North Korea - Future Wars?

[preemptingyou03]

I have a few quick questions for all of you.

1) Do you think it is possible that we will soon be involved in another war with a rogue state, and if so, with whom?

2) If we were to remove Kim Jon Il from power in North Korea, would that be considered part of the War on Terror, even though it isn't against radical Islam? I still think it would.

3) Considering France and Germany don't have financial ties to the Koreans, if we did preempt the North Koreans, would we have their support?

4) Would China get involved perhaps causing World War III?

Personally, I think by 2005, (after Bush wins the election) we will have captured OBL by then, Afghanistan and Iraq will hold elections, insurgents will slowly stop in Iraq, and stability will come to that region.

By the summer of 2005, the drums of war will start with North Korea. By the summer of 2006, I except American, British, Italian, French, and German forces strolling the captial of Korea, and Kim Jong Il found in a spiderhole. Afghanistan, Iraq, North Korea... three fronts in the beginning stages of the Global War on Terror.

 

[Avatar4321]

Yes it would be part of the war with terror since there is evidence that N Korea has been cooporating with terrorists. They are using, the enemy of my enemy is my friend philosophy. I think Iran will be dealt with first though unless major developments occur in N Korea. kinda sad how all the problems we face today are problems because of one man. Jimmy Carter. Who failed to do his job.

 

[preemptingyou03]

I think with the capture of bin Laden and al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda as an organization will slowly start to collapse. And then it is Hezbollah's turn.

Iran sponsors Hezbollah and Syria funds and shelters them. Iran and Syria might be next, but then again, North Korea is well ahead in their WMD programs than the previous two.

An American occupation of North Korea wouldn't bring us the guerrilla atatcks we are facing in Iraq, mainly because North Koreans aren't mature in the tactics of terrorism. A post-war North Korea would be much smoother than a post-war Iran or Syria, except the war itself with North Korea may be harder than expected.

A war with Iran would take about 4-8 weeks, and a post-war Iran would be like post-war Iraq.

A war with Syria would take about 1-3 weeks, and a post-war Syria would be WORSE than a post-war Iraq, because it is closer to the base of Hezbollah and Hamas which would carry out attacks.

A war with North Korea would take about 3 months, maybe longer, and would result in at least 2,000 American casualties. The North Korean military isn't the Iraqi or Iranian military. It is up there.

But a post-war NK wouldn't be all too difficult.

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by preemptingyou03

4) Would China get involved perhaps causing World War III?

China has one of the worlds strongest growing economies, it seems North Korea is actually a burden to China. Going against the West would not benifit them. I see them a doing everything diplomatic as possible to avoid any conflict regarding NK.

 

[Avatar4321]

4) Would China get involved perhaps causing World War III?

World War 3 is over. Reagan won it without firing a shot.

 

[preemptingyou03]

Good point about Reagan. I don't think that though. I think the Cold War could have led to World War III, but because of Truman's Doctrine and Reagan's policy, it didn't.

But my point is, if we go into Korea, would we have French and German support?

We need to defend our society but every time we go to war, we can't inflame the entire world against us. If we had French, German, and Russian support in taking out Saddam, anti-Americanism wouldn't be on such a scale.

 

[preemptingyou03]

Do you think we'll go to war with Korea? I see a possible war with North Korea sometime in 2006 or 2007.

 

[_dmp_]

For those feeling we are on the verge of a fight w/ N. Korea...or that N. Korea is capable of a sustained battle, please provide your sources of Intel.

 

[preemptingyou03]

There have been reports that the Dept. of Defense has ordered equipment from the Afghan and Iraqi theaters, to the DMZ. This is just speculation though. I do, think however, Bush has a broader vision for his campaign against rogue states and terrorists.

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by preemptingyou03
There have been reports that the Dept. of Defense has ordered equipment from the Afghan and Iraqi theaters, to the DMZ. This is just speculation though. I do, think however, Bush has a broader vision for his campaign against rogue states and terrorists.

