By continuing you agree to eChinacities's Privacy Policy .
Sign up with Google Sign up with FacebookQ: North Korea tests nuke.... thoughts??
Apparently, Nth Korea has successfully tested an underground nuke... given the other thread on the islands and what might happen....
Will this have any real affects in China?
something about the 'straw that breaks the camel's back'.
why is it many people seem to believe that there will never be a WWIII ? I personally do believe that there will be a WWIII and this event in N. Korea is just another 'straw'.
There are tens of 1000's of nuclear devices scattered around our planet today. What is so implausible about one being detonated in a large urban center ? could that not lead to ill-considered retaliation ? could that not lead to ill-considered response ? that, my friends, are how wars begin.
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword."
Amonk:
People doubt a major war because of the relative stability of the unipolar system caused by America's primacy. Any major war at this point in time would need to be waged with the tacit support (or at least apathy) of NATO and the Anglosphere in particular. The foreign relations of the US are largely designed around making sure no one wants war (McDonald's Diplomacy), which has been moderately successful in improving the global economic system.
Any war large enough to be dubbed "WWIII" would inevitably involve the US and NATO (at least the Anglosphere, if by some method NATO were to dissolve). Now, imagine the forces that would need to be mustered to make a full scale conventional war last longer than a few months. China and North Korea would certainly not be enough. In military forecasting, it would basically require Russia AND another major power (Japan or India or France or Germany or Brazil AND the former Eastern Bloc) to even come close to having a snowball's shot in Hell at challenging the US/UK/Australia/Canada. Now, go up to any of those five country's legislatures and ask whether they would back China over America in a war. If you could bottle the laughs you could sell them for billions.
As for the future, it will take another ~50 years for China's economy to reach anything close to that of a "developed" country, and another 30 for its military tech to match that of the US. High-tech military developments are the furthest development indicator to lag behind all others. You cannot challenge the US until you can scale the Pacific, you cannot cross the Pacific with a thousand Soviet carriers (I mean... Chinese? Really? They have the gall to call it Chinese, rather than Russian refurbished scrap metal? Okay, TIC).
Oh, and by the time any other country is capable of effectively waging a war on the US, we will most likely be dead- assuming longevity tech doesn't go as far as I hope. Is it possible the DPRK will launch a nuke? Yes. Is it likely that nuke will land at all, much less at its intended target? No. Just because you are not aware of the technology to target and neutralize ICBMs does not mean it doesn't exist.
If you really want to work yourself or others up into being scared about things you cannot control, I suggest researching biomedical warfare. It would be much easier for a rouge group to wipe out 90% of the world with a virus than any amount of uranium.
Edit: Someone please give me a job as an analyst. I am a 22 year old with a political science degree from UConn. Please? Thank you.
diverdude1:
Everything you say makes sense.
I believe the question lies in what does Not make sense. Simplest example of that I can give is the 'rogue nation / rogue nuke'.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2012-09/23/c_123750479.htm
yeah, bio or chem weapons may be more devastating ultimately,,,, but nukes have drama working for them, passions need to be inflamed for conflicts to get out of hand...
anyway,,g'night..
Traveler:
Actually, China has already given Australia (May 2012) the ultimatum that we must choose between USA and China as our protecting "godfather." We were threatened by being told to remember that we depend on China to "feed ourselves."
www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/chinese-official-its-us-or-america-20120515-1yp5f.html
Shining_brow:
Amonk, I disagree (partly) with your assessment.
The main reason we don't have nuclear war is because everyone knows there's no winner! Not because any one particular nation pretty much ignored the non-proliferation agreement and still has buckets of nukes underground... (and supports another country that ignores the NPT).
Yes, most likely any WWIII would involve the US (personally, I think they'll have a lot to do with starting/encouraging that war - Middle East, anyone?) Depending on where that war starts, depends on who does what... if it turns out to be in the SEA area, it could get really nasty! (ie, China vs Japan, & US, with Nth Korea not staying out of it... and Russia..???)
The technology to send a nuke over the Pacific isn't that difficult... getting past the defenses, and precisely striking your target is more of an issue. But, with a nuke, does it matter?
(and, that all presumes you need to actually get it over the Pacific... as against, getting one smuggled into a city...).
I think your assessment of China's development and military tech is way off! It sounds very much like you're basing your assessment on the past 30 or so years, and completely ignored the rate of technological development - especially in the last 10 years (but actually more).
But, I certainly agree about biochemical warfare being far more of an issue! Won't be too long before the US develops viruses that are genetically coded for/against certain genotypes for use around the world.
