Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
Thanks Tree5Thanks

Thread: North Korea's motive

  1. #1
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    6,279
    Thanks
    4087

    From
    Canada, West Coast

    North Korea's motive

    Here is an alternate view of what makes Lil Kimmy play the way he does. I'll just quote a couple of excerpts, but it is worth a read IMO.

    Kim Jong-un views nuclear weapons as a way to escape fate of Saddam and Gadhafi


    -~-

    But Tobey and most experts agree that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un's No. 1 goal is self-preservation. For Kim, the pursuit of nuclear weapons and a missile program is a rational way to stave off attempts by the U.S. to overthrow his regime.

    "I think most people ascribe a motivation of regime preservation to their nuclear programs," Tobey said. "So it would be used to deter any attacks that would be aimed at dislodging the government."

    -~-

    Philip Yun, a former senior adviser to two U.S. co-ordinators for North Korea at the Department of State, said that he has been in hundreds of hours of negotiations with the North Koreans. "Every single time during that period, they talked about [Slobodan] Milosevic and they talked about Saddam Hussein and subsequently talked about Gadhafi if they had nuclear weapons they'd still be there."

    -~-
    Kim Jong-un views nuclear weapons as a way to escape fate of Saddam and Gadhafi - World - CBC News

  2. #2
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    59,378
    Thanks
    31632

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    Here is an alternate view of what makes Lil Kimmy play the way he does. I'll just quote a couple of excerpts, but it is worth a read IMO.



    Kim Jong-un views nuclear weapons as a way to escape fate of Saddam and Gadhafi - World - CBC News
    How is that an "alternative view." This is the consensus view.

    Of course, if Kim is able to avoid the fate of others by developing nukes and the missiles to carry them, there will be several others in line behind him. Starting with Iran.

  3. #3
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    6,279
    Thanks
    4087

    From
    Canada, West Coast
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    How is that an "alternative view." This is the consensus view.

    Of course, if Kim is able to avoid the fate of others by developing nukes and the missiles to carry them, there will be several others in line behind him. Starting with Iran.
    So maybe the world would be better off if the US quit threatening and invading other countries?
    Thanks from Friday13, Sassy, MaryAnne and 1 others

  4. #4
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    59,378
    Thanks
    31632

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    So maybe the world would be better off if the US quit threatening and invading other countries?
    Maybe. I'm not sure that just letting nukes proliferate around the world is the answer either. In any case, North Korea is our enemy and has never cared to be anything else since its founding.

    I'm of the view that this is China's moment to show they are a first-tier player in the world. If they can't, why will their neighbors not oppose China's moves to expand. its sphere of influence? That doesn't mean China has great options either, but there's a wider frame to this issue--influence in the Pacific. China wants more of it, which means the US has to withdraw some. Continuing to allow NK to threaten the US justifies our continued influence in the northwest Pacific region and bolsters our position vis a vis the South China Sea, which is also in play here.

  5. #5
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    17,978
    Thanks
    5045

    From
    midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    Maybe. I'm not sure that just letting nukes proliferate around the world is the answer either. In any case, North Korea is our enemy and has never cared to be anything else since its founding.

    I'm of the view that this is China's moment to show they are a first-tier player in the world. If they can't, why will their neighbors not oppose China's moves to expand. its sphere of influence? That doesn't mean China has great options either, but there's a wider frame to this issue--influence in the Pacific. China wants more of it, which means the US has to withdraw some. Continuing to allow NK to threaten the US justifies our continued influence in the northwest Pacific region and bolsters our position vis a vis the South China Sea, which is also in play here.
    That's pretty much true.

    Remember this: when Trump makes statements about N Korea, his message is also aimed at China.

    And Russia.

    China needs America to buy the stuff it produces as much as America needs China to produce it.

    Amazingly, it all comes back to money.

    M O N E Y

  6. #6
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    59,378
    Thanks
    31632

    From
    in my head
    I agree with this part.
    Quote Originally Posted by Miller47 View Post
    That's pretty much true.

    Remember this: when Trump makes statements about N Korea, his message is also aimed at China.

    And Russia.
    But not so much this...
    China needs America to buy the stuff it produces as much as America needs China to produce it.

    Amazingly, it all comes back to money.

    M O N E Y
    China depends on us a lot less than it used to. The rest of the world is catching up and provides them with wide markets, but what they really want is to stimulate INTERNAL demand. If they can manage that, they can become the preeminent economic power on the planet. But translating that into international influence or control over a sphere beyond its borders (particularly across wide waters) is another issue. They want to be more than Japan became when it ascended--they want to be a superpower. They have to act like it.

    The thing is, they may want something in exchange with regard to influence-in-the-Pacific.
    Last edited by Rasselas; 13th August 2017 at 12:28 PM.
    Thanks from RNG

  7. #7
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    17,978
    Thanks
    5045

    From
    midwest
    China still depends on us a lot.

    As we do on them.

    Trump is trying to get a better trade deal, allegedly.

    Let's see what transpires.

  8. #8
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    6,279
    Thanks
    4087

    From
    Canada, West Coast
    Quote Originally Posted by Miller47 View Post
    China still depends on us a lot.

    As we do on them.

    Trump is trying to get a better trade deal, allegedly.

    Let's see what transpires.
    And yet, according to the BBC this morning, he is about to announce some means of "handling" the trade situation with China. In particular the Chinese acquiring of US intellectual property.

    As you said, let's see what transpires.

  9. #9
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    51,358
    Thanks
    9407

    From
    By the wall
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    So maybe the world would be better off if the US quit threatening and invading other countries?
    Maybe.

    Maybe it would be better if we invaded more.

    Had we invaded Germany when Hitler started acting up how many lives would that have saved?

    You can find examples of that all over.

    The only problem is knowing which ones to invade.

    Would invading Iran save the destruction of the ME and ultimately result in fewer losses for us?

  10. #10
    ~Standing My Ground~ Sassy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    38,466
    Thanks
    15002

    From
    God Bless Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Miller47 View Post
    That's pretty much true.

    Remember this: when Trump makes statements about N Korea, his message is also aimed at China.

    And Russia.

    China needs America to buy the stuff it produces as much as America needs China to produce it.

    Amazingly, it all comes back to money.

    M O N E Y
    Say it isn't so..........

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30th May 2017, 07:34 AM
  2. Replies: 37
    Last Post: 5th May 2017, 08:37 PM
  3. "We're not North Korea. We're WORSE than North Korea!"
    By The Man in forum World Politics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 30th March 2017, 10:44 PM
  4. North Carolina? More like North Korea
    By Davocrat in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 11th April 2016, 05:08 PM
  5. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11th April 2013, 12:06 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed