• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Forum moderator applications are now open! Click here for details.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

North Korea to enter state of war with South Korea and United States

Gyardosamped

entering snake habitat
1,462
Posts
18
Years
Apparently, early Thursday morning (North Korean time), NK made this statement on their state broadcasting news station:

"The moment of explosion is approaching fast. No one can say a war will break out in Korea or not and whether it will break out today or tomorrow," North Korea's state news agency KCNA declared in its latest broadside. "The responsibility for this grave situation entirely rests with the U.S. administration and military warmongers keen to encroach upon the DPRK's sovereignty and bring down its dignified social system with brigandish logic."

Also, on Wednesday, North Korea decided to disallow entry to South Korean employees who worked in a joint industrial complex between the two Korea's. This industrail complex raised a lot of money for both Korea's, so it's definitely something that has caused alarm because NK closing it off to SK workers does not benefit them (NK) at all.

This also comes as the United States has placed missile defense systems off the coast of Korea, as well as near Guam, which is a U.S. territory in the Pacific.

NK's rhetoric has definitely vamped up within the past few weeks, and although many people believe it's just bluster and all, the U.S., SK, China, and Russia (among the most important few in regards to NK) have certainly made their remarks and their presence known.

We'll have to wait to see what happens.
 

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness
8,123
Posts
19
Years
Continuing from that reasoning: what does NK win by lanching a nuke to somewhere? Nothing. Zero. If anything, they will win absolute annihilation. So 0 gain and possible infinite loss. Sounds reasonable to go ahead.

On the other hand, what will they win by threatening with a nuke? They'll get to start negotiations and maybe even get food in exchange for "good behaviour", as most of the country is starving.

If you can extort someone into getting what you want, specially if that person is so much more powerful than you, it's foolish to go on with the threat- you'll lose your chance to get things in return!
I don't see anyone caving to them. Sort of a "we don't negotiate with terrorists" thing.

And I don't think North Korea is operating with a full deck
 
5,983
Posts
15
Years
You know what guy? I just thought of this.

What if there's an internal crisis? Like there's another famine. They've already begun mobilizing the people, getting them to do air raid and evacuation drills. Maybe it's to move attention away from internal troubles?

Or what if there's a power struggle among the North Korean elite? Kim Jong-eun is a new leader, and this might be a good opportunity for some party faction to oust their enemies. Or maybe ultra-militaristic generals want more power in the government so they start these aggressive movements. Kim, not wanting to appear like he's backing down, becomes aggressive to foreign media to pander to this faction. Kind of like how Mitt Romney would have to say stupid things to keep Tea Partiers happy.

Mao Zedong started the Cultural Revolution that tore up the country, but allowed him to destroy his political enemies. This tells me that the North Koreans might be taking one out of his playbook to improve their own power inside their country. So perhaps changing the balance of power in their own favour is worth closing down the Kaesong Complex. Or these are the ultranationalist faction that don't like cooperation with the South in the first place, and so don't see Kaesong closing as much as a sacrifice. There are always ideological nuts in every country that see their agenda to be more important than the national interest.

So if this happens to be the case, open war would be unintentional because that would jeopardize the power they're trying so hard to obtain. However, this would be a really big gamble they're trying to achieve. Thoughts?
 

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness
8,123
Posts
19
Years
I was watching CNN and some talking head had said "North Korea is crazy, but not suicidal".

No... I think they're suicidal. North Korea is already pretty content with having a country of starving people. They don't really have anything to lose here
 
5,983
Posts
15
Years
That would make them irrational though. And the rational actor model is a pretty decent "edit: model" for explaining many political phenomena. The North Korean elite are content with a country of starving people. Anything that goes against that reduces their relative power, and they want to keep on the position they already have. That's why conservative can suck, and a rational explanation to their behaviour. Did you know that North Korea started some basic market-oriented, China-style reforms before all this news happened? No doubt some of the top brass had fit over that, feeling their own privilege being threatened.

Internal politicking, that is some elite faction trying to hold on/increase their private interest to the detriment of the public good, would give a pretty rational explanation to why the whole country has to suffer. While I don't think it's in human nature to be suicidal, it sure is in human nature to be selfish.
 
