Duban wrote:I'm not sure where you're getting this "we'd only intervene to protect our assets" idea from. The US has strong ties to S. Korea and has stated explicitly that we would support the South if a war were to break out. Sure we have military bases, that's nice, but N. Korea is the primary reason why we have bases there.
You have it backwards. North Korea exists primarily because the US has military bases on the peninsula. The military presence was there before
the DPRK existed
, and the situation is so tense because the US has had nuclear weapons positioned on the Parallel since the fifties. But, yes, the US would retaliate in the event of military action but it's because they'd want to maintain their interests in the region: if they didn't, they'd pack up their toys and go home, like the Europeans did in the forties and fifties.
jestingrabbit wrote:Have a look at the countries that border China: Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar, India, Bhutan, Nepal, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kygyzstan, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Russia, and, last but not least, North Korea. Excluding members of the commonwealth of independent states, Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, and Bhutan, they are (nominally) far left, authoritarian regimes. As far as I can see, if they can push a neighbor towards that style of government, they do it. Nepal is a good recent example. If there was a railway to Bhutan with a few more tonnes of load tolerance, it would likely have gone the way of Tibet a long time ago imo.
It seems to me they see it as being in their interests to have puppet states under the thumb of authoritarian regimes as neighbors. That's their deal. I don't think that they'll be cool with the DPRK amalgamating with the ROK. I think they want a nice buffer between themselves and anyone they don't control.
You're implying China somehow engineered those countries towards communism, when they all had their own communist movements before the communists were even in power in China. I think you're imagining Chinese agency in these affairs, and it's notable that although China is always outspoken they've never been the ones responsible for veto'ing unification talks. All it is China doesn't want is the conflict breaking out again, because that would mean North Korean refugees flooding their country and destabilizing the population.
jestingrabbit wrote:I'm not saying that China is best buds with all those countries, but I think they believe that they know what to expect from them, and know how to handle them. The Sino-Vietnamese war was essentially businesslike, they had a short, conventional conflict. They knew what they could expect. Especially now that there are no other major communist powers around, they have the whip hand against those states.
Regardless, North Korea is definitely a client state, and is a geographical buffer between china and countries that are well within the US sphere of influence. They're not just going to walk away from that.
No, it really isn't. North Korea historically sourced its aid and took general direction from the Soviet Union, not from China. Since the 90s, it has sourced most of its aid from South Korea. And it is plainly evident China does not dictate the DPRK: China loves the status quo, and North Korea regularly threatens it. Never mind that the essence of North Korean nationalism is founded on the concept of radical independence and isolation.
SummerGlauFan wrote:They can't sink it.
No aircraft-carrier can withstand a constant barrage of missiles, which is why defense is often built around stealth. The DPRK can but they won't, because they don't want a war. Argentina invaded the Falklands because they could get away with it (even though they lost the war they were never at
war with Britain), not because they wanted to go to war with Britain or anyone else. The DPRK will do what it can get away with to assert itself and no more.
SummerGlauFan wrote:No. The reason the island was attacked was because of military exercises, which IIRC were already submitted to NK for "approval" beforehand. Well, to be honest, it's becase NK is a crazy child who has to prove he's the biggest bully, but the military exercises were a handy excuse.
North Korea is the smallest bully under threat from a lot of much larger, better equipped bullies. They have to act
crazy to be treated as a genuine threat. That's not the same as being