If we do go to war against the NK's again, China will definetely get involved again, but at least that'll give us an excuse not to pay our debt to them ha-ha. North Korea is a buffer for them. They would not like to have American troops or South Korean troops right on their border, heck, they would not like to have a prosperous capitalist nation on their border so China is what I'd be more concerned about than the NK people. I doubt the NK people will form some kind of insurgency, maybe just the people in Pyongyang, as that is where the most privileged class lives, but a lot of provinces have become more independent from the central government and, believe me, the "Dear" leader is not so dear in those areas. Maybe a better idea would be to just send them weapons and let them retake their own country and if they do run into trouble provide them some air cover.
Now, about a prosperous Korea after reunification. The people in North Korea for generations have lived under a totalitarian dictatorship which has provided their rations for everything, that is when they have enough to give out, so the concern I got is that they will not know how to make an honest living if reunified with the south. The South Koreans, from some reports I've read, are also concerned that the northerners when reunified will just be looking for their usual handouts, sort of what happened when Germany was reunified and the easterners expected their new capitalist democratic government to support them.
But the question is, can America fight in another front? Well, since we're expecting combat troops to leave Afghanistan soon and, from what I've heard, they have already left Iraq, it's not really fighting on another front then.
china may not get involved: NK isn;t just beligerant to the west. china may feel that a united Korea may be better than a dangerous North Korea.
There will be no insurgency from the priveledged elite; like all elites they're fat and weak.
I think your idea about giving them weapons and leaving them to it with airstrike support is great; when NK troops see their tanks go bang, their morale will die real fast. Frankly tho, I have much less favour for your idea that east germans just waited for government handouts; lets not forget that Germany is one of, if not the strongest European country.
I don't know how you can be concerned about them making an honest living; the fact is that NK has an army the size of china with a FRACTION of the populace; they've been the ones who've made the economy work for weapons and they've likely recieved NOTHING in return. Fact is I'll bet money they'll work FUCKING hard for almost nothing.
I hate war. But I'm a war history fan. That makes me a contradiction. Sure. But this war, if it happens, will spill over and escalate beyond anything we may have intended. The North is run by fanatics who would give up anything for a missile with a range long enough to reach U.S. soil--in fact, they may already have this, thanks to submarines. Yes, America has a technology advantage, but we had one in Vietnam, too--except for the rifle, as the Vietnamese used the AK47 and the Chinese Type 56, both were better than the M-14/M-16s. The PAVN used aircraft and artillery from the Soviets as well as captured arms from the U.S. and France, but they had less of them and little training. Their effectiveness was the resilient combat soldier. Similarly, the U.S. and South Korea presently have better arms, but face a much larger foot army. China supports North Korea and they are far more advanced and organized now than in 1951. They also are very sore over the issue of Taiwan. Despite the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, the Chinese still have hundreds of thousands of troops amassed at the SinKiang province bordering Russia. The Japanese are involved as well, economically and militarily, as the waters around their country are vital for importing. In short, this war should be avoided.
I like war. I know it's wrong and terrible, but I do. Any war may not escalate; china has shown signs of being weary of NK, stating that NK acts like a child. a submissive us controlled SK might be preferable to an unpredictable NK.
america's (& SKs) tech advantage will allow them to quickly eliminate NK tanks, SSMs, airfields and strategic positions. once those are all down, the oppressed NK will quickly cave, losing morale.
The difference is that in Vietnam the Vietnamese were emerging from French colonial oppression and were determined not to be oppressed. Once the NK see the chance of bolting from under the fist of NK, those guys are gonna move like greased lightning.
Frankly, it's excellent that those troops are tied up on the Russian border; they'll be unable to assist the forces of oppression in the conflict.
This war should be avoided. ALL war should be avoided. But this war is a much more worthy one than Iraq/Afghanistan for example.
The only thing threatening my country is hype, propaganda, snow and american bullshit.
The snow is not a threat to our country. It is only a symbol of our increasing weakness that we regard it as such.
Snow isn't really threatening, unless you're in The Alps, or the Antarctica.
^^This.
As a guy who wasn't drafted due to a handicap, (Epilepsy), my take on war is the entertainment value.
[/sarcasm]
No, really, it is similar in the case of Iraq, Afghanistan, evry other war: Countries would need to really sanction these countries in trades. No more trading with them, for two or three years, and they would settle for an agreement.
Sadly, all those big-talking countries whose leaders talk so big talk but around the back, they still sell weapons and stuff to countries they say they want to sanction
Because we need wars. We have massive industry branches and those weapons need to get used or we can't sell more.
So let's shoot up some brown or yellow men and make way for some juicy new grenades, smart bombs, tanks, etc pp.
While america has an excellent war industry, reuniting the Korea's, fighting dicatorship like NK, is a worthwhile cause.
Lets not forget that when we attacked Iraq, all hte comedians were joking, saying that "poor Korea, she wanted to have the war so much, but Iraq got it!"
A wise man once famously said something about war, that was quite sarcastic but he thought was very clever. I thought he was just a douche.
War is a racket. A general said that.
A war with Korea is the type that the modern U.S. military is designed to fight and win very, very quickly. The problem with that is if N. Korean Subs or artillery can hit bases or dense troop formations before they're destroyed by Air or missile, we'll see a large amount of casualties. America is a world class heavyweight boxer with a glass jaw, a squeamish public that can vote.
As for soldiers fighting after Command and Control has collapsed, it may hinge on two points.
1) North Korean soldiers (and a good deal of the public) are brainwashed and think they're fighting for the very survival of the "pure" Korean race against evil foreigners who want to kill each and every one of them.
2) Korean soldiers surrender en masse to RoK authorities or the Chinese. The level of propaganda against Americans would probably make it unlikely that they would respond to propaganda or bargaining prompts from sources they believe to be American. I wouldn't be surprised if high level folks who've been to the outside world would run to a western power or perhaps America. You also have to consider that many of these people in charge could be facing crimes against humanity or WMD trafficking charges.
3) China's role in all of this. I don't think China would go to war against the U.S. over North Korea any time soon. The U.S. and China both want to avoid war with each other at this time, and the potential for something really stupid (like a city near a defense hub getting flattened) is too great for the U.S. or China to consider. China will have to contend with refugees, but I think a lot of that will eventually fall on RoK. So China would not come out to fight on the side of DPRK, in fact it's more likely to help RoK and the U.S. in preparations for the lead up to the war.
With that said, I'm not convinced that an attack on N. Korea is likely in the next 6 years. I'm sure they're waiting for Kim Jong Il to die rather than forcing a regime change through direct military confrontation while he's still alive. They may try something if his son is running the show, but I doubt it. They're more than likely to cut a deal with him.
You can talk about brainwashing all you want, but my teachers grew up in the Soviet union and they weren't taken in by brainwashing. I remember my teacher teling me about how they had masks for nuclear attack which seemed like they were made of cottonwool and all the schoolkids joked about whose was best. I doubt naybodys buying the brainwashing; I know my lecturers didn't buy the brainwashing of the CCCP.
