View Poll Results: What is the best course of action in dealing with North Korea?

Voters
14. You may not vote on this poll
  • Full scale preemptive military strike

    4 28.57%
  • Limited preemptive military strike

    0 0%
  • Appeasement in the form of recognition and aid

    1 7.14%
  • Strategic Patience - Neither negotiation nor military action

    9 64.29%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 52 of 55 FirstFirst ... 43444546474849505152535455 LastLast
Results 766 to 780 of 819

Thread: The Korean Dilemma

  1. #766
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,418
    Trump got a promise to talk again, a promise to return remains of US servicemen and a promise to 'work toward' something. Kim got a promise to talk again, a promise to stop military exercises, and a US President giving him stellar photo ops.

    It isn't nothing, as Trump haters want to believe, but nor is it very substantive, as Trump cultists want to believe. It is still a good thing...at this stage. I am still convinced we are going to get to a point where what Kim is prepared to offer won't be enough to reasonably satisfy The US & its allies. Of course, Trump may make a bad deal just for a 'win', but that remains to be seen.


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  2. #767
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    7,219
    Well, the Repubs would charge Obama did that already with Iran, make a bad deal just for a 'win'. Funny how the Euros seem to have the biggest problem swallowing that right now.

    We're talking about two countries that still haven't signed a peace agreement. Surely, the acid test of how this meet went was it didn't end in more acrimony. In other words, the bar for success here is pretty damn low for a first meet. This to me is common sense.

    yes both agree to meet up and speak to each other. That is progress over the past. What comes out of it is to be seen. Kim seems ready to talk this time because he feels he has something to bargain with. His father did not and that is why there was the reneging and it all fell apart. I'm being postiive about any eventual outcome here. Maximalist positions are going to get whittled down, that is the hard business of deal making.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 13 Jun 18, at 12:50.

  3. #768
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    7,219
    Not a whole lot in this Chinese paranoia. A united korea means Kim is out of a job.

    Before Kim Meets Trump, China Gets Jittery About North Korea’s Intentions | NYT | Jun 10 2018

    By Jane Perlez
    June 10, 2018


    BEIJING — In the sudden rush of diplomacy involving North Korea, China has appeared to have the upper hand, hosting the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, twice before his long-anticipated Singapore summit meeting with President Trump even begins.

    Yet as Mr. Kim prepares to finally meet Mr. Trump in Singapore on Tuesday, some analysts say Beijing appears to be getting a sudden case of the jitters.

    They say the Chinese leaders, who are unused to being on the outside looking in, are growing anxious about whether they can keep their Cold War-era ally firmly in its current orbit around China. Leaders in Beijing are worried, experts say, that Mr. Kim might try to counterbalance China’s influence by embracing the United States, North Korea’s longtime enemy.

    According to analysts, Mr. Kim may seek to do this by offering Mr. Trump some sort of deal, which would probably include some pledge to scrap his nuclear arsenal in exchange for American help to reduce or even eliminate North Korea’s near total dependence on China.

    “If you look at history, North Korea is not sure of China, and has a kind of revenge mentality,” said Shen Zhihua, a prominent Chinese historian on North Korea. “The worst outcome is that the United States, South Korea and North Korea all get together and China gets knocked out.”

    Analysts said China worried that the United States could also use the Singapore meeting to engineer a united Korean Peninsula that joins the North with South Korea, one of Washington’s closest allies. For China, that raises the uncomfortable specter of American troops on China’s doorstep, erasing North Korea’s traditional role as a buffer.

    There is even the remote possibility that North Korea could flip allegiances, just as China did in 1972. When President Richard Nixon visited Beijing that year, Mao Zedong further distanced China from the Soviet Union in favor of friendship with the United States.

    Some analysts ask whether the United States could now flip North Korea to its side and away from China.

    “China can see some shocking resemblance to Nixon coming to China with Trump and North Korea,” said Yun Sun, a China analyst at the Washington-based Stimson Center. “If China could do it, why not North Korea?”

    Experts say the more preferable outcome for China would be for Mr. Trump and Mr. Kim to sign a peace treaty that formally ends the Korean War and paves the way for the eventual withdrawal of the 28,500 American troops in South Korea.

    That would leave the entire peninsula open to China’s influence, while eroding the confidence of American allies in Asia regarding Washington’s commitment to the region.

    Either way, a strategic realignment in Northeast Asia appears underway, with North Korea apparently intent on preserving its independence from China, and China not wanting to lose its leverage over the North and its young leader.

    There have already been signs that Mr. Kim is bridling under China’s influence.

    In one of his first acts after taking power in 2011, Mr. Kim ordered the killing of his uncle Jang Song-thaek, who had been seen as China’s main conduit to Pyongyang; Mr. Kim later ordered the killing of Kim Jong-nam, his half brother, who was also friendly to China, according to American and South Korean intelligence agencies.

    During his first six years of rule, Mr. Kim kept China at arm’s length, not even meeting with China’s leader, Xi Jinping. He finally met Mr. Xi in Beijing in March and then again in the Chinese port city of Dalian in May as part of the gamesmanship before his landmark meeting with Mr. Trump.