Reports where?

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
Yes it would be part of the war with terror since there is evidence that N Korea has been cooporating with terrorists. They are using, the enemy of my enemy is my friend philosophy. I think Iran will be dealt with first though unless major developments occur in N Korea. kinda sad how all the problems we face today are problems because of one man. Jimmy Carter. Who failed to do his job.

damn avatar, lets not stop at just two democrat presidents. why not blame kennedy for not destroying cuba during his tenure and letting terrorism bloom there. lets blame FDR as well, not colonializing japan or germany and letting terrorism take root in asia and the balkans.

lets blame every democrat in office for every trouble in the world today and hold the GOP blameless for any resulting deaths afterwards because you idiots thought it was okay to sacrifice arab people and their countries in your desperate bid at peace around the world. :finger:

 

[Avatar4321]

Well sorry you cant handle facts. I dont include JFK cause atleast he had the guts to confront the soviets. He made a few blunders. bay of pigs. starting vietnam. But he wasnt like Carter and Clinton who ran from any confrontation. During the Carter administration, rather than support our ally in Iran, we got a regime worse than the one it replaced. Because of the overthrow of Iran, Saddam was able to take power in Iraq. And because of both Carter and Clinton promising N Korea Nuclear power plants for peace we have problems with N Korea. If clinton had just dealt with it i would have been behind him completely. But rather than deal with it he pushed it off to future administrations.

the GOP does not have the track record of the past two Democrat administrations. Well if you count Johnsons blunder in Vietnam thats 3. The last real leader you guys had was JFK, and I think he is overrated simply because he is a martyr.

 

[gaffer]

Eventually we will have to go against NK. But in doing so there is a factor to be considered that hasn't been discussed here. And that is after the fall of NK what becomes of it. The economic impact of the two Koreas being combined would be extremely difficult on the south. The north is in abject poverty. Even their rail system is too antiquated to handle trains from the south. I discussed this with a guy from SK not long ago and his opinion was that SK wouldn't want NK combined with them, at least until they can become more modernized. Combining the two would be even worse than east and west germany recombining. So the south is not real anxious to see the two combined, at least according to the guy I talked too.

 

[preemptingyou03]

Well, combing Germany worked out well in the long run. We live in an instant gratification world. Just like Iraq will take time, I'm sure rebuilding North korea would take time too. But a post-war North Korea wouldn't have radical Islamists running around causing chaos like post-war Iraq. However, the actual invasion of North Korea would be much harder than the invasion of Saddam's Iraq.

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by dmp
Reports where?

 

[preemptingyou03]

Sorry, reports came out in July of last year that we were moving things from Iraq to South Korea. I don't have a link. This is all just hypothetical.

Do you think it'll lead to a war?

 

[supermarine]

nk also has nukes. IF a dictator like kim knows he will fall in the brink of the end of the war, hes likely to nuke the asian countries around there. Such as taiwan, japan, and sk. I think the better approach would be encouraging rebellion, starting the collapse from the inside. THat way the chiniese wont complain and start a war. Second, i think that we need to find a way to show china that nk is a threat to everyone. China will stay out of the way if we do that. DO NOT encourage the chinese to help in the taking of korea.

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by preemptingyou03
Sorry, reports came out in July of last year that we were moving things from Iraq to South Korea. I don't have a link. This is all just hypothetical.

Do you think it'll lead to a war?

No...and I've been there...I've also been in HQ's high enough to know when they are huffing and puffing (nearly non-stop) and it DOESN'T draw the media attention. They have been shouting and screaming and such since the cease-fire.

 

[preemptingyou03]

So how will this resolve? A war with NK would show Muslims we aren't at war with Islam.

 

[Zhukov]

We are at war with Islam.

And I doubt we will ever engage in a full out war with N. Korea. Lob a few selected bunker busters? Perhaps. Full out war? I doubt it.

But people flying planes into buildings surprised me, so I've been wrong before. (I assumed it would be a nuke, but at least I got the city right)