(I, for one, DO expect to see a WWIII in the not too distant future... not quite sure how exactly it plays out, though)
Shining_brow:
Oh, Traveler - part of that linked article had: "Senator Carr yesterday met the man expected to become China's next premier, Li Keqiang, in Beijing.".... Hmmmmmmm, yeah, well worth listening to :)
Amonk:
Good point Shining_brow. You'll note I do intentionally state 'conventional' forces, for a reason- meaning non-nuclear. In general, I tend to operate (as the IAEA tends to) under the assumption that MAD will ensure no nation with the ability to wage nuclear war would actually do so. So, you are right- but I agreed with you in the first place . The problems then shift to, as previously mentioned, 'rouge groups' and 'rouge states' with a small number of nuclear devices. You are right on delivery method, a suitcase nuke is more feasable than other delivery systems. But 'more likely' is different from 'likely'.
I think when you talk about rapid technological advancement you are refering to the exponential gains made with the computer age, no? If so, I believe that US R&D is exponential as well, and that any potential time reduction China would see is due to network hacking rather than change in the paradigm of mass investment over sustained periods. Even if China were investing as much as the US (China is currently investing about 18% the absolute amount of the US), it would take a considerable time investment to catch up. Again, if hacking is as successful as the newsmedia boogiemen seem to suggest, all bets are off.
All military assessments suggest that Russia is still more fit for a war against the US than is China. The ability of the Chinese to wage war is, as is its economic indicators, seen by experts to be vastly overstated due to self-reporting and quantitative over qualitative statistics. I look up the kill counts of well trained German panzer units compared to those of inexperienced Soviet or American tankers during WWII whenever I get worried about the actual number of military equipment any given country has.
Again, I must state that high-tech military capabilities lag behind economic development further than any other indicator. In security studies (as far as I know, I am only up-to-date as of 2011) this is not generally debatable, rather it is taken as a constant. So, the American military is actually gaining on the Chinese military until the Chinese economy grows to a point where it can sustain an equal investment in military R&D.
Amonk:
Oh wow, I missed the Australian article. I think they could have gone with a different headline on that.
"Chinese Ex-Diplomat Claims Australia Not Doing Well Politically"
Shining_brow:
@Amonk .. yeah, fair enough!\
There's another thought, though.
Let's just say, hypothetically, the US and NATO (and the UN... we really shouldn't forget them... and by that I mean, the US should actually listen to them once in a while!!) go to war with Nth Korea, it would most likely start out as conventional. I have severe doubts Pyongyang will allow itself to be invaded... hence, nukes will fly! (which is probably the whole point... Nth Korea feels isolated, and ganged up on... showing they have effective nuclear weapons is one way to say "don't start up with the Korean War again...").
(not to mention, that so many countries seem to think that showing off military hardware is an indication of 'strength'... aka 'face' :p)
Shining_brow:
Oh, btw, sorry - pet hate of mine... 'rouge' is a colour in cosmetics, 'rogue' is deceitful or unprincipled (and a pretty nice X-man! :p)
Yes. The same thing that happens everytime NK does something that China doesn't like. China's leadership will call The Biggest Little Emperor in the World up to Shenyang so that they can have a sit down with him to ask him whether he's lost his god damn mind. On that day, traffic will be awful.
North Korea is doing the same thing that Adolph Hitler did before the start of WW11. The democracies did nothing for fear of starting another war. Because they did nothing Hitler thought he could do what he liked. So what did we get? A war. North Korea needs to be brought to heel, before they think they can do what thy like. Franck3
Amonk:
Yeah, completely different scenarios. So much so that I'll assume you aren't going to respond well to a reasoned argument. I will say, however, that North Korea is being focused on because of its proximity to Japan, South Korea, and China- not because of its seemingly maniacal leadership (spoiler: they have been pulling a Reagan) or necessarily its ability to wage war.
Shining_brow:
<sigh> Why does everyone bring out the Hitler card, with obviously no idea on the realties of the situation...
Germany was forced to pay war reparations even during a severe depression, meaning money was leaving Germany to pay for the rest of the world's problems (and not able to look after its own). Their people were starving, industry was limited, and their people divided. And millions were unemployed... all because the 'allies' (as we know them) refused to help or throw a bone (ie, refusal to let up on the war reparations - even as just a delayment of payment.) The country was in serious debt (guess who to, for at least some of that). Industry and technology was forcibly stagnated by foreign governments.
And, over their new borders imposed by those foreign powers, native Germans were being persecuted, victimised, and even murdered (remembering that those areas used to be part of 'Germany').
The German people were really unhappy with their own government, and with the rest of Europe (in particular) because any calls for help were ignored. Hitler, through a strong legal and democratic process, got his Nationalist (ie, pro-German) Socialist (ie, state controlled capital works) party.. something seriously needed at the time. (sure, he later murdered a lot of them... but I'm talking about the situation that led to his rise, which is a different situation to Nth Korea's)
Once Hitler achieved power, he repeatedly asked for help from the foreign powers over many issues - finance, technology/industry, and help with Germans suffering across the borders (including asking to have those lands given back to Germany, as the majority in those areas didn't want the prevailing situation). Because the allies refused to help, he did what he felt was needed... ignored the reparations, developed technology (and military - hence employing people with the money they now had), gave people food, and went to 'liberate' Germans living across arbitrary borders (Austria - which welcomed him), Czechoslovakia (which had a great deal of technology and wealth as well) and Poland (as per Czechoslovakia).Sure, after 'asking' didn't do any good, he resorted to threats to get what he wanted... do you blame him (well, really, the German people??)