    What went on in those two meetings in China remains shrouded in secrecy. Chinese experts speculate that Mr. Xi promised hefty financial help or security guarantees.

    Some Chinese analysts also note a long-simmering resentment in North Korea about being considered the little brother of its much bigger neighbor. They said this touchiness was apparent in the lack of monuments in North Korea honoring the estimated 400,000 Chinese soldiers who died helping protect the North during the 1950-53 Korean War.

    Still, the odds of North Korea shifting its allegiance toward the United States are not great, Western experts say. That is particularly true in the era of President Trump, who is seen as an uncertain partner even for Washington’s existing Asian allies.

    “North Korea has no reason to believe that the U.S. would be willing or able to defend it from China,” said Hugh White, an Australian defense strategist. “Who in Pyongyang would believe that America could fight and win a land war against China on China’s borders?

    Rather, Mr. Kim is more likely to be looking for ways to increase his level of independence from China, a desire that has recently been shown by a meeting with the Russian foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, and by reports that the Syrian leader, Bashar al-Assad, is planning to visit Pyongyang.

    “Like any middle power, Kim is aiming to be independent of any great power — both China and America — and he is already a fair way towards that goal,” Mr. White said. “That’s what the nukes are for. What Kim wants is to keep as much of his independence as possible and hence as much of his nuclear capability as possible.”

    For Mr. Kim, an embrace of the United States would also have its limits.

    Although Mr. Trump has chosen largely to ignore the human rights abuses in North Korea, there is still enormous hostility in Washington toward what remains a Communist dictatorship. Some members of Congress and of Mr. Trump’s administration, including his national security adviser, John R. Bolton, have advocated regime change in the North.

    Mr. Kim would also have little reason to expect economic help from the United States. After North Korea’s second-most powerful figure, Kim Yong-chol, visited him in the Oval Office, Mr. Trump said he had no intention of helping the North build its backward economy, a job that he said belonged to China and South Korea. “That’s their neighborhood,” Mr. Trump said.

    Already, trade across China’s border with North Korea is stepping up. Last week, the state airline, Air China, renewed flights to Pyongyang after a six-month hiatus.

    China, which reluctantly enforced United Nations sanctions at the urging of Mr. Trump, is now anxious to mend ties with the North by helping with its economy, said Cheng Xiaohe, a North Korea expert at Renmin University of China.

    “The United States and China are moving away from the uneasy cooperation on North Korea of last year,” Mr. Cheng said. “China doesn’t trust Trump, and the U.S. doesn’t trust China.”

    Still, Beijing’s past efforts to help build the North’s economy have often ended in misery for Chinese companies, making them leery of new investments.

    Chinese investors in coal mines and other natural resource ventures have complained of being duped by the North Koreans, and then having no legal protection. A major bridge built by the Chinese over the Yalu River between the border town of Dandong and North Korea after Premier Wen Jiabao visited Pyongyang in 2009 remains unfinished. The North has refused to connect the road on its side of the river.

    No senior Chinese officials are expected to be in Singapore during the Trump-Kim summit meeting. China will have to wait to hear what happened from the American secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, who is planning to travel to the South Korean capital, Seoul, and to Tokyo before going to Beijing to give briefings about the meeting’s results.

    Apparently eager to maintain China’s own diplomatic momentum, Mr. Xi has accepted an invitation from Mr. Kim to visit North Korea. He could go as soon as the end of this month, some analysts suggest.

    “It would be natural to expect Xi to make his first visit as president to Pyongyang in the not-too-distant future,” said John Delury, an associate professor of Chinese Studies at Yonsei University in South Korea.

    The visit would be part of Mr. Kim’s careful post-Singapore strategy, a move to show that he was his own man, a creature of neither the United States nor China.

    “Kim seems to be pursuing a rebalancing of dynamics, rather than an out-and-out ‘defection’ to the U.S. side,” Mr. Delury said.

  4. #769
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    957
    Quote Originally Posted by LongLurker View Post
    It looks to me like his promise to stop war games are today, as in they are already in effect, and will continue during the process of denuclearization, and probably beyond.

    Are there any usually scheduled exercises coming up that we can judge this on?
    Actually zero. All Trump did was to suspend US participation. South Korea is still going ahead with all the exercises. The threat to North Korea remains though somewhat diminished but not by any significant degree.

  5. #770
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    957
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    [*]The DPRK’s last missile test was in November. That so-called freeze is not the result of either the promise of a summit or its coming to fruition.
    You're going to have to lay off the amateur spook work. The NKs are now working on RVs, no longer rocket engines with prep work for a SLV launch later this year.

    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    As for the cost of war games that others cited, well let’s just agree that wars when you’re not quite prepared are a whole lot more expensive.
    The South Koreans have not cancelled the exercises. In the end, they're the only ones who mattered. The US is only committing 35,000 men to Seoul's defence. South Korea is doing the lionshare with over a million men. Seoul can destroy the DMZ faster and more efficent with US help but make no mistake, they can do the job alone.

