View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Dave The Man wrote: |
This shows quicker they get rid of Kim from North Korea the Better.
They went into Iraq for lot less Reason. So what is Holding them Back? |
Um, the results of going into Iraq for one! _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | Dave The Man wrote: |
This shows quicker they get rid of Kim from North Korea the Better.
They went into Iraq for lot less Reason. So what is Holding them Back? |
Um, the results of going into Iraq for one! |
Well North Korea is a Bigger Worry at the Moment then the Middle East _________________ I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
|
|
|
|
Morrigu
Joined: 11 Aug 2001
|
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
Not good, but like anything with nuclear weapons, the really scary moment will be when one side thinks they can get away with it without crippling retaliation.
Given the US has clearly been looking at this issue, it suggests to me that they will have taken steps to ensure that their ability to strike back will not be impaired by an EMP. So at that point, it's probably just a variation on the whole nuclear strike calculation.
I remain astonished that the US is not holding China to greater account. if it were a client state of the US threatening China in this way, all hell would break loose and fashionable opinion would be sitting atop a raised roof. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 Location: The 18
|
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Mugwump wrote: |
Not good, but like anything with nuclear weapons, the really scary moment will be when one side thinks they can get away with it without crippling retaliation.
Given the US has clearly been looking at this issue, it suggests to me that they will have taken steps to ensure that their ability to strike back will not be impaired by an EMP. So at that point, it's probably just a variation on the whole nuclear strike calculation.
I remain astonished that the US is not holding China to greater account. if it were a client state of the US threatening China in this way, all hell would break loose and fashionable opinion would be sitting atop a raised roof. |
I don't know why you'd think China is any less a prisoner of realpolitik than the US is. Ultimately nobody, particularly not an economic superpower, wants the world to descend into nuclear war. For that, you need deeply irrational and trigger-happy agents, and Xi – for all his bleak regime's tyranny – seems a far safer pair of hands than either Kim or Trump. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
China has one serious rival as an economic and global superpower. Do you think it would advantage China massively to have the Us semi-destroyed in a nuclear holocaust with a small power ? I am not saying that they want it, but of all the long run historic scenarios that might play out, it would accelerate Chinese global hegemony unlike any other. Meanwhile, their client state keeps America strategically preoccupied while they seek to extend their dominance in the Pacific. China, NK’s only real trading partner, could crush Kim in weeks. The question is why they choose not to. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
Mugwump wrote: | China has one serious rival as an economic and global superpower. Do you think it would advantage China massively to have the Us semi-destroyed in a nuclear holocaust with a small power ? I am not saying that they want it, but of all the long run historic scenarios that might play out, it would accelerate Chinese global hegemony unlike any other. Meanwhile, their client state keeps America strategically preoccupied while they seek to extend their dominance in the Pacific. China, NK’s only real trading partner, could crush Kim in weeks. The question is why they choose not to. |
You can't think of a reason other than "extending their dominance in the Pacific"? _________________ In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
^ about seven or eight more. Maybe fifteen. If you have a point to make, it might be best if you make itt. _________________ Two more flags before I die!
Last edited by Mugwump on Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:41 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
But I don't have it. |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
Mugwump wrote: | ^ about seven or eight more. Maybe fifteen. If you have a point to make, it might be best if you make itt. |
Who among us really wants to complicate the story of the all-powerful China, with its intimate love-in with North Korea, control of Kim's hand and arsenal, disinterest in stability, disregard for economic consequences, and singular lack of self-preservation instinct in the face of short-range missiles and potential global catastrophe?
You can hear the talk in Beijing even as we speak:
"Our dearest brother Kim — Confucius love 'im — couldn't hit the side of a barn!" _________________ In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
pietillidie wrote: | Mugwump wrote: | ^ about seven or eight more. Maybe fifteen. If you have a point to make, it might be best if you make itt. |
Who among us really wants to complicate the story of the all-powerful China, with its intimate love-in with North Korea, control of Kim's hand and arsenal, disinterest in stability, disregard for economic consequences, and singular lack of self-preservation instinct in the face of short-range missiles and potential global catastrophe?
You can hear the talk in Beijing even as we speak:
"Our dearest brother Kim — Confucius love 'im — couldn't hit the side of a barn!" |
Your post is not easy to follow, but I think you are suggesting that China has little influence on North Korea because it fears“instability”.
If so, underwriting 95% of the foreign trade of a client state which capriciously fires missiles across foreign territories and regularly threatens the other superpower and regional players with nuclear holocaust is a strange way to contribute to stability.
The only stability argument regularly advanced by Chinese diplomats is that they do not want a refugee problem on their northern border via an NK collapse. That is a strange trade off for the de facto sponsorship of a state that threatens to spark nuclear war in the region. I think the Chinese are a little more strategic in their thinking than that. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Culprit
Joined: 06 Feb 2003 Location: Port Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
It appears the propaganda machine is in full swing. A few nights on mainstream news and online is how bad NK is and how people have escaped the tyranny and live in fear and horror. Todays news we have soldiers morale is low and they are diseased. Now in Melbourne have alarms installed in the CBD for Terrorist attacks. We must be moving into attack mode. |
|
|
|
|
|