So, if you follow the news. You will know that there are some age old issues between South Korea and North Korea. If you don't know whats going on right now, let me catch you up.
Allegedly N. Korea sank one of S. Korea's ships. Now the US is sending over a small fleet over to Korea to flex there muscles and show that they are backing S. Korea, so N. Korea better not mess around with S. Korea anymore. Now it's well known that China is an ally to N. Korea, and the US and China have not been getting along to well lately. Does anyone have any opinion on what may come out of all this? Are there signs as of a possible war for China and the US?
All right, I am going to go ahead and put an end to this. I am not about to have France versus the USA in a thread that is supposed to be about South Korea. So, please, shut it. If you want to debate US relations and involvement, start a new thread.
[quote="Calm"]Now, I don't want to be misunderstood here: clearly, the North Korean leader is "mad" but you have to remeber that the North korean people did not elect him, and a huge part of the population resents him, but they cannot leave! And they would be the ones ending up as fodder in the war if war there is.[/quote] Really? According to this article, there are tens to hundreds of thousands estimated to North Korea and fleeing to China: Total North Korean refugee outflows to China are difficult to gauge, but the US State Department places the figure between 30,000 and 50,000, while other organizations have estimated anywhere between 100,000 and 300,000.
My guess is that North Koreans are, effectively, trying to do something.
The article also states, 'The South Korean constitution affirms that South Korea consists of the entire Korean Peninsula and, as such, that North Koreans are citizens of South Korea. North Korean refugees, though not officially recognized as such by the South Korean government, therefore have a right to be resettled to South Korea.'
The thing about South Korea is that yes, the US is still allied with her, so if anything were to happen, the president would be breaking the armistice by going to war. However, it may only require waiting it out. I doubt Jong-Il would try much. There would be too much resistance for him, including North Koreans. It's still possible and the 'war' has been going on since 1950, so I don't imagine it will simply disappear until Jong-Il is gone. It's a shame there is so much tension with the two halves of the country, but they're picking their battles.
@ Calm The US involvement in Korea goes back 60 years, so regardless of your personal political thoughts on my nation, I have no control over the Korean Conflict. We got ourselves in a long time ago. We agreed to assist South Korea. I'm sorry you take issue with that. But the US is involved and this thread is about Korea. We're there, so we feel like it's our war and our struggle, too.
The US involvement in Korea goes back 60 years, so regardless of your personal political thoughts on my nation, I have no control over the Korean Conflict. We got ourselves in a long time ago. We agreed to assist South Korea. I'm sorry you take issue with that. But the US is involved and this thread is about Korea. We're there, so we feel like it's our war and our struggle, too.
I completely understand this, and I think the USA could play a good role in helping settle the conflict. What I disagree with is the current behaviour of the US military and the way they are dealing with the crisis. Planning a military exercise close to the North Korea territorial waters seems to me like a threateing move rather than an apeasing one, especially after the UN decision that was taken earlier on to try and appease regional conflicts and therefore not to apply more severe sanctions.
The USA have for the past 6 decades played as the arbiters of the world. Now I don't really resent it, and I think in some cases they did a really good job, but some other decisions seem to me to be foolish, and that is one of them.
[quote="Calm"]Planning a military exercise close to the North Korea territorial waters seems to me like a threateing move rather than an apeasing one[/quote] When a child does something very wrong--throw a tantrum, talk back/argue, insult the parent/sibling, break curfew--a two-minute time-out is useless. Often grounding a child is useless. So a parent removes their privileges.
Now, I am not saying the US is here to 'arent' the world, but that is exactly how you're going to interpret it, especially since you've made that assumption multiple times in every post you've made so far. However, our involvement with North Korean government and the fact that they've not changed in all these years means we've run out of favourable options. Additionally, President Obama is not a complete moron--he knows there is an armistice, but Kim Jong-Il has been challenging him.
As far as your personal opinion of US involvement... Read the articles. South Korea is the one making the decisions, the US is there to assist them and back them up and support them. We do not simply stick our nose in, Calm, nor do we send out troops at random. We offer support, we give our opinion. There is absolutely no need for you to be snotty about the US. I get it, you disapprove, so can we talk about North and South Korea? (And as a US citizen, I hope you've noticed I've said absolutely nothing negative about anyone's country. We do not all fit in the box you would like us to fit in. Stop insulting me and stop insulting my country.)