    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    Verification? Still just a pipe dream, as in 1994 and 2005.
    Know the facts before jumping in. The IAEA verified the Joint Framework before KJI decided to abandon the Framework due to South Korean, Japanese, and US abandoning the Framework first.

    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    Not part of the joint statement.
    You think Trump is going to honour the satement if Fat Boy pulls a fast one? Where have you been when Trump blasted Trudeau and walked out of the G7 Communique AFTER the US signed it and published?

  6. #771
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    957
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    Yea yea and Mexico will pay for a wall and probably Canada too soon and the inauguration crowd was the biggest, greatest ever and he never had any deals with Moscow ever.... Is he a virgin too?
    Why? You want to screw him?

  7. #772
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,671
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-44453330 Verifiable? No... Irreversible? No.... What did the murderer get? Free razmataz on the world stage, China easing sanctions; they even claim Trump will end sanctions.

  8. #773
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    7,219
    Quote Originally Posted by InfiniteDreams View Post
    Can't wait to see this board implode when he gets re-elected. It's going to be better than the first time where every genius on this board said Trump didn't have a snowballs chance in hell.
    Blame your media for that. Some however did call it right

    Think back to 2008, people here were banging on about a third term for the repubs. After the finance meltdown earlier in the year? Nah!

    I didn't care for Obama but I kept my mouth shut about it because he was 'my president' of 'my country'.
    Good policy

    Never in my life have I seen such derangement, and the need to repeat the same thing over and over.

    How many times does one have to repeat that Trump is "unfit", and that his supporters are "delusional".

    We have the same members here regurigitating the same disdain over and over, and what was once a great board for debate has become nothing more than an echo chamber.
    you learn to un-see it after a while and then look for any substance or not. Personal attacks not helpful to understand what he is doing or scheming

    We have the same members here regurigitating the same disdain over and over, and what was once a great board for debate has become nothing more than an echo chamber.

    Notice there are hardly every any dissenting voices to the posts by the same few people over and over, yet these same people feel the need to voice their 'super intelligent' and 'morally superior' opinions in order to validate their worldview.

    As a longtime lurker on this board it's something interesting to behold.

    Like I said....can't wait to see ya'lls post and temper tamprums when Trump gets re-elected.
    And where have those dissenting voices gone off to ? their party won after all
    Last edited by Double Edge; 14 Jun 18, at 02:49.

  9. #774
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    957
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-44453330 Verifiable? No... Irreversible? No.... What did the murderer get? Free razmataz on the world stage, China easing sanctions; they even claim Trump will end sanctions.
    Well, you can't even read. No cancellation of exercises. No lifting of sanctions. Chinese firms doing business with NKorea are still subject to US sanctions. Seems like the US still holds the upper hand.

    It's a freaking communique, not a treaty.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 13 Jun 18, at 17:40.

  10. #775
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,671
    For which he got zilch and shouts we are all safer...

  11. #776
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    957
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    For which he got zilch and shouts we are all safer...
    We are safer. Both sides have stopped talking nuclear war.

  12. #777
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,671
    And Trumpkin never lies?

  13. #778
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    957
    It's better than stupidity of not analysizing what's accomplished but spout stupid rhetoric with zero understanding of what went on.

    You asked what did Trump accomplished.

    He got promises from Fat Boy to destroy a rocket engine testing site (in addition to the collapsed warhead testing site); to allow American verification of denuclearization; and to continue to allow an American military presence in the penisula.

    Not written down in the communique but on par with the suspension of American participation in South Korean military exercies. In short, good will has been established in this meet. Both sides have to live up to this goodwill because both sides can walk away from this communique in a blink of an eye. But KJU has more to lose by walking away. Trump has nothing to lose.

  14. #779
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,671
    No verification was mentioned in what you call a 'communique' which would not be binding. Stop making up stories. The North Koreans first promised 'denuclearisation' in 1982 and guess what? They did nothing.

  15. #780
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,470
    As OOE pointed out, that's not accurate. NK was more or less living up to their side of the 1994 agreement. They were cheating, but not significantly (in our estimation). The US was more at fault for killing the framework than NK.

    2005 was vague promises on both sides that never amounted to anything.

    Pausing on missile testing and the razing of the site is good for us because NK needs to do a lot more missile testing before they have reliable, road-mobile, fuelable missiles with accurate warheads (at least to my understanding). There's a big difference between a NK that has to fuel liquid missiles at a missile launch facility and a NK that has road-mobile solid-fuel ICBMs with MIRV'd warheads.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 26 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 25 guests)

  1. Sam

Similar Threads

  1. The Drone Dilemma
    By Merlin in forum Operation Enduring Freedom and Af-Pak
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 14 Dec 09,, 23:02
  2. S. Korean perception of N. Korean nuclear program
    By Ironduke in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 13 Jan 09,, 00:36
  3. the dreadful dilemma....
    By dave angel in forum The Field Mess
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05 Sep 07,, 14:44
  4. The Second Korean War and China's dilemma...
    By YellowFever in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 24 Oct 06,, 05:41
  5. Dilemma of Confronting Fundamentalism
    By Ray in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30 Sep 05,, 21:34

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •