Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
15 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: The Line in the sand is drawn rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Andre
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/02/politics/nikki-haley-north-kor...

A hardline stance, to be sure, and one that may prompt Trump toward military action. Making statements like these, and then ignoring them if the line is crossed, would look weak. And we all know that Trump does not like to look weak. I am no longer hopeful of a diplomatic solution here at all, although I do think that the recent outflow of NK defectors might show that times are hard for the average NK citizen now, and the sanctions may be having their intended effect.

China may yet play a moderating role, but so far, they have been unwilling to pull for the U.S., with more demonstrative sanctions. Maybe after war is started, they might change their stance?

I do not believe that NK will stop their nuclear testing, which does not portend well for peace.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
abadolato01 wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/02/politics/nikki-haley-north-kor...

A hardline stance, to be sure, and one that may prompt Trump toward military action. Making statements like these, and then ignoring them if the line is crossed, would look weak. And we all know that Trump does not like to look weak. I am no longer hopeful of a diplomatic solution here at all, although I do think that the recent outflow of NK defectors might show that times are hard for the average NK citizen now, and the sanctions may be having their intended effect.

China may yet play a moderating role, but so far, they have been unwilling to pull for the U.S., with more demonstrative sanctions. Maybe after war is started, they might change their stance?

I do not believe that NK will stop their nuclear testing, which does not portend well for peace.


If NK launched a nuclear ICBM in response, do you think it would be a west coast city? Or something on the east coast like Mara Largo?

Of course NK isn't going to stop. They've seen what every american president, liberal or conservative has done in response to countries without nukes vs those who may have nukes.

If they get a half dozen nukes with intercontinental range, they will be treated differently forever.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wendell
United States
Yellow Springs
Ohio
flag msg tools
Si non potes reperire Berolini in tabula, ludens essetis non WIF.
badge
Hey, get your stinking cursor off my face! I got nukes, you know.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
abadolato01 wrote:


China may yet play a moderating role, but so far, they have been unwilling to pull for the U.S., with more demonstrative sanctions. Maybe after war is started, they might change their stance?


Why should they? China is an independent nation with its own concerns and interests. Among those are not to have a collapsed North Korean state on its borders with perhaps millions of refugees crossing the Yalu into China. Even worse, China doesn't want a pro-Western capitalist advanced and unified Korea on its borders.

As for war - China has said if North Korea starts a war, they're on their own. But remember what happened last time outside powers approached the Chinese border in North Korea...
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
maxo-texas wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/02/politics/nikki-haley-north-kor...

A hardline stance, to be sure, and one that may prompt Trump toward military action. Making statements like these, and then ignoring them if the line is crossed, would look weak. And we all know that Trump does not like to look weak. I am no longer hopeful of a diplomatic solution here at all, although I do think that the recent outflow of NK defectors might show that times are hard for the average NK citizen now, and the sanctions may be having their intended effect.

China may yet play a moderating role, but so far, they have been unwilling to pull for the U.S., with more demonstrative sanctions. Maybe after war is started, they might change their stance?

I do not believe that NK will stop their nuclear testing, which does not portend well for peace.


If NK launched a nuclear ICBM in response, do you think it would be a west coast city? Or something on the east coast like Mara Largo?

Of course NK isn't going to stop. They've seen what every american president, liberal or conservative has done in response to countries without nukes vs those who may have nukes.

If they get a half dozen nukes with intercontinental range, they will be treated differently forever.


Neither, they might try to send one our way, but the most likely response will be to send them to Seoul, where thousands might perish. I don't think they are technically capable of sending one our way with any accuracy, it's still unconfirmed whether they have managed to place a warhead in the ICBMs (at least publicly). If I were living in Seoul, or even Japan, I would not sleep well at night.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
wifwendell wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:


China may yet play a moderating role, but so far, they have been unwilling to pull for the U.S., with more demonstrative sanctions. Maybe after war is started, they might change their stance?


Why should they? China is an independent nation with its own concerns and interests. Among those are not to have a collapsed North Korean state on its borders with perhaps millions of refugees crossing the Yalu into China. Even worse, China doesn't want a pro-Western capitalist advanced and unified Korea on its borders.

As for war - China has said if North Korea starts a war, they're on their own. But remember what happened last time outside powers approached the Chinese border in North Korea...