Ok, first of all I want to apologise for offending anyone in my previous posts, as I was not trying to insult anyone, but just stating my opinion which I admit is probably a little controversial.
On the other hand I do not understand why we should not talk about the USA involvment here as they are key actors in this situation. Care to explain to me?
Also, using your comparison:
When a child does something very wrong--throw a tantrum, talk back/argue, insult the parent/sibling, break curfew--a two-minute time-out is useless. Often grounding a child is useless. So a parent removes their privileges.
I agree, but as you point out it's the role of the parents to punish the child and in this situation the parents (UN) have decided that the child should not be punished more heavily and so I'm questioning the attitude of the big brother(South Korea+USA) to disregard the parent's decision.
You see, I think that if North Korea see that the international community is in disagreement, they will try to use it to their advantage. I know the UN is usually really weak but why make it knowingly weaker?
I am on your side here, and I certainly don't want to see North Korea continue its military development (although we might already have reached a critical point) but past situations have shown war is never the best solution... Actually, more severe economical sanctions might be the way to go, as long as it is within an international consensus (and I cannot stress that point enough).
[quote="Calm"On the other hand I do not understand why we should not talk about the USA involvment here as they are key actors in this situation. Care to explain to me?[/quote] Oh, sorry, that's not what I meant. I meant let's not have a battle of the countries--why the US is full of bullocks and smells of poo because blah blah blah. I don't think we can avoid US involvement talk when regarding Korea.
[quote="Calm"]Actually, more severe economical sanctions might be the way to go, as long as it is within an international consensus (and I cannot stress that point enough).[/quote] How do you mean? How far in do you want to take this?
You say the US is overly involved in things. We've stretched ourselves thin and have seemingly forgotten to address domestic issues first (installing more green wind power, looking to alternate fuel sources, agricultural needs, etc). However, now you're saying that the situation in Korea needs more international involvement? Will you please explain to me how that's logical?
Sure, I understand that perhaps the US's viewpoint is biased at this point--North Korea as evil or bad or forsaken. It's possible. The problem I see with more countries entering this conflict with the Koreas is that it can easily turn into World War III. I cannot imagine that is what Obama wants. He is making attempts to bring our troops home as it is (at least from the Middle East).
Like you said, everyone else disagreeing with North Korea can be used. However, Kim Jong-Il versus the world will not go successfully. I'm all about the US aiding those in need, but I think there comes a point when a country needs to take care of its own. But both sides have their allies. It's it not as though North Korea stands alone entirely--they have China and Russia. So, really, the US involvement and support of South Korea is not just the US tooting her own horn and showing her guns. We are up against two more super-powers... and I think Vladimir Putin could own everyone's souls if he wanted to.
Ack! I am so sorry for the BB Code. This is what I meant to have (and I severely apologise for double-posting, but I wanted to correct the editing mistake):
[quote="Calm"]On the other hand I do not understand why we should not talk about the USA involvment here as they are key actors in this situation. Care to explain to me?[/quote] Oh, sorry, that's not what I meant. I meant let's not have a battle of the countries--why the US is full of bullocks and smells of poo because blah blah blah. I don't think we can avoid US involvement talk when regarding Korea.
(Again, sorry! My reply was made part of the quote and that was not my intention.)
However, now you're saying that the situation in Korea needs more international involvement?
Well, yes if the international community can reach an agreement. The last thing anyone wants is a war, and seeing the way things are going towards, a war is not far off. So when Obama says that he supports Lee in his will to bring this issue to the UN permanent Security council, I sincerely applaud: we have an organism, we might as well use it once in a while
After all, the Permanent SC unites Russia, China, and the US, the three major players that would end up being involved if there is a war... and if these three nations reach an agreement, then I'm pretty sure everything else will work itself out: NKorea will never dare start a war if Russia and China pronounce that they will not intervene.
Now, I know this will prove really hard, since at the moment China is very busy defending NKorea and blaming the US, but I believe it's the best way to go. At least we'd get to know exactly where everyone stands, if nothing else.
The problem I see with more countries entering this conflict with the Koreas is that it can easily turn into World War III.
True but as you mentioned further down in your post and I just mentioned above, 3 of the global military powers are already deeply involved...
I'm not supporting more military involvment, I'm supporting a uniform response by the international community to the current situation.