Last edited:
2,709
Posts
18
Years
  • Age 30
  • Seen Feb 16, 2020
That would make them irrational though. And the rational actor model is a pretty decent "edit: model" for explaining many political phenomena. The North Korean elite are content with a country of starving people. Anything that goes against that reduces their relative power, and they want to keep on the position they already have. That's why conservative can suck, and a rational explanation to their behaviour. Did you know that North Korea started some basic market-oriented, China-style reforms before all this news happened? No doubt some of the top brass had fit over that, feeling their own privilege being threatened.

Internal politicking, that is some elite faction trying to hold on/increase their private interest to the detriment of the public good, would give a pretty rational explanation to why the whole country has to suffer. While I don't think it's in human nature to be suicidal, it sure is in human nature to be selfish.

There are shreds of rationality when dealing with NK, not just one single logical approach. The 'reforms' you mention are just about as substantial as the constant stream of worthless statements being sent out by the press.

The vast majority of national security govt. heads/analysts agree that if a war were to happen, the entire North Korean army would be virtually decimated in 24-48 hours; I'm willing to bet real money that North Korea is quite aware of this as well. Jong-Un spent his teen years in Europe - he knows about his Hermit Kingdom. The trouble is getting this message across to the rest of the Party. Refugees are beginning to mention the fact that the general perspective isn't so much on superiority anymore as much as it is on the wish of achieving some sort of resolution in the end. The only sensible way to do this without driving the still-brainwashed military leadership even more crazy is by making Jong-Un himself assert his own leadership. How? By doing all this bullcrap we've been seeing lately.

There's a certain level of hope surrounding the idea that maybe Jong-Un does not actually want a conflict; he's just merely having some trouble weighing his wishes with how the rest of the country sees him: a young kid who's still inexperienced with the military and the country's 'objectives.'
 

Mr. X

It's... kinda effective?
2,391
Posts
17
Years
Maybe, maybe not.

It's really hard to estemate how effective our army would be against their's. Sure, we have the technological advantage, but we're forgetting how... what was the word... um... brainwashed loyal the people are despite how ****** of a situation they are in.

Sure, we can knock out their leadership easily enough - And their major military positions. But after that? It would be a much longer ground campaign. Where our technological superiority wouldn't, as the wars in Iraq and Trashcanistan Afghanistan show, be of that much use.

Still - This depends on how loyal the people really are. If they are as loyal as N.Korea says then this could easily turn into another long war.

And we can't forget that China still has a mutual defence agreement with N.Korea. And really, China is the only reason that we haven't dropped a bomb on Kim's doorstep yet.

Edit - Actually, China has been mobilizing forces near the Korean border for a while now.
 
Last edited:
5,983
Posts
15
Years
Maybe Kim should get his hands dirty and purge the "party traitors". Maybe an inner party coup with his biggest enemies assassinated or demotions? I have a feeling that the military is extremely entrenched. Perhaps removing them in one fell sweep, something so shocking that his opponents can't react, is the only way of removing their influence. Machiavellian, but worth a shot :P

Mr. X: China doesn't have to guarantee North Korea's security. It's the stronger power, so it can do whatever it wants. When push comes to shove, North Korea can ask for assistance but treaties can be broken. And I really don't think that'll make China look bad, in fact it'll probably improve its international prestige by doing the only sensible thing XD.

The North Koreans, especially the peasant class are not a loyal people. That's brainwashing crap spun by Western media. Sure, the N. Korean government are coercing political loyalty, but you can't force someone to love you. In fact, some of the latest defectors have be talking about how the North Korean youth, who were born and grew up in the famine years, have no memories of Kim Il Sung, the leader that was actually worth two sh*ts and got stuff done. All they have are years of poverty, bright city lights of Liaoning to their north, and pirated South Korean dramas.
 
Last edited:

KingCharizard

C++ Developer Extraordinaire
1,229
Posts
14
Years
We cant nuke north korea cause the south is too close, japan is close and so is china, the result of nuking NK would be destivating to multiple countries, and none of them want that..

I think the north knows we wont do it either, only as a last resort and the other countries would protest...

Its hard to say what will happen yet, its a waiting game now..
 

KriegStein

Nuclear Reactor
407
Posts
11
Years
I just wondered something. People only seem to think of nukes and nuking. So I wonder...what about the north korean cruise missiles? Surely they wont use just their (perhaps created) one-or few nuke/s? What I mean to say is that even mid range cruise missiles can cause damage. But I guess thats why the missile defence systems have been sent to guam. (was it guam?)
 
5,983
Posts
15
Years
I wouldn't imagine the KPA to be bristling with cruise missiles like the Americans have Tomahawks. They do carry some Chinese-produced missiles but it's 60 year old soviet tech, and regardless the bulk of their arsenal is ballistic. They could probably mess up South Korea really bad though - over 50% of South Korea's population live within 80km, and it's only 400 km to the other end.
 

Mr. X

It's... kinda effective?
2,391
Posts
17
Years
Most of the issues with N.Korea are because the US broke it's agreements with them.

In the 50s - The US ignored the provisions in the Korean armistice that said no weapons were to be introduced to either side. The US, under a Republican president, determined that they didn't have to follow that provision and moved a lot of hardware, including nuclear weapons, into S.Korea.

Into the future, the 90's, we made a deal with them to end their nuclear program. Our side of the bargain was to provide them oil and construct two LWR reactors for their use. This was done under Democrat leadership, but when Republicans reook congress soon after the oil shipments started arriving late, because Congress refused to provide necessary funds for the project.

Foward to when Bush gets elected, the US then backs out of it's promise to build the reactors suspending the project

We've hand chances to improve relations - Sadly though, under Republican leadership, we determined that we didn't need to stay true to our word.

While N.Korea is making things worse with their recent actions, with as many times as the US ignored it's deals with them then it's no suprise that they refuse to bend to US demands. They've gotten tired of making deals with a country who hasn't held true to it's word.

The US had a chance to improve relations when Un took leadership as well - They could have lifted some santions as a gesture of good will in hopes of further negotiations. While they did offer food aid - It was suspended when N. Korea said they were planning to launch a satellite into space. Idiocy on the US's part - Instead, they should have offered to launch the satellite for them.
 
Last edited:

KingCharizard

C++ Developer Extraordinaire
1,229
Posts
14
Years
Most of the issues with N.Korea are because the US broke it's agreements with them.

In the 50s - The US ignored the provisions in the Korean armistice that said no weapons were to be introduced to either side. The US, under a Republican president, determined that they didn't have to follow that provision and moved a lot of hardware, including nuclear weapons, into S.Korea.

Into the future, the 90's, we made a deal with them to end their nuclear program. Our side of the bargain was to provide them oil and construct two LWR reactors for their use. This was done under Democrat leadership, but when Republicans reook congress soon after the oil shipments started arriving late, because Congress refused to provide necessary funds for the project.

Foward to when Bush gets elected, the US then backs out of it's promise to build the reactors suspending the project

We've hand chances to improve relations - Sadly though, under Republican leadership, we determined that we didn't need to stay true to our word.

While N.Korea is making things worse with their recent actions, with as many times as the US ignored it's deals with them then it's no suprise that they refuse to bend to US demands. They've gotten tired of making deals with a country who hasn't held true to it's word.

The US had a chance to improve relations when Un took leadership as well - They could have lifted some santions as a gesture of good will in hopes of further negotiations. While they did offer food aid - It was suspended when N. Korea said they were planning to launch a satellite into space. Idiocy on the US's part - Instead, they should have offered to launch the satellite for them.

Exactly and this is the part most people chose to overlook or ignore.. Its our fault this is happening and now we expect the north to be scared at our military might.. its like being a police officer and stealing or beating someone badly and expecting other ppl to accept it quietly without getting upset... it doesnt work like that, it never has never will. But if someone backed out of a deal with the US we'd just go and take what were owed, Iraq oil for instance..
 
2,709
Posts
18
Years
  • Age 30
  • Seen Feb 16, 2020
Exactly and this is the part most people chose to overlook or ignore.. Its our fault this is happening and now we expect the north to be scared at our military might.. its like being a police officer and stealing or beating someone badly and expecting other ppl to accept it quietly without getting upset... it doesnt work like that, it never has never will. But if someone backed out of a deal with the US we'd just go and take what were owed, Iraq oil for instance..

