North-Korea is strategically important to China. They would not allow an invasion there.FranzTyphid said:We should invade their ass
North-Korea is strategically important to China. They would not allow an invasion there.FranzTyphid said:We should invade their ass
Kinky!FranzTyphid said:We should invade their ass
I was talking about the invasion "by whole world", actually. Doubt there's any leader who likes Kim-Jong Il besides Kim-Jong Il.HotFezz8 said:examples of how this policy might end up fucking you over: vietnam, somalia, northern ireland, iraq, afghanistan, hezbollah, rhodesia, there are many more... put simply only UK and the US would be willing to send troops, and both countries are massively over stretched as it is.
P.S. yeah, kim yong il is massively insane though... still its the old phrase "power corrupts, absoloute power corrupts absoloutly"...
When has anyone ever fixed anything by invading? I think we should just let these countries develop on their own. After all every country had dictatorships at some point in it's history. It's a phase that every country go's through and it helps the country to grow up into a stable member of global society.Kollega said:Indoubtedly. North Korea is a single most horrible regime in the world, i say it's about damn time someone invades and starts fixing things.
I think you are onto something here.randomrob said:(wow reading that i make countries sound like children. Meh maybe they are.)
Actually we did and it worked fine, the problem is now the cleanup requires babysitting the indigenous forces until they are capable of defending their own country. It's not really a war anymore, best as I can see it, its more like forced education. Personally I'd say Hussein is long gone, pack up and go home, come back if some other idiot decides to follow in his footsteps. No need to teach people how to live their own lives.generic gamer said:we tried that recently with another dictator, it's not really working. the only difference is north Korea DO have nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.FranzTyphid said:We should invade their ass
its a good point mate, but when has there been a unified world invasion in the last 50 years? and can you imagine the US trying to get a world coalition again? i can't see it working...Kollega said:I was talking about the invasion "by whole world", actually. Doubt there's any leader who likes Kim-Jong Il besides Kim-Jong Il.HotFezz8 said:examples of how this policy might end up fucking you over: vietnam, somalia, northern ireland, iraq, afghanistan, hezbollah, rhodesia, there are many more... put simply only UK and the US would be willing to send troops, and both countries are massively over stretched as it is.
P.S. yeah, kim yong il is massively insane though... still its the old phrase "power corrupts, absoloute power corrupts absoloutly"...
I'm just being overly idealistic (read as: idealistic, period) again. Could work, actually, but for that North Korea would have to present an actual threat to the world. It's not like countries would unite just because it would be nice (and it would be) to ruin Kim-Jong Il's shit.HotFezz8 said:its a good point mate, but when has there been a unified world invasion in the last 50 years? and can you imagine the US trying to get a world coalition again? i can't see it working...Kollega said:I was talking about the invasion "by whole world", actually. Doubt there's any leader who likes Kim-Jong Il besides Kim-Jong Il.
lol what sort of threat? WMDs? ;-)Kollega said:I'm just being overly idealistic (read as: idealistic, period) again. Could work, actually, but for that North Korea would have to present an actual threat to the world. It's not like countries would unite just because it would be nice (and it would be) to ruin Kim-Jong Il's shit.HotFezz8 said:its a good point mate, but when has there been a unified world invasion in the last 50 years? and can you imagine the US trying to get a world coalition again? i can't see it working...Kollega said:I was talking about the invasion "by whole world", actually. Doubt there's any leader who likes Kim-Jong Il besides Kim-Jong Il.
Yeah, something along that lines. Maybe deadly virus, or a nuclear missile. And of course leader insane enough to use them.HotFezz8 said:lol what sort of threat? WMDs? ;-)
Is it that strange? Most people who knew Hitler personally said he was a very nice man in daily life as well. Monstrosity is a part of human psychology.Parallel Streaks said:You know an odd journey to take? Reading his Wikipedia page. Everyone in Western and most of Eastern society have come to view Kim Jong-il as a depraved amoral monster, but then you read that page and it says he's a big fan of movies from the Friday the 13th series and Godzilla, and that he likes Basketball. Jesus Christ, the man's insane, but hearing things like that are equally disturbing, because it shows there IS a man behind the monster.
This is the best piece of reasoning I've ever read.Davrel said:Glass the entire place.
My reasoning?
1) We would only invade because of the humanitarian issue.
2)During the invasion hundreds of thousands of civilians would die (rendering point 1 redundant).
3)If we don't invade those same civilians die, albeit more slowly, from starvation.
4)If we don't stop the regime in NK we still have to deal with a reckless, incredibly dangerous nation that relies on brinkmanship to further its foreign policy.
There are, therefore, no positives to doing nothing about NK.
Invading would be incredibly costly in terms of our own soldiers lives etc. So to have a very high chance of removing the "problem" (and remember I'm not talking about the humanitarian issue here) the only option is nuclear weaponry.
Everyday, powerful states do nothing to stop conflicts and overthrow regimes were civilians are killed en mass; morality is no issue in IR.
N.B. - I'm not saying that this is a pleasant solution, but it would work; though it would anger China.