I agree that they will not favor us in any way, the more likely scenario is exactly as you describe, they will not settle for having the U.S. on their doorstep (which is likely in the end game of a war with NK), so this conflict might escalate quickly, embroiling us in possible hostilities with China (ar at minimum, border square-offs). By China change their stance, I had meant that they would abandon NK, as opposed to continue their economic aid (thru trade).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Pustilnik
United States
Bronx
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
maxo-texas wrote:


If NK launched a nuclear ICBM in response, do you think it would be a west coast city? Or something on the east coast like Mara Largo?

Of course NK isn't going to stop. They've seen what every american president, liberal or conservative has done in response to countries without nukes vs those who may have nukes.

If they get a half dozen nukes with intercontinental range, they will be treated differently forever.


The North Korean ICBM program is what is the most alarming, on top of Kim's toxic rhetoric (even worse than Trump's, in my opinion), and his sociopathic starvation of his own people. The nukes that Kim has are more than enough to deter an attack. He doesn't need ICBMs.

It looks to me like he wants to use the ICBMs for nuclear blackmail. Indeed, a recent North Korean defector said exactly that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MikePustilnik wrote:
maxo-texas wrote:


If NK launched a nuclear ICBM in response, do you think it would be a west coast city? Or something on the east coast like Mara Largo?

Of course NK isn't going to stop. They've seen what every american president, liberal or conservative has done in response to countries without nukes vs those who may have nukes.

If they get a half dozen nukes with intercontinental range, they will be treated differently forever.


The North Korean ICBM program is what is the most alarming, on top of Kim's toxic rhetoric (even worse than Trump's, in my opinion), and his sociopathic starvation of his own people. The nukes that Kim has are more than enough to deter an attack. He doesn't need ICBMs.

It looks to me like he wants to use the ICBMs for nuclear blackmail. Indeed, a recent North Korean defector said exactly that.


What he is seeking thru that blackmail is something that, I suspect, we are either unwilling to provide, or cannot reasonably provide. Which makes this game all the more dangerous.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Pustilnik
United States
Bronx
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
abadolato01 wrote:

What he is seeking thru that blackmail is something that, I suspect, we are either unwilling to provide, or cannot reasonably provide. Which makes this game all the more dangerous.


I agree.

As I recall, Kim wants the US to withdraw all forces from South Korea. He also wants more food and fuel. The question is, how far will Kim go to get these things?

In theory, we could pay him off, and this would cost much less than a war. But if Kim keeps asking for more and more, eventually the US and South Korea are going to have to say "no".
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sam I am
United States
Portage
Michigan
flag msg tools
designer
What did I tell you...
badge
NO PICKLE!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm positive the Republican's will be as red-assed when this line is crossed as they were when Obama's Syrian red line was.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vic Lineal
Spain
Barcelona
flag msg tools
Nope. Nope nope nope nope.
Avatar
mb
It isn't unthinkable that North Korea might try diplomacy to test the internal political divide in South Korea. What portion of South Korean society would be willing to reduce some ties with the US in exchange for détente with North Korea?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.D. Hall
United States
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
MikePustilnik wrote:
It looks to me like he wants to use the ICBMs for nuclear blackmail. Indeed, a recent North Korean defector said exactly that.


Kim may try this, but I doubt it would be effective. At most he could wreck a few cities in the US and cause millions of casualties or wipe out a substantial portion of South Korea. The cost, however, would be the rest of the Korean peninsula and the regime Kim is most anxious to preserve. The nuclear option is always best in a defensive reactive mode, i.e. you invade us, we blow up the world. That's what Kim is going for.

If Trump had brains, he would offer to sign a peace agreement with the North Koreans. That knocks the main pillar of support for a massive military bristling with nukes in an incredibly poor country. But as we know about our president...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
viclineal wrote:
It isn't unthinkable that North Korea might try diplomacy to test the internal political divide in South Korea. What portion of South Korean society would be willing to reduce some ties with the US in exchange for détente with North Korea?


Their dimplomacy with the South Koreans I suspect would be fairly Draconian. "Give us tons of money, and we won't nuke you into oblivion".

Even their conventional arms force is enough to wreak significant devastation on Seoul. And given Trumps instability, and his seeming lack of concern for this exact scenario, is it any wonder that the South Koreans wish to talk to North Korea?

I wouldn't be suprised to see China, Japan, and the two Koreas holding talks soon, leaving the U.S. out in the cold, with their hardline stance that NK should dump all nuclear ambitions, before we come to any table.

Much like the world is doing with the Paris Accord, they are simply moving on without us.

Trumps strategy is based on being the 800 lb gorilla in the room, but the reality is, the room is big enough to enable outher countries to simply sidestep around us. And there is plenty of room for other powers, namely China, to step in and play a large role, in peacemaking.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Kearns
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
Silence is golden.
badge
Your sea is so great and my boat is so small.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Why aren't nukes more like guns?

Where the more countries who have them the safer everyone is?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vic Lineal
Spain
Barcelona
flag msg tools
Nope. Nope nope nope nope.
Avatar
mb
abadolato01 wrote:
Their dimplomacy with the South Koreans I suspect would be fairly Draconian. "Give us tons of money, and we won't nuke you into oblivion".


Do you suspect that based on something in particular?

They are definitely two states at war, but they have repeatedly expressed their interest in a peace treaty and a permanent and guaranteed resolution to the stand-off. As have, periodically, done South Korean governments (IIRC there's even a ministerial position in the RoK government for reunification matters).

Quote:
Even their conventional arms force is enough to wreak significant devastation on Seoul. And given Trumps instability, and his seeming lack of concern for this exact scenario, is it any wonder that the South Koreans wish to talk to North Korea?


The willingness to talk between both parts of Korea has had its ebbs and flows, but there's always been an important part of the political spectrum in South Korea that wanted to talk to North Korea to achieve a resolution beyond immediate security concerns - it was a standard position of both the left and the democratic opposition to the dictatorship. The military approach is largely favoured by the right wing (very powerful in the Republic of Korea), the military establishment and the core State institutions, but given that South Korea is a peculiar democracy to say the least, it'd be foolish to assume that that State policy is automatically supported by an overwhelming majority of the population. Reunification is a very powerful motive in South Korea.

Quote:
I wouldn't be suprised to see China, Japan, and the two Koreas holding talks soon, leaving the U.S. out in the cold, with their hardline stance that NK should dump all nuclear ambitions, before we come to any table.


I'm not sure about Japan - I don't see Abe doing that - but China could definitely seek talks with both Koreas and perhaps other regional players.

Quote:
Much like the world is doing with the Paris Accord, they are simply moving on without us.

Trumps strategy is based on being the 800 lb gorilla in the room, but the reality is, the room is big enough to enable outher countries to simply sidestep around us. And there is plenty of room for other powers, namely China, to step in and play a large role, in peacemaking.


Hopefully!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
viclineal wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:
Their dimplomacy with the South Koreans I suspect would be fairly Draconian. "Give us tons of money, and we won't nuke you into oblivion".


Do you suspect that based on something in particular?

They are definitely two states at war, but they have repeatedly expressed their interest in a peace treaty and a permanent and guaranteed resolution to the stand-off. As have, periodically, done South Korean governments (IIRC there's even a ministerial position in the RoK government for reunification matters).

Quote:
Even their conventional arms force is enough to wreak significant devastation on Seoul. And given Trumps instability, and his seeming lack of concern for this exact scenario, is it any wonder that the South Koreans wish to talk to North Korea?


The willingness to talk between both parts of Korea has had its ebbs and flows, but there's always been an important part of the political spectrum in South Korea that wanted to talk to North Korea to achieve a resolution beyond immediate security concerns - it was a standard position of both the left and the democratic opposition to the dictatorship. The military approach is largely favoured by the right wing (very powerful in the Republic of Korea), the military establishment and the core State institutions, but given that South Korea is a peculiar democracy to say the least, it'd be foolish to assume that that State policy is automatically supported by an overwhelming majority of the population. Reunification is a very powerful motive in South Korea.

Quote:
I wouldn't be suprised to see China, Japan, and the two Koreas holding talks soon, leaving the U.S. out in the cold, with their hardline stance that NK should dump all nuclear ambitions, before we come to any table.


I'm not sure about Japan - I don't see Abe doing that - but China could definitely seek talks with both Koreas and perhaps other regional players.

Quote:
Much like the world is doing with the Paris Accord, they are simply moving on without us.

Trumps strategy is based on being the 800 lb gorilla in the room, but the reality is, the room is big enough to enable outher countries to simply sidestep around us. And there is plenty of room for other powers, namely China, to step in and play a large role, in peacemaking.


Hopefully!


I only base my analysis on the presumption (and it is a presumption) that two countries come to the table to compromise and see what the other can offer, in exchange for this peace. North Korea's only real bargaining chip, and the one that South Korea fears, is their use of weapons that can do immense damage to Seoul. I strongly suspect that this capability would be used as a bargaining chip, in any discussions with either the U.S., or South Korea. If they did not have these weapons, they would not even be able to pose a threat to South Korea, or the U.S., and regime change might have occured a long time ago (whether by internal means, or external means). Kim Jon Un recognizes that his military (and nuclear) capability is key to the survival of the regime, and he will not give it up easily.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.