by trying to shoot down the 4 missiles. NK's taunt seems to be directed at US's highly taunted Thaad system. US military claims great success with the system, I think we may have a chance to see if it does as well in real action, not as a carefully set up test. Of course there is a question if NK can even launch 4 missiles successful.

The NK is good at embarrassing the US. It captured the Pueblo way back in the 60's and we negotiated the release of the crew who were tortured. It took a year of negotiation and NK kept the boat as a trophy. In 1969 NK shot down EC-121 over the sea of Japan killing all 31 aboard. Nixon staged a show of strength but he did not more than that.

If NK shoots any missiles toward Guam and US (or its surrogate Japan) do not make an effort to disrupt the test, I think they will consider that they have demonstrated our impotence, not just to them self but also to China & Russia.

Reply to ssu SSU, of course NK is a threat to China since NK can't be expected to be rationally intimidated by MAD and has less prosperity to lose. They also have much less invested in secondary countries than China.

And England is a terrible parallel, since they have proven themselves legitimate allies.

Do you think Trump will attack if Kim Jong Un threatens again?

Quoting Thanatos Sand

SSU, of course NK is a threat to China since NK can't be expected to be rationally intimidated by MAD and has less prosperity to lose. They also have much less invested in secondary countries than China.

Why on Earth do you believe that NK is a threat to China?

The idea that North Korea is totally crazy is just American propaganda. North Korea, as a dictatorship and a militarized police state, is quite logical from it's own viewpoint. And China has good relations with the country.

After all, now during this crisis, which likely will subdue to the background now, China has said through it's state paper that "if North Korea launches missiles that threaten U.S. soil first and the U.S. retaliates, China will stay neutral," yet also said the following: "If the U.S. and South Korea carry out strikes and try to overthrow the North Korean regime and change the political pattern of the Korean Peninsula, China will prevent them from doing so."

If China truly would see NK as threat, would they say they would come it's aid if the US attacks them?

So, just a recap. After all the saber rattling, we have an end to the Korean war.

What an outcome!

EDIT: Upon further reading it's a cease fire, not the end of the Korean war. Still, amazing outcome in my opinion.

Reply to Posty McPostface Trump helping to make Korea great again!

Reply to Buxtebuddha

Yeah, right. Hah!

China is the unsung hero for this outcome.

Reply to Posty McPostface Everyone's done their part, though I think NK has simply reached the breaking point. No food, no money, and their nuclear program sucks, so not much of a bright future for them. Regardless, it's remarkable what has happened between NK and SK. Seemed like the tension would just keep going on and on.

Reply to Buxtebuddha

Common admit it, none of this wouldn't have been possible had China not been on board.

Quoting Posty McPostface

Common

[hide][/hide]

Quoting Posty McPostface

China

Reply to Buxtebuddha
I loled a little, but yeah 'China'...

Quoting Posty McPostface

Upon further reading it's a cease fire, not the end of the Korean war.

It was already a cease fire. That was the Korean Armistice Agreement. Yesterday's was a declaration to end the war.

Quoting Michael

It was already a cease fire. That was the Korean Armistice Agreement. Yesterday's was a declaration to end the war.

Great, couldn't be happier to see peace instead of war for a change.