Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ChairmanPoo]

Newsflash: reintegration was very hard, and East Germany was not North Korea to begin with.

And I'd hardly call "glasnost" a major success as far as the geopolitics of Eastern Europe are concerned.

Edit: ninjaed

[Loud Whispers]

If North Korea's leadership were toppled I am almost certain it would not be replaced by "the next strongman". East Germany didn't devolve into thirty years of anarchy, it unified with its liberal sister government. We saw glasnost bring down the Soviet Union and I hope to see it repeated in North Korea.

On the military and political frontier East Germany's reunification was either ambivalently or enthusiastically supported by the USSR, USA, France, UK, West Germany and East Germany. The USSR's political reforms led to unification of Germany, but division of the USSR, with strongmen from the former Soviet security apparatus taking over. China takes the failure of the USSR's reforms to mean that they were in the end correct; economic reform before political reform will preserve the state where political reform before economic reform will ensure its collapse. Lastly, it is a safe bet to make that the dissolution of a heavily centralized government, itself dependent upon its leader, having that leader atomized, would not topple in the same manner that the East Germans made a cautious transition in political parties without damaging the state or nation. A unification of North Korea into South Korea is not impossible, but whatever the likelihood cannot be rushed

[smjjames]

Not to mention that it would be expensive as all hell and take decades to bring NK up to the technological and living standards of SK. They're further apart in standards than West and East Germany ever were.

[Hanslanda]

I realize that a great deal of time has passed, but I'm still under the assumption that Japan is less than enthusiastic about joining the list of nuclear military powers. Despite the voiced opinions of certain prominent politicians.

This. I've heard that many Japanese still remember losing family to the only two offensively deployed nukes in history, and a great many abhor the idea of it happening ever again. Just hearsay mind you.

[Loud Whispers]

Not to mention that it would be expensive as all hell and take decades to bring NK up to the technological and living standards of SK. They're further apart in standards than West and East Germany ever were.

To be fair, the economic cost is easily the least controversial aspect. There's no denying Korea as a whole would be all the wealthier for reunification

[smjjames]

I realize that a great deal of time has passed, but I'm still under the assumption that Japan is less than enthusiastic about joining the list of nuclear military powers. Despite the voiced opinions of certain prominent politicians.

This. I've heard that many Japanese still remember losing family to the only two offensively deployed nukes in history, and a great many abhor the idea of it happening ever again. Just hearsay mind you.

Not surprising that it would still be painful in the national culture. They reportedly do have plutonium stockpiles and combined with the fact that Japan could easily become a nuclear power in under a year since they already have all the applicable knowledge is enough to make China a bit antsy about that fact.

Anyways, in NK news, Giuliani said that the three detainees are being released sometime today, though there is no official news yet and it's Giuliani that's saying it rather than the White House. If it really is happening, it's a hell of a concession before the summit.

Not to mention that it would be expensive as all hell and take decades to bring NK up to the technological and living standards of SK. They're further apart in standards than West and East Germany ever were.

To be fair, the economic cost is easily the least controversial aspect. There's no denying Korea as a whole would be all the wealthier for reunification

Yeah, it's just the reality of it, and yes, Korea as a whole would be better off after reunification.

[scourge728]

I can't recall, is China one of the nuclear powers and if not, are they capable of becoming one?

[Trekkin]

I can't recall, is China one of the nuclear powers and if not, are they capable of becoming one?

They have nuclear weapons, yes.

[scourge728]

Well that's.... slightly worrying

[Kagus]

I can't recall, is China one of the nuclear powers and if not, are they capable of becoming one?

They are a nuclear power, yes.

However, the 2015 estimate puts them at "only" 260 strategic missiles, whereas the US currently has somewhere around 4,000.


Enough to completely end the world... How many times over?

[Teneb]

I can't recall, is China one of the nuclear powers and if not, are they capable of becoming one?

They are a nuclear power, yes.

However, the 2015 estimate puts them at "only" 260 strategic missiles, whereas the US currently has somewhere around 4,000.


Enough to completely end the world... How many times over?

None, I think. But more than enough to destroy the current economy and politcal systems.

[Egan_BW]

Probably don't even need to blow anything up to break those things, at minimum.

[smjjames]

Turns out that the WH can't even confirm what Rudy Giuliani was saying about the detainees, so, maybe he was just mouthing off?

[Hanslanda]

I can't recall, is China one of the nuclear powers and if not, are they capable of becoming one?

They are a nuclear power, yes.

However, the 2015 estimate puts them at "only" 260 strategic missiles, whereas the US currently has somewhere around 4,000.


Enough to completely end the world... How many times over?

Most estimates of a total nuclear war between USA and Russia range from 'significant devastation and some weather change' to 'near-extinct human race and global winter for decades'. A war of that nature against China would be much less devastating, but still cause some weather change and obviously many many casualties.

[Shazbot]

China's policy is one of minimum retaliation.

I should clarify, I read your warning as the thought "the next strongman" will continue being a dictator who maintains an independent and oppressive nation. I don't see a reason or need to push over NK's leadership, which I think is what you are concerned about. However I see the possibility it will be pushed over internally from coups or liberalization. In that instance, I don't see an internal strongman taking over save one who facilitates the transition. But even in the event of the very unreasonable invasion of North Korea, I don't see a strongman who perpetuates the existing policies. Hitler was replaced by an admiral of the Kreigsmarine, itself the least political arm of the military. This doesn't seem analogous to Iraq or Afghanistan nearly to the degree it is analogous to East Germany. If the existing regime weakens or ceases to exist the country I can only imagine it folding into South Korea and, after a not-insignificant period of disruption, become at least a place where people have food and aren't thrown in concentration camps.

Unless China moves in to secure the destabilized country with the army they've already moved to the border, and annexes it.

Goddamnit.

That is a real stare-down to war, but I hope Xi has less interest in economic exclusion zone waters falling to a US aligned Korea than he wants to rebuild the North Korean economy and feed its millions.

Things just get better, folks.