[New York Times, 8 minutes ago] WAR!

[Crni Vuk]

friendly relations today are where the money is. And since North Korea has no one of it. Says it all I guess. I mean are they some kind of strong economical partner to China ? Probably not I guess.

 

[DarkCorp]

china is caught between a rock and a hard place.

If push came to shove I have no doubt China would abandon the DPRK. Actually taking sides would ruin the whole point of being a "mediator" between two parties. Also, the PRC needs the US and the west as a counter-balance to any potential russian powerplay.

But, the DPRK is one of the PRCs assests as well. As long as Kim continues to rattle sabers, the west will continue to ask the PRC to mediate as a show of western-eastern co-operation.

Again I can't help but think this is more of the same bullshit albeit much more of a hardcore "rattle" compared to the usual.

 

[.Pixote.]

But, the DPRK is one of the PRCs assests as well. As long as Kim continues to rattle sabers, the west will continue to ask the PRC to mediate as a show of western-eastern co-operation.

True, but it will also mean that the U.S will continue to have war games 200 miles off the coast of China, because in the eyes of the U.S it has some sort of responsibility to protect South Korea (we all know that's bullshit, but anyway).

Only after the Korean peninsula has been unified under the souths control, and the Koreans ask the U.S to go home will China be happy...fat chance though, just think of Japan and the Island of Okinawa.

 

[DarkCorp]

I think the PRC believes the face it gets from its "mediator" and economic co-operative status", outweighs any loss garnered from foreign military excercises. In the future the PRC may be militarily strong enough to warn the US off its shores but that might be the end of it.

I can't help but think that China realises any military confrontation with the US and the west would end up a failure. it is simply too far behind and will continue to lag behind thanks to the happenings of the early and mid 20th century.

If the PRC were to wage any battle with another superpower, it would most likely be a form of internet/cyber warfare. What it cannot achieve with conventional military might it will attempt to win with its nuke status, cyber warefare expertise and diplomatic weasling.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Only after the Korean peninsula has been unified under the souths control, and the Koreans ask the U.S to go home will China be happy...fat chance though, just think of Japan and the Island of Okinawa.

Yeah, because Okinawans were so happy under Japanese occupation, weren't they? Last time I checked, Japan started a war they couldn't finish, lost the Battle of Okinawa utterly and unconditionally surrendered. See how that works?
You can't go banzai-ing and kamakazi-ing your way across Asia in an orgy of violence and rape and then complain about not getting one of your imperial holdings back on your terms. Not how that works