Again, I'll state - Germany was in a foreign-power imposed hell, and after he came to power, Hitler asked for help from the Allies, and they were continually refused!
So, it was the foreign powers that created Hitler (certainly, a climate for a Hitler to come along).
And look what happened......
(it's because of all those stuff-ups by the Allies in post-war reparations and land-splits that gives us the situation we have now, where Japan and Germany were still able to develop without suffering... yes, the world actually learned from its mistake!!!)
North Korea is not (at least officially) in a depression, and neither is the world relying on NK to help hold them up while their people suffer. While NK is limited in their borders, they're not artificially imposed. Nor are North Koreans being victimised and murdered within any former borders of NK. And, of course, Kim Ill didn't come to power through legal democratic elections due to the will of the people for change. They're not asking for foreign help, they're not being denied access to technology and industry by overseas powers. Kim Ill doesn't have reason to go to war... well, ok, really his country is suffering, but anyway... (nor does he have a chance if he does :p)
Is that a good enough response?
Scandinavian:
Germany was in this situation due to WW1, their actions during WW1 and the outcome meant they where not allowed to have certain types of weapons. there is a strong resemblance from this to NK
but yeah, throwing the Hitler card in a debate is a resignation as per Godwin's Law
The only affect it will have is that if something really goes down people will start to blame China for not doing enough into talking to their close allies N. Korea.
Amonk:
One of the reasons Xi is going to have that sit down with Kim III in Shenyang!
soil and water contamination in such a small country from testing these devices may come back and bite them in the ass environmentally, also very close to china for detonation on the map.
The propagation of fear is the oldest tool in the propaganda war chest...think the war in Iraq backed buy the moronic majority of Americans at the time.
The only reason the US does not bomb the living hell out of N. Korea is because of China...and they know this and because of this they can get away with whatever they want...because the last freaking thing China wants is the collapse of the N. Korean government with a massive exodus of refugees pouring over their boarders.
This has become a game of containment...maintaining the status quo to prevent unwanted burdens.
The DRPK has a better chance at real freedom than they do at launching a nuclear strike...even if they were stupid enough to do so...thus ensuring their own destruction.
What I worry about most is them selling their technology to stateless terrorists.
Amonk:
Definitely true, the refugee crisis after the collapse of the DPRK regime would supposedly be the worst in the history of the world. Also, Pyongyang is expected to launch whatever ordinance it can at Seoul once military operations were to commence against the regime.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/chinas-army-looks-getting-ready-175936611.html
Looks like a storm is coming.
LastTargarean:
The ongoing standoff with India is more likely to escalate into something terrible.
ambivalentmace:
yes very convenient for India to be doing a war dance to keep China worried about a 2 front war.
America may be using India to make sure China does not take North Korea outright in a changeover of power.
This may be misdirection and planned ahead of time.
The question is could China handle a North Korea problem and India at the same time, men, supplies, resources, etc. Is the threat of India an insurance policy to keep China in line in what ever agreement xi and trump already agreed to over N. Korea.
ambivalentmace:
if a 2 front war or a war and refugee problem with the military ties up resources, will this embolden Vietnam and the Philippines to reclaim islands taken from them. China has few friends and the best time to attack an enemy is when they are already under attack. The last domino to fall will be if the crazy leader of North Korea succeeds in detonating a nuclear device on a pacific island, Japan, South Korea, etc, China can kiss their dreams of controlling the South China sea completely goodbye because every one in Asia will want to arm themselves to prevent it from happening again and China assurances that North Korea was not serious problem would be dead wrong and will ruin any possible goodwill China ever had to be trusted as a stable regional power.
Shining_brow:
"yes very convenient for India to be doing a war dance to keep China worried about a 2 front war.
America may be using India to make sure China does not take North Korea outright in a changeover of power"
I don't think so... I think it's very much China trying to control and dominate in an area that's been the cause for war before, and India getting sick and tired of it all... again!
ditto on amb"s comment. The buildup is necessary to stop the refugees and prevent human smuggling. A war would embolden many factions in China to incite revolution. Beijing must play it's poker hand very carefully. Japan still has the military capability to make the Chinese military think twice. I actually doubt there will be war because Beijing knows that it won't be just N Korea that has a regime change. History has shown all dictatorships undergo regime change under stress of war with democracies. China's best bet is to reign in Kimmy to maintain the status quo. I think that China may also have to face a nuclear armed Japan in the near future because of it's imperialistic demands.
ambivalentmace:
nuclear bunkers, wtf., ok, labor is cheap and soldiers standing around do need something to do, but as cheap as China is, spending money on nuclear bunkers, what do they know, or what do they think they know?