• David Solman
    48
    What should we do about North Korea?

    In this post i will simply put my opinion on this and all are welcome to discuss your own.

    So over the last year North Korea have started to threaten the United States with nuclear weapons. Is it as simple as a mad man dictator threatening the west? That's what the U.S government want you to believe.

    North Korea and the US are still at war and they have been since the Korean war in 1950, after agreeing to an armistice during the Korean war this was not an official end to the war. It is also not unusual for an American citizen to not know anything about this war, after all the US air strike on Pyongyang destroyed almost 75% of the capital and was only part of a bombing campaign that killed nearly 3 million north Koreans. Not surprising that they don't teach you this at school.

    American troops are all over the world and they are on the border of South Korea to North Korea, i understand the need for an american presence since there has been tension between the North and South for a while and the US and south Korea are close allies, this was maybe the right move at one point, in my opinion not anymore. Kim has said repeatedly that the reason for a nuclear arsenal is to counteract american aggression and i think that it has reached a point where america must accept that North Korea is a nuclear power and move it's troops away. Throughout history the presence of enemy troops on the border is a threatening act. Let's take the Cuban missile crisis for example, the Soviet Union moved nuclear weapons to Cuba in the height of the Cold War, this spread panic across the whole country and an agreement was made to remove them, in other words america did not like it. Now, recently the US moved nuclear armed bombers to Guam as a direct threat to North Korea. Is this not the same thing that america had no tolerance for back in Cuba?

    American actions across the middle east is also a major factor in this crisis. Overthrowing Saddam Hussein in 2003 over suspicion of chemical weapons sent a major message to the world and North Korea was listening. Although in some ways America was justified in it's actions towards Iraq, in a lot of ways they weren't. The death toll now reaches half a million in Iraq since the US invasion and $100 billion has been spent reconstructing the country and aiding citizens wounded by war. This was a messy war that cost the country almost everything. Rushing into a war like this without taking into consideration that other rogue states were watching was careless. It was almost obvious that a country like north Korea would decide to build on it's military power in case the same thing happened to them.

    I don't even need to point out that the way Trump has handled the situation has been extremely immature and unprofessional and has rapidly increased the tensions between the two countries. in my opinion taking all history into account america needs to accept and leave North Korea alone. The cost of trying to remove his nuclear weapons will end in millions dying and potentially pulling china into war that could escalate into another world war. They have told america that if they remove all aggression nothing will come of his nuclear weapons but if the US can't accept it we could be looking at another few million dead. The facts are that the reason North Korea is such a threat is due to american actions.

    Kim Jong Un is a terrible man, don't get me wrong. But this was never about human rights and it never will be, as sad as it is. It wasn't about human rights when America destroyed North Korea and killed 3 million. The war in Iraq was never about human rights either so it's irreverent. I am a firm believer that first world countries need to move against rogue states that defy human rights, if it is done with that reason. A war with North Korea will cause devastation in a country already destroyed by poverty and more sanctions by the UN only causes more poverty when it isn't the citizens fault.

    Best solution, America has to be first to give up nuclear weapons and i believe that most countries will follow suit. Especially when the reason most enemy countries have them is counteract Americas nuclear weapons in the first place.
  • Dogar
    30
    You've misread the situation. Considering the state of Western media, most people do.

    You know Iraq wasn't invaded because of human rights, that was merely emotional rhetoric to stir up support for the war. The real reason for the invasion was a neoconservative belief that democracies are more likely to do business with other democracies; converting a "pillar" of the Middle East into a democracy was supposed to have a "domino" effect, meaning other autocracies would follow their lead. This, in turn, would burgeon commercial enterprise between the US, the UK and other recently-turned democratic Middle Eastern states. People talk about the petrodollar, they talk about the weapons of mass destruction, they talk about the welfare of Iraqi citizens under Saddam Hussein - none of that had anything to do with it. Mostly it had to do with what I just outlined, as well as allowing the West to counter Iranian domination in the area (and, by extension, Russian interference). The great game.

    Onto North Korea. Consider Iraq. Consider Libya. Iraq was invaded because the US knew it didn't possess nuclear weapons and thus mutually assured destruction was not a viable option. Libya, on the other hand, possessed a nuclear article. Gaddafi was only overthrown after he naively agreed to give up his nuclear arsenal following extended diplomatic discussions with the West. North Korea has no intention of ever using its nuclear weapons. Ever. There is no nuclear threat from North Korea to anyone in the world, despite the madman scenario Western media depicts. Truth of the matter is that North Korea has sustained itself for eighty years by being a calculated and rational player in foreign relations. It knows that the only way it can ensure it won't be invaded by other countries is to continue bolstering its nuclear supply and throw out a few crazy threats every few months to keep everyone on their toes. The country is topical now because there's a lot of uncertainty around the South China Sea, with South Korea possibly looking to do more business with China than the US, and China, naturally, being the world's next superpower, is North Korea's only true ally (and even then that relationship is frayed). It's a question of geographical dominance. North Korea is merely a proxy. Their nuclear weapons and capability of wiping out Soeul are just guarantors of their prolonged security. Add onto that the fact that China and South Korea (and Japan, how did I forget Japan) will never let the US try anything without massive retaliation, you realise the situation is the product of military flexing and posturing. Nation states only care about their own survival - there is far too much risk to invade North Korea in order to save its citizens, but even if there was mitigated or minimal risk, no country would do it because there's nothing to gain from doing so on an economic basis. No war has ever been about liberating a certain people from an oppressive regime, despite the tendency to frame it as such.

    Edit: if you think for a second that the US or any other nuclear power are going to give up their nuclear arsenal then you should do some serious reading because all that's going to happen from here on out is nuclear proliferation.

    Edit 2: so as for what we should do about North Korea, absolutely nothing. Everything works out better that way for everyone.
  • Miguel Hernández
    66
    Edit 2: so as for what we should do about North Korea, absolutely nothing. Everything works out better that way for everyone.Dogar

    North Korea owes a lot to the Bee Gees...

  • ssu
    8.5k
    What should we do about North Korea?David Solman
    Face reality.

    Just leave it as it is. You cannot do anything anymore (and luckily, didn't do anything before either). And simply stop being in panic about it.

    northkoreamap-1.png

    North Korea has a nuclear deterrent and hence the US has a similar cold war situation with the poor country as you had with the Soviet Union (and basically still have with Russia). End of story. Forget ideas of interfering in their politics or "liberating" the country. Besides, they know they cannot win a war against South Korea and the US.

    Actual peace deal would be nice, because the US just has an armistice with North Korea.
  • tim wood
    9.2k
    It would be nice if you actually knew anything about the Korean war. What you've got is QAnon-like fantasy of it. Google. Start to learn.
  • Harry Hindu
    5.1k
    Best solution, America has to be first to give up nuclear weapons and i believe that most countries will follow suit. Especially when the reason most enemy countries have them is counteract Americas nuclear weapons in the first place.David Solman
    Riiiiight. America is the only country with imperialistic tendencies. Give me a break.

    I'm of the mind that Americans shouldn't be spilling their own blood for people that don't want them there. If S. Korea doesn't want American troops there the S. Korea govt. just needs to say so. But the reality is that S. Korea is more scared of N. Korea than of American soldiers on their soil. They know that American troops are keeping the N.Koreans from invading, just as Saudi Arabia knows the American troops are keeping Iran from threatening them, and Eastern Europe knows that Vladimir is looking to reassert Russian influence in the region.

    The world saw what happened before wwii when Germany was simply allowed to invade and annex neighboring countries without any consequence. Drawing the line at Poland was to late. Stopping Germany sooner could have avoided a lot of bloodshed.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.