Author Topic: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...  (Read 12538 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
We don't use nukes ever again. Period.  This should be non-negotiable.

 

Offline Klaustrophobia

  • 210
  • the REAL Nuke of HLP
    • North Carolina Tigers
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
is it really not possible to launch a massive non-nuclear "first strike" attack that would wipe out nearly all of NK's artillery targeted on civilian population centers?  we can worry about their actual war-fighting assets later, they really aren't a credible threat.  it's my understanding that south koreans, those living in seoul in particular, are well practiced at evacuating/taking cover in case of attack.  some documentary type thing said they run drills at regular intervals, and the entire city goes ghost town in like 3 minutes.
I like to stare at the sun.

 

Offline Aesaar

  • 210
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
I'm sure China'd be fine with letting NK get nuked.  It's not like they'd possibly receive a significant amount of fallout because they're so close, right?

  
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
I'm sure China'd be fine with letting NK get nuked.  It's not like they'd possibly receive a significant amount of fallout because they're so close, right?

Actually, the most significant fallout would be carried by the jet stream over Japan and eventually North America, if a large enough cumulative payload is used.  A nuclear first-strike by the United States would be a somewhat more direct shooting of themselves (and their allies) in the foot.

Why are we talking about nuclear first-strikes anyway?  Kim Jong-Un is stirring up nationalist and pro-military sentiment to secure his political position at home.  He's still a new dictator, and the most likely time for a coup to occur is when there is or has recently been a major change in the political system, such as when leadership changes hands.  Kim Jong-Un doesn't want to be forced out of leadership, barely two years in.  That statement cleaves both ways, though:  He doesn't want his own military leaders forcing him from office, but he doesn't want to be curb-stomped by the United States, so he'll use the North Korean state media to talk a big storm and be provocative with satelite launches and nuclear tests, but ultimately it just makes for a slightly noisier status-quo.  We're not talking about Kim Jong-Il thinking about ways to secure his historical legacy; we're talking about a new dictator, who is more concerned with political self-preservation.

The prospect of reigniting the Korean War is an interesting foreign policy thought experiment, given how complicated the United States' relationship with China has become since the 1950's, but even a conventional war scenario isn't terribly realistic, and a nuclear war scenario is laughably absurd. 

 

Offline MP-Ryan

  • Makes General Discussion Make Sense.
  • Global Moderator
  • 210
  • Keyboard > Pen > Sword
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
We don't use nukes ever again. Period.  This should be non-negotiable.

I'm not in favour of the pre-emptive or general use of nuclear weapons either (specifically in this conflict), but I can't agree with your statement in broad terms and timeframes.
"In the beginning, the Universe was created.  This made a lot of people very angry and has widely been regarded as a bad move."  [Douglas Adams]

 

Offline Luis Dias

  • 211
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
The best way of dealing with them might be to simply carpet the entire country with ICBMs timed to strike simultaneously, so they're flattened before they realize what's happening.

I really hope the voices inside the military of those involved (US, Korea, Japan) don't even consider the madness you are advocating.

 

Offline Mars

  • I have no originality
  • 211
  • Attempting unreasonable levels of reasonable
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
How about we park a few carriers in the sea of Japan and strike as many of their howitzers as we can at once, if and only if it comes to that, instead. Nuking the country would have repercussions far beyond simply killing millions of people.

 
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
Unfortunately there's so many howitzers aimed at Seoul we can't take all of them out before Seoul gets pounded into dust and possibly nerve gassed.
17:37:02   Quanto: I want to have sexual intercourse with every space elf in existence
17:37:11   SpardaSon21: even the males?
17:37:22   Quanto: its not gay if its an elf

[21:51] <@Droid803> I now realize
[21:51] <@Droid803> this will be SLIIIIIGHTLY awkward
[21:51] <@Droid803> as this rich psychic girl will now be tsundere for a loli.
[21:51] <@Droid803> OH WELLL.

See what you're missing in #WoD and #Fsquest?

[07:57:32] <Caiaphas> inspired by HerraTohtori i built a supermaneuverable plane in ksp
[07:57:43] <Caiaphas> i just killed my pilots with a high-g maneuver
[07:58:19] <Caiaphas> apparently people can't take 20 gees for 5 continuous seconds
[08:00:11] <Caiaphas> the plane however performed admirably, and only crashed because it no longer had any guidance systems

 

Offline Nemesis6

  • 28
  • Tongs
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
I'm sure China'd be fine with letting NK get nuked.  It's not like they'd possibly receive a significant amount of fallout because they're so close, right?

You're forgetting that China are the ones who are basically the cause of there being a North/South divide today by getting into the fight on the side of the DPRK. Whether this has changed I don't know, but I doubt it.

On an adjacent note - After pounding Seoul to hell, any North Korean offensive would stall the second their forces come across a super market.

 

Offline BloodEagle

  • 210
  • Bleeding Paradox!
    • Steam
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
Does anyone still make earthquake bombs?

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
We don't use nukes ever again. Period.  This should be non-negotiable.

I'm not in favour of the pre-emptive or general use of nuclear weapons either (specifically in this conflict), but I can't agree with your statement in broad terms and timeframes.
Well, let me clarify it a bit: we don't use any nuclear device that generates any appreciable level of fallout within our own atmosphere.  That one I definitely consider non-negotiable.

 

Offline Pred the Penguin

  • 210
  • muahahaha...
    • EaWPR
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
I'm sure China'd be fine with letting NK get nuked.  It's not like they'd possibly receive a significant amount of fallout because they're so close, right?

You're forgetting that China are the ones who are basically the cause of there being a North/South divide today by getting into the fight on the side of the DPRK. Whether this has changed I don't know, but I doubt it.
That was a long time ago, in a very different world, and very different China.

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
Not to mention you could just as easily blame America for it too.
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 

Offline watsisname

Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
Does anyone still make earthquake bombs?

Bombs that operate under the same principle are still produced and used to great effect, yes.
In my world of sleepers, everything will be erased.
I'll be your religion, your only endless ideal.
Slowly we crawl in the dark.
Swallowed by the seductive night.

 

Offline BrotherBryon

  • 29
  • Resident Lurker
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
This is nothing more than political saber rattling on the north's side, they can't be stupid enough to launch a preemptive nuclear strike no matter how crazy their dictator is. It's common knowledge that the US has enough conventional weapons to wipe out the north with out even the need for tapping into it's nuclear supply. Now granted a conventional war would be expensive and unwanted right now but the North must realize that unless they have full Chinese support any resumption of hostilities will sign their government's death warrant. This whole thing will blow over in a couple of weeks. Hell we could throw a few more of our worthless celebrities at them to play with for a little while that ought to appease them for a bit.
Holy Crap. SHIVANS! Tours

 
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
Not to mention you could just as easily blame America for it too.

Ummm....  No?

North Korea invaded South Korea.  The United Nations Security Council voted seven to zero (with three abstentions) to support South Korea in driving out the invaders.  The United States acting in compliance with U.N. Resolution led a multinational force, which proceeded to ROFLstomp North Korea's military, driving them back to within a few miles of the Chinese border.  When Chinese diplomats warned Truman not to advance further, he heeded the warning, ordering a halt to further advances.  General MacArthur exceeded his authority, in driving the North Korean forces back to the Chinese border.

Rather than seek to have MacArthur dismissed, have the United States removed from command of the U.N. force, or restore the war's immediately previous status quo or even the pre-war status quo, China entered the war as a full ally of North Korea, going so far as to push south of the 38th Parallel.  China wanted South Korea wiped from the map just as much as North Korea did and merely waited for a politically expedient moment to enter the war.  While the United States was developing an animosity toward Communist states, they entered the Korean war at the behest of the international community on the side of a nation defending against military aggression.  China entered on the side of the aggressor, citing grievances that could have been addressed through diplomatic channels or much more limited military means than what they ultimately brought to bear.

Yeah, I think it's fair to say that China bears the lion's share of the responsibility for the Korean War ending in a stalemate.  Had China not entered the war, North Korea would be a footnote in history.  Had China entered the war to enforce the boundaries of North Korea, as they were in October of 1950, then North Korea would be a buffer, little more than an impotent border region, between China and South Korea.  Instead, they tried to drive South Korea into the sea, but couldn't, since they were fighting against a force that was their military equal.

This is nothing more than political saber rattling on the north's side.

Thank you.  I was worried that I was the only one who thought all this nuclear navel-gazing was inane.

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
I find it interesting that you picked the start of the war and not the events leading up to it at all.

You do realise that the US was heavily responsible for the mess that led up to it, right? Not to mention being responsible (together with the Russians) for partitioning Korea in the first place (funnily enough, the Koreans weren't even asked if this was something they'd consider desirable).

Step back a bit and you'll see that the US and USSR pretty much caused the problem. China just made it worse.


Oh and talking about UN resolutions at that point is kinda laughable considering neither USSR nor mainland China were involved in that vote. Not to mention the way you consider MacArthur's actions to be a fairly minor contributor to the eventual outcome.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2013, 12:43:02 am by karajorma »
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
I find it interesting that you picked the start of the war and not the events leading up to it at all.

