Tuesday, November 23, 2010

What Some Guy Said About It

A comment from "Brandon G." on CBC's website. Nothing particularly new here, but it does a good job echoing what I'm thinking right now. Does the regime get worse or at least more desperate as time goes on? Is regime removal, occupation, and too early a reunification the way to go? What's more inevitable? Come on, China with your shabby human rights record - get the hell out of the way on this one.

"Regardless of the differing opinions on this site, at some point and time this has to happen, this is not a people that have the ability to take down their leadership without assistance, they are ruled by intimidation and fear.

As pointed out in the comments here "I am no general" but this war would be very different than other nuclear capable, slightly insane states, like Iran. I have never read a report of the North's ability to take a barrage on their nuclear sites and for them to still be capable to fire back, unlike Iran which has buried its facilities so deep that strikes are difficult

I know as Canadians we try to rationalize a reason not to go to war, who shot first, this is just a cry for attention to get more aid, a newly crowned son asserting himself internally, at some point this has to end, the US and the South need to get a friendly nod from China (otherwise there's no way it will) and lets end this. I dont think the north is diluted enough to think that its infantry can win this war and if we remove the norths capability to mount a modern attack, taking out military installations and hopefully leadership, this could be a short war, with a minimal lose of life.

What is the cost of doing nothing? We allow a people to live under brutal repressive leadership, a people to starve, a leadership to continue to kidnap theirs neighbours citizens (Japan, South Korea) by the hundreds over the decades, allow families that have been split by the war to continue to long for reunion, a military to become more and more emboldened and over time more technologically advanced andwe continue to give aid to a regime that uses it to tighten their grip over their people.

Its sad and something must be done."


Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/11/23/korea-artillery-fire.html#ixzz16AZdzvIG

2 comments:

Douglas-uh said...

This is a very complicated issue where evens the basic understanding of the situation exceeds my current knowledge of the issue. That said, there's a load of question to be asked. How far will China and Japan go (particularly China) to prevent unification for political and economic reasons. Does the Korean government have an economic stake in absorbing millions of poor people? Korea's biggest backer, the United States; how could they be hurt economically by the Chinese in retaliation for supporting/leading the charge? What does the US have to gain? Perhaps a stronger Korea to shift the balance of power slightly in that region. If they would win the war rather quickly, more support back in the Homeland. What does North Korea have in terms of resources that would lead to a stronger Korea? I heard they got some minerals.

George Bailey Sees The World! said...

Of course - you are exactly right as well. It's far more complicated than the comments I posted. I can't imagine the market economy of the South absorbing the millions form the North without first scoping-out Pyeongyang for sites to strategically install Dunkin Donuts and Angel-in-us Coffee franchises.

I don't see how this ends well, and I don't see how it gets better maintaining the status quo.

Your guess is as good as mine.