1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

North Korea will NEVER fire its nuclear missiles westward and northward?

Discussion in 'Asian Politics' started by reedak, Jul 4, 2017.

  1. reedak

    reedak Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    8
    China's UN ambassador Liu Jieyi on Monday (Jul 3) warned of "disastrous" consequences if world powers fail to find a way to ease tensions with North Korea which he said could "get out of control". Instead he should have warned of "disastrous" consequences if world powers fail to dismantle North Korea's nuclear programme. With regard to his warning that tensions with North Korea could "get out of control", it is clear to the world that North Korea's nuclear programme has already "gone out of control".

    While constantly voicing its phobia about the resurrection of Japanese militarism, China turns a blind eye to the growing nuclear threat of North Korea which is taking the same military path of pre-war Japan. China's apparent indifference to the threat posed by North Korea's nuclear programme is beyond all comprehension.

    China always speaks as though the North Korean nuclear programme poses no threat to itself but concerns only the US and its allies. The reality is that North Korea's nuclear missiles can hit Beijing, Shanghai and Tianjin. If North Korea's nuclear missiles can reach Alaska in its latest test, it means that the whole of China is now within the range of North Korea's nuclear missiles.

    Don't assume that the North Korean leader is so idiotic that he knows only to fire his nuclear missiles eastward and southward. One fine day, he will fire his nuclear missiles westward and northward.

    Kim Jong-un is 33 years old. He will outlive many leaders of China, the US, Russia and Japan. Assuming North Korea can make one nuclear bomb every year, by the time he reaches the age of 83, he will have at least 50 nuclear bombs, which will be enough to erase China from the face of the Earth if any territorial dispute, similar to the 1979 Sino-Vietnam border war, arises between both countries. By then with one leg in the grave, it won't come as a surprise that the devil incarnate will not mind bringing the whole world along with him to hell.

    http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news...get-out-of-control---china-s-un-envoy-9001010
     
  2. The Scotsman

    The Scotsman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,552
    Likes Received:
    296
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    South of the Haggis Munching Line
    The gallic shrug seems to be appropriate...I guess China has to think about whether it wants a bankrupt nuclear state or a pro-western state on its doorstep - its their game.....back to the gallic shrug....
     
  3. reedak

    reedak Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Do you think North Korea is contented with the role of China's watchman? One day it will turn its gun or rather nuclear missile backwards in its bid to become the "master of the house". Please be reminded of the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War. If Vietnam had nuclear weapons, the world would be different now.

    It was reported that at least 10 people have been killed by North Koreans — mostly soldiers — attempting robberies near the Chinese border town of Nanping. There were wars between China and Korea in ancient times. A border war between both nuclear-armed states could not be ruled out in the future.

    http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...-villagers-flee-for-their-lives/#.WVxxSbpuLIU
     
  4. The Scotsman

    The Scotsman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,552
    Likes Received:
    296
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    South of the Haggis Munching Line
    To be honest I take a different view. In practical terms, I look at NK as a chip which China can use as a bargaining tool in their international diplomacy. China is amassing a significant amount of international influence and through that “amassing” it causes international ructions for example the Spratley Islands and the Philippines, Tibet and human rights etc. China has a significant influence within and over NK; I assume they have provided the means and opportunity for NK to have their nuclear program, certainly the mobile launch systems are Chinese thus any attempt by the West to rein in the NKs would have to, by default, look to China or attempt to have Chine on their side in any negotiation or discussion. Then the games begin – yes, says China, we can put in a word for you but what about the Spratlies, can you have a word with the Filipinos? Or, Yes, Say the Chinese we can restrict their power supplies but can you assist in that trade deal? It’s a poker game and I don’t see any reason why China would want to have NK lose its nuclear program whilst there is political capital to be had from it - especially when you have a disjointed “western” alliance and all sorts of issues with the US and Russia/ US and Europe/ US and Middle East – China is in a strong position as long as it has tools it can bring to the table.

    As to NK turning on the hand that feeds it, again, I don’t see any real threat from that. The Chinese are not stupid and certainly not short sighted I feel sure that China can easily see any warning signs coming from within the regime. They know the leadership and they know the power politics and will know the signs of belligerence that might esculate before it turns to conflict. The NK intelligence service reports directly to the Central Committee of the Workers Party which will be closely monitored by Chinese Intelligence so they have a good idea on the “players” in the NK intelligentsia and if they perceive a threat they I am sure that they have the means and people in position to change the rhetoric and direction of travel.