You do realise that the US was heavily responsible for the mess that led up to it, right? Not to mention being responsible (together with the Russians) for partitioning Korea in the first place (funnily enough, the Koreans weren't even asked if this was something they'd consider desirable).

Step back a bit and you'll see that the US and USSR pretty much caused the problem.  China just made it worse.

...and when you pull back further, you see nearly a half-century of foreign rule over the Korean peninsula, which ultimately led to the problem of how to reconstitute the nation, post-World War II.  Shall we blame the stalemate of the Korean War on Imperial Japan - an entity that ceased to exist, five years before the war began?

Yes, reconstituting a state that ceased to exist fourty years prior is a messy business, particularly when rival parties have a vested interest in the type of state that emerges from the process.  That process (which I am not defending, by the way) may have led to the war, but the outcome of the war must be attributed to the participants and how they conducted themselves, which leads me to....

Not to mention the way you consider MacArthur's actions to be a fairly minor contributor to the eventual outcome.

Not at all.  MacArthur's actions were the catalyst/excuse for China's entry into the war.  That makes him a pretty significant player, but China had many different ways to respond to his overstepping his authority, and they chose to enter the Korean War as a full ally of North Korea.  China did not seek retribution against MacArthur; China did not seek to secure their border against his activities; China sought to join the North in wiping out South Korea.  That is the decision that ultimately led to the stalemate at the Thirty-Eighth Parallel, and that's why I assign China the lion's share of the blame for that stalemate.  Does MacArthur deserve a share of the blame as well, for attacking North Korean depots, within Chinese territory?  Certainly.  Trying to pin that part of the blame on the United States as a whole is somewhat absurd, though, since that action was taken in direct contradiction to the orders MacArthur had received from President Truman.

Oh and talking about UN resolutions at that point is kinda laughable considering neither USSR nor mainland China were involved in that vote.

1)  The Soviet Union was a permenant member of the Security Council.  They were not uninvolved in the vote; they gave up their vote and veto as part of a protest, regarding the representation of Communist China in the United Nations.  Had the Soviet Union been so empassioned to stop United Nations' involvement in the Korean War, they could have terminated their boycott and vetoed the resolution that brought the U.N. into the conflict.  Pointing out that the USSR voluntarily omitted themselves from this decision shows that they were either grossly short-sighted or placed a comparatively low priority on the outcome of the Korean War.

2)  The legitimacy of The People's Republic of China was still in question, at the time the U.N. was passing resolutions relating to the Korean War.  They had only managed to drive the Nationalists from mainland China months prior to the passage of UNSCR's 82 and 83, and so it was an open question of whether or not the PRC would last, as a government, long enough to warrant recognition (nevermind the Republic of China's permenant seat on the Security Council), or whether they would be toppled by a subsequent revolution or foreign invasion.  (I will grant that the question should not have remained open for the two decades that it did, but with the benefit of hindsight, it's easy to see where the Chinese Civil War could have become, in the early 1950's, a proxy war on the scale of Vietnam.)

3)  The point of bringing up the U.N. resolutions was to show that the United States did not go barging into the Korean peninsula unilaterally, but at the behest of the global community, and so whatever blame you would assign to the United States for the outcome of the Korean War deserves to be shared by the six other nations that voted with the United States to put U.N. support behind South Korea and the three that complacently let the resolution pass (including and especially the USSR, given their veto authority).

To find some common ground, though, I think we can both agree that Yugoslavia was blameless in this affair.  ;)

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
Seems like a stretch to me. Zhou Enlai sent a quite clear message to the US that they would only intervene if the Americans crossed the 38th Parallel. When MacArthur did exactly that, a day later, what did you seriously expect them to do? I do have to question what options you feel China had given that they weren't members of the UN. It's not like they could have gotten a UN resolution in their favour. And MacArthur's actions are basically little different to the invasion of South Korea by the North Koreans i.e. the illegal invasion of a country. I somehow doubt America would have sat still and done nothing had Soviet forces been on a illegal mission in North Mexico.


Basically I think the claim that you can blame the Chinese for the mess is petty short-sighted and I think the claim that they entered the war to destroy South Korea is flat out wrong. I find the claim that the North Koreans were despots laughably biased too given the number of massacres perpetrated by the South Korean government both before and during the war. There were a whole bunch of factors that led up to that mess and America are responsible for a lot of them.

Finally when it comes to MacArthur, there is a certain amount of responsibility the US has to face for not relieving him for disobeying orders. They could have done it much earlier.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2013, 07:00:21 am by karajorma »
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 

Offline Luis Dias

  • 211
Re: If you've ever wondered what I would consider legitimate cause to intervene...
At least this thread is becoming quite a lot informative to me!