Discussion in 'Academy/Military News' started by patentesq, Dec 18, 2011.
The world just got a bit safer.
Hmmmmmm . . . I wonder how long he's been dead.
It's weird how he died immediately after North Korea inked a deal with the U.S. over uranium.
Looks like his successor will be his son, Kim Jon-un. This kid must be incredibly, extremely good, because he became a 4-star General at the age of 27!!!!!!!
To those of you on active duty in the U.S. military who are over the age of 27 and haven't yet received your 4th star, you need to pick up the pace!
I loved him in Team America: World Police.
May he enjoy his eternity in Hell. He and his father before him were responsible for the death of millions and the imprisonment of an entire nation.
How can anyone compete with such an incredibly fit man such as him? I'm sure he earned those 4-stars through hard work and determination
I and a bunch of other Koreans (South of course) found out about this last night during a Christmas party. To be frank, nobody was happy. Although Kim Jong-Il died, many of us believed his son is even more crazy (I guess they just get weirder with every generation). My fellow church members were even more scared about his rule than they were about his father's. Some even openly expressed opinions about another war.
To give you their perspective of the recent events, they think that Kim Jong-Un was the one responsible for the missile launching on a South Korean island. It is believed that he did so to demonstrate his power as he gains influence.
It's incredibly sad to talk about North Korea. Many people talk about how countries such as the U.S. sends aid to the Communist country, but the only ones who receive it there are the military and the elite class. Most of the commoners are periodically starving, and witnesses who managed to escape to South Korea report that there are instances when people die from starvation and their family cuts them up and sells them as cow meat out of desperation for food.
kbaek (or anyone who might render a guess), two questions:
1. Do you think young Kim Jong-un has to introduce more drama on the world scene (i.e., in terms of more muscle flexing against the South) to gain the respect of the elder generals? My guess is yes. Or will we see an internal power struggle and the North implode?
2. Do you foresee North and South Korea ever re-uniting? (the last time something like this happened, everyone expected Gorbachev to block the reunification aspirations between East and West Germany, and I'm curious where you think China stands). My guess is that China won't permit this to happen.
Just curious to hear from someone who knows much more than I do about this subject.
Suffice it to say that anything that anyone "knows" about North Korea is pretty speculative. But- here is a pretty good analysis from the BBC : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-16243948
Fascinating read, bruno. Thank you for sharing.
I'm not sure whether you saw this report on CNBC, but the Pentagon -- as luck would have it -- apparently selected regime change in North Korea as its training exercise last week. http://www.cnbc.com/id/45728428 Sure is comforting to know that we've got some very smart folks in the Pentagon planning for the contingency that this young kid will not be able to consolidate his father's power and all heck breaks loose.
1. Anything is speculation as no good intelligence on the internal power structure of NK. The most reliable source is a very high ranking defector that defected about 10 plus years ago or more. But since so much time has passed, his knowledge might not be so relevent now. No need to gain respect when selective purging does the same thing. That's what Kim Jong Il did.
2. Scenarios for Korea's future
a. Status quo - after 1994 with Kim Il Song's death and famines in 90s, so called experts all predicted implosion of NK. Its 2011 now
b. War - as time passes on any military advantage NK might had is eroding. There is no substitute flying hours for pilots, 60s and 70s technology equipment, and etc to make up for what SK has. Not likely
c. Peaceful unification - if the faction that wants it wins the power struggle
c. Collapse of NK - certain parts of NK are reportly to have no functioning government. This is really big as in NK, the government is everything.
China wants status quo - simply it does not want a united Korea. The potential is significant as to a unifed Korea with South Korea's economy, North Korea's natural resources, and North Korea's nuclear weapon will make the unified Korea a regional power. Japan and Russia feels about the same. This is why China has been supporting NK. South Korea also doesn't want unifed Korea. Simply, South Korea cannot afford to pay for the unification. There has been a shift in the public opinion. The older generation wants unification, whereas the younger generation does not. Now, there are more of younger generation. Before Bush Jr, South Korea and US provided very significant assistance to NK - a part appeasement and part status quo.
We will just have to wait and see.
That was a very interesting response, MemberLG. Thank you. I hadn't through the implications of a nuclear united Korea and its impact on the region. Perhaps that could be handled in other ways that would benefit everyone (like policing up the nuclear materials and forbidding Korea from gaining access).
I could also see that China would benefit more from an even larger trading partner than having to support North Korea year after year, particularly if China crashes economically as some are predicting. It might even provide more stability than what we have now. Nevertheless, status quo seems like the most logical result as of this writing, with some speed bumps along the way
A theory about why NK developed its nuclear capability. There are many Koreans living in Japan, some witnessed the aftermath of nuclear attacks against Japan at the end fo WWII than went back to North Korea. Only good deterent to nuclear weapon is another nuclear weapon. Initially USSR supported NK effort to developy its own nuclear capability than stopped. China provided some assistance than stopped. The elder Kim was real good about playing USSR aginst Chinese to get what he wants. But when both stopped providing nuclear assistance, he realized that certain things he need to go ahead on his own. I don't know if anyone knew about this or not, but South Korea had its own active nuclear weapons development program before the US "stopped" it. Again, for South Korea's perpsective, can she rely on U.S. nuclear protection forever?
So if we assume a Korean unification under South Korea's lead, why should South Korea give up the nuclear capability? For world peace, if so than should all other nuclear powers give up their nuclear weapons also.
Trading partner wise, I don't think United Korea doesn't change the equation. As it is China is providing aid to North Korea and South Korea passed North Korea as a bigger trading partner to China a long time ago.
Separate names with a comma.