N. Korea Says It Has, Plans to Test Nukes

[GePap]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
If you really think that China intervened in the Korean war to drive US away from Yalu, you are kidding yourself. Chinese army forces were in the Korean war as soon as the US joined the war. Only when the US came close to the Yalu, did the Chinese come over in force, but US forces ran into the Chinese well before that.

Whatever their reasons in 1950, that was 1950. You have failed to give anyr easons why anything of this srt is even remotely true today.

Secondly, WHERE did the nuclear program come from? It isn't easy to get uranium or plutonium or the technology. The North Korean technology came from China. If China was against NK, why would they provide them with the technology to build nukes?

First of all, nuclear physics is universal, so any state can, if they spend enough, develop nuclear power on their own (yes, shocking but true!). second, as a signatory of the NPT, NK had the right to buy nuclear materials and develop nuclear power for itself. Lets take your pupet test> most Easterrn european regimes were soviet puppets. Many of them have Soviet developed nuclear power plants. None of them ever had a nuclear weapons program....why, the Chinese are so much more egalitarian with their puppet, no?

China has NO reason to reel in NK. It isn't hurting them any. If NK was hurting China, they would have instituted a little change in leadership.

China has several reasons to reel NK in: one, the NK issue gives fuel to Japanese right-wingers who want to re-militarize. And a new Japanese military is a far rgeater threat to long term Chinese interest than the US ever will be. Second, SK is an increasing trade ally, and torubles with NK undermine that. Thirdly, NK regugees are an economic problem for China.

For the third time, you have failed completely to give any rationale the chinese might have..are you fezzing yourself up?

[chequita guevara]

Actually, I was mentioning the growing problem in Korea before the war and how Bush was ignoring it to have his pet war in Iraq.

[Kuciwalker]

I have to disagree with Imram here. China doesn't particularly want or need NK.

[Zylka]

Time to finish ye old ballistic missle intercept program, lend a couple hundred thousand Amtrack amphibious assault vehicles to Japan, and utterly humiliate one backwards Asian despotism!

[Imran Siddiqui]

second, as a signatory of the NPT, NK had the right to buy nuclear materials and develop nuclear power for itself.

And where would they get the tech and materials from?

China has several reasons to reel NK in: one, the NK issue gives fuel to Japanese right-wingers who want to re-militarize. And a new Japanese military is a far rgeater threat to long term Chinese interest than the US ever will be. Second, SK is an increasing trade ally, and torubles with NK undermine that. Thirdly, NK regugees are an economic problem for China.

A tiny Japanese military (which will be the only result) does not present a great threat to China, especially compared to a US tookover NK. Two, SK will continue to trade with China, no matter what NK does (why would they not?). Thirdly, would the refugee problem change significantly with a new regime? Doubtful.

For the third time, you have failed completely to give any rationale the chinese might have

What other rationale do you need? A forceful takeover of North Korea by the US would totally undermine Chinese power, especially in their own sphere of influence.

[SlowwHand]

Moon over Miami; and Nukes over North Korea.

[Kuciwalker]

Why would the US station troops in the reunified Korea? You have US leaving.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Moon over Miami; and Nukes over North Korea.

That's really disgusting.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Why would the US station troops in the reunified Korea? You have US leaving.

What else would the US 'doing something' about North Korea mean?

[Kuciwalker]

South Korea would be the one to have troops stationed there permanently.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by skywalker
South Korea would be the one to have troops stationed there permanently.

You think the U.S. would leave? We're still in Japan, the only reason we left the Phils is because they refused to renew the leases.

China is a rival power, and will only continue to grow in power. The U.S. will want to "contain" that power, i.e., make sure that China recognizes American supremacy. We aren't leaving Korea unless we're thrown out.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


And where would they get the tech and materials from?

from china, the SU, and pakistan.

A tiny Japanese military (which will be the only result) does not present a great threat to China, especially compared to a US tookover NK. Two, SK will continue to trade with China, no matter what NK does (why would they not?). Thirdly, would the refugee problem change significantly with a new regime? Doubtful.

Since when do Japanese right-wingers advocate a tiny, worthelss military? (sepcially iven that Japan already, for example, has a far more powerfull navy than China will have for decades, and a far better airforce). Besides, the idea of a US takeover of NK is laughable. Even if the Us started the war, it would fall on The Republic of Korea to unify itself and create a single Republic of Korea. So there is no "third regime", only either 2 koreas, or one.

What other rationale do you need? A forceful takeover of North Korea by the US would totally undermine Chinese power, especially in their own sphere of influence.

Since your sceenrio for what a US attack would be is absurd, it is not a surprise you have a falalcious idea of a Chinese response. If the Us sought to do an "Iraq" on NK, China would greatly object..but still not go to war. The likelyhood of the US doing an "Iraq" on Nk are nill (specially since it would take a huge number of land forces, something that could onyl happen with SK approval, which would NOT be forthcoming for such a US plan).

[Imran Siddiqui]

China is a rival power, and will only continue to grow in power. The U.S. will want to "contain" that power, i.e., make sure that China recognizes American supremacy. We aren't leaving Korea unless we're thrown out.

Bingo.

I still want people to specify what they mean by 'deal with North Korea' without meaning US force.

[GePap]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
China is a rival power, and will only continue to grow in power. The U.S. will want to "contain" that power, i.e., make sure that China recognizes American supremacy. We aren't leaving Korea unless we're thrown out.

That's the point, we would be, once there was no NK. Koreans are not eager to have a permament significant US military presence.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Since when do Japanese right-wingers advocate a tiny, worthelss military?

Since when will the Japanese public let them get any greater than that? IIRC, their Constitution specifies a small defense force.

The likelyhood of the US doing an "Iraq" on Nk are nill

So what does 'deal with North Korea' mean then?