    It’s a bit like Israel and the US one is a vassal state of the other and one used in much the same way as China uses NK – how did Israel get its nuclear weapons who reins in Israel if there is any mediating to do in the middle east to maintain the free flow of oil. If there was no oil in the middle east do you think the US would give a crap about Israel?
     
  5. reedak

    reedak Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    8
    So far, what has China gained from the US with your so-called "bargaining tool"? Getting the US to force Taiwan to reunite with the Chinese mainland? Getting the US to rescind the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act? Getting Japan to return the Diaoyu Islands to China? Getting all the US forces to withdraw from Asia to the American mainland? Absolutely none!!

    Hence North Korea has no value as a bargaining chip for China at all.

    For China to let a nuclear-armed North Korea exist across its border is akin to sleeping with a tiger. Using another analogy, it is just like a swordsman adopting his enemy's son and imparting all his fighting skills to him.

    In short, if China is really using North Korea's nuclear programme as a bargaining tool in its international diplomacy, it is making a pact with the Devil.

    So far China has gained nothing but a lot to lose from its Frankenstein's creation. I just mention one of the geopolitical fallouts from China's tolerance or impotence towards North Korea's nuclear programme. Some countries have begun to view China as a paper tiger, being led by the nose, or worst of all, by the leash as narrated in the Political Satire: The Old Man of the Mountain at http://www.houseofpolitics.com/threads/political-satire-the-old-man-of-the-mountain-3.19427/

    Recent events around China have shown that the following countries have been emboldened by North Korea's defiance against its foolish benefactor and they have begun to emulate North Korea in their dealings with China.

    (a) Modi's China diplomacy signals a great change in India's attitude towards that nation -- from a defensive posture maintained over several decades to that of equal, controlled aggression. Currently, there is a standoff between Chinese and Indian troops at their borders. Indian troops still remain in the "Chinese side" of the border despite China's demand to them to withdraw immediately.

    (b) Vietnam has begun drilling for oil in an area of the resource-rich South China Sea also claimed by China.

    (c) Anti-China sentiment and centuries-old hostilities took centre stage in the recent Mongolian election campaigns.

    https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/taiwanarms

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deal_with_the_Devil

    http://www.rediff.com/news/special/how-modi-plans-to-deal-with-china/20170706.htm

    http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/newsrepublic/2017-07/06/content_30022307.htm

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/06/china-india-bhutan-standoff-disputed-territory

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40493277

    http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-...ent-and-centuries-old-hostilities-take-centre

    http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news...igh-love-hate-relationship-with-china-8975280
     
  6. The Scotsman

    The Scotsman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,552
    Likes Received:
    296
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    South of the Haggis Munching Line
    Thanks, some interesting points you raise.

    Thinking about Taiwan for example, do you think that Trump's or Tillerson's comments regarding the "one China" policy will have the desired effect on China, personally I doubt it, I think it's an interesting gambit on their part probably designed for US internal politics or maybe grandstanding? I suppose I can understand the rational behind it as Trump has had to talk tough or risk ridicule at home following his presidential campaign speeches, however, I just wonder if Tillerson etal understand the slap in the face they dealt the Chinese by putting "one China" on the table. As to China's response don't you find it interesting that since they dispached Liu Yunshan to NK there has been a softening of tensions between them and China and an increased in the level of anti-US rhetoric from NK? Apart from a few diplomatic spats on NK's part against the Chinese, China is prepared to maintain its ties with NK. Why do that when only a few years ago they were quite happy to follow international diplomatic oppinion against NK?

    As for making pacts with "devil" I doubt the Chinese leadership sees it in those terms, I think they are pragmatists and know that any internal conflicts within NK could lead to tensions or even internal conflict (Sryian style) which could be the catalyst for some form of "German" style re-unification under the control of a US backed wealthy SK - consider the adversarial rhetoric of Tillerson and Trump and campaign rhetoric by Trump. Why would the Chinese leadership pour petrol on the fire if they consider an outcome they considered against their political interest?
     
  7. reedak

    reedak Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    8
    1. The following are excerpts from Minnie Chan's 28 July, 2013 article headlined "China's Korean war veterans still waiting for answers, 60 years on" with sub-head "Some veterans feel they were duped into answering the call to fight 60 years ago" at http://www.scmp.com/news/china/arti...n-war-veterans-still-waiting-answers-60-years

    (Begin excerpts)
    Sixty years after the fighting ended in Korea, some soldiers who rallied to fend off the "American imperialists" are still seeking answers about China's involvement in the costly conflict.

    Beijing remains reluctant to declassify documents that might finally shed light on the decision to rush to North Korea's aid in 1950, resulting in the deaths of between 149,000 and 400,000 Chinese soldiers.... (End excerpts)

    2. Many years ago, I came across an article in a Chinese newspaper claiming that Kim Jong-il, the father of the current North Korean leader, had a low opinion of Chinese leaders' mental capability even when he was a student. Hence it won't come as a surprise for him and his son to defy the Chinese leadership openly. As shown by China's tremendous casualities in the Korean War, Chinese leaders were/are not pragmatic.

    In comparison, Russian leaders with the exception of Mikhail Gorbachev were/are pragmatists. For instance, crafty Stalin abandoned the Chinese soldiers to face the onslaught of the US war machine during the Korean War just like the white horse bolting out in the opposite direction, leaving the priest to face the dreadful hellhound alone when it detected the supernatural canine's odour in the air as depicted in my political satire at http://www.houseofpolitics.com/threads/political-satire-hell-breaks-loose.17722/

    A nuclear-armed North Korea poses a more serious threat to China than a US-backed wealthy but non-nuclear South Korea. Who could predict the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War in which the ungrateful Vietnamese fought the Chinese with weapons supplied by China to fight the Americans in the Vietnam War? The same thing can happen if nuclear-armed North Korea succeeds to conquer the South in the future. However, by then China will discover to its regret and despair that it will be waging a war a million times more catastrophic than the Sino-Vietnamese War.

    http://nationalinterest.org/feature/when-china-vietnam-went-war-four-lessons-history-16675

    http://www.historynet.com/war-of-the-dragons-the-sino-vietnamese-war-1979.htm

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Jong-il
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2017
  8. The Scotsman

    The Scotsman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,552
    Likes Received:
    296
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    South of the Haggis Munching Line
    I can only assume that is predicated upon the thinking that one does not know the intentions of the other party or is not aware of the capabilities of the other party? Since the "fear" factor is not a part of the Chinese thought process (they have dealt the a nuclear armed and beligerent Russia for decades) then I would not think that the Chinese consider them a serious threat. If they did or do then I would imagine they have systems in place that would counter or dampen any threat towards them. If not then why allow NK to maintain this direction of travel?

    It seems to me that should the Chinese leadership have felt any threat to their hold of Chinese political power they would have acted against that threat. Personally I think China has more of an eye on SK.
     
  9. The Scotsman

    The Scotsman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,552
    Likes Received:
    296
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    South of the Haggis Munching Line
    That's an interesting one isn't it. Do your think that this was more aimed at a proxy war by Russia against China. During the mid 1960s nearly all military aid to North Vietnam was from Russian following the raise of Kosygin. Russia needed to asset its authority over the South China sea area in order to have a southern warm water port thus allying with Vietnam made strategic sense in order to consolidate their position. Couple that with the deterioration with relations between China and Russia in the late 60s and you have a ripe scenario for conflict which as you say caused many deaths.
     
  10. reedak

    reedak Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Taking an analogy, if you were a shop-owner, you would be more afraid of a rich man with fat pockets than a beggar entering your shop with a hatchet. :)
     
  11. The Scotsman

    The Scotsman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,552
    Likes Received:
    296
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    South of the Haggis Munching Line
    (y) I like that. But if you are aware of the value of your stock and the vunerability of cerrtain sections of your shop then the most experienced store detectives will know what to look out for and have the ability to act accordingly.
     
  12. reedak

    reedak Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    8
    If yours is a pawn shop and the beggar is a poor wood-cutter holding a golden axe, you will certainly welcome him. However, if the beggar is waving an ordinary hatchet threateningly in front of your face, I don't think you are going to welcome him with open arms. ;)

    http://shortschoolstories.com/2013/04/13/the-poor-wood-cutter/
     
    The Scotsman likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page