You just can't compare Iraq with North Korea. The US backing out of 'a deal' was definitely not the cause of NK developing a fantastically massive cult of personality surrounding a very strange family that was put in charge of the country. The US backing out of 'a deal' did not cause said family to go on a military-first rampage transformation of a country whose apparent destiny was to become more and more isolated from the outside world by choice, with severe aggravations to those who opposed the decision.

Most importantly, the US backing out of 'a deal' was definitely not the single hand in the cause of all of the human rights violations that are going on at the moment, which are perhaps on a much more broader scope than the sheer famine (due to mismanagement of resources given to NK by aid across all these years) and collective 'genocide' and human labour exploration that is happening right now both within the country itself in the form of labour camps as well as in certain parts of Siberia in the form of exported labour for very low pay with very, very long-term 'contracts', whose workers are under the threat of any deviation in the safety of their families back home, that we are aware of.

The armistice agreement clauses did not cause this intimidating transformation of the Hermit Kingdom and its darkest patches; the country's government did this to itself and its own people, and it's only a matter of time before some sort of intervention takes place, whether through a war or through something else. Or, at least, one would hope, before it's too late.
 

Mr. X

It's... kinda effective?
2,391
Posts
17
Years
The country did this because it felt diplomacy would no longer work - Caused by the US continuously refusing to adhere to it's agreements.

N.Korea is making a mistake by doing this true, but it's the US's actions that caused N. Koreas leadership to lose faith in diplomacy.

The thing is that unification was supposed to happen a long time ago - But the the US and the Soviet Union got into a cold war, which prevented unification from happening.
 
5,983
Posts
15
Years
What shocks me is how the United States seems to be taking initiative if something happens. If anything, China has more right to regime change in North Korea. I think a joint Chinese-South Korea occupation would make the most sense. It would be terribly inappropriate if the United States intervened to a great degree in the Asian Sphere. Actually yeah, it would be rather insulting for the United States to intervene in Korea a second time.

Edit: South Korea would provide the economic leadership for a united Korea, and leaving China out of it would be insulting to the great power right next to its own border. If South Korea and China could agree, I don't think Japan would get involved, because that might be unacceptable to the Chinese and Korean publics.

All the new regime has to do is follow China-style reforms back in the 80's and 90's. With time, incomes will rise and the two Koreas may reunify.
 
Last edited:

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness
8,123
Posts
19
Years
What shocks me is how the United States seems to be taking initiative if something happens. If anything, China has more right to regime change in North Korea. I think a joint Chinese-South Korea occupation would make the most sense. It would be terribly inappropriate if the United States intervened to a great degree in the Asian Sphere. Actually yeah, it would be rather insulting for the United States to intervene in Korea a second time.

Edit: South Korea would provide the economic leadership for a united Korea, and leaving China out of it would be insulting to the great power right next to its own border. If South Korea and China could agree, I don't think Japan would get involved, because that might be unacceptable to the Chinese and Korean publics.

All the new regime has to do is follow China-style reforms back in the 80's and 90's. With time, incomes will rise and the two Koreas may reunify.
North Korea is threatening the US though. Why would they toss the responsibility to China?

If they strike South Korea before they do the US, China can come into play. But all of South Korea's allies would probably step up to the plate
 
5,983
Posts
15
Years
Because the US intervening on the peninsula was half of the reason there's a North and South Korea in the first place. And Korea is in China's backyard, much like the Monroe doctrine and how Americans didn't want Europeans intervening. Furthermore, Korea borders China, and I think China would want a direct say in how things would get done, who will invest in the new regime, what they'll do about potential refugees, and so on. And Korea and Japan wouldn't want America to get too involved. While they're cautious of rising Chinese power, bringing in foreign influence has never lead to peace no matter where you are in the world (French and Spanish intervening in Italy, America in the Middle East).

So China + Korea have the most to gain. An analogy may be how the US freaked out over the Cuban missile crisis. While the US wouldn't go arming united Korea with nukes, mistrust over the going-ons in your backyard will drive the Chinese paranoid. Anyways, the US will probably allow China to decide how the occupation will be carried out. It's implied in the respect of a great power's "sovereignty" in its sphere of influence, and I don't think the US would throw that out the window.
 
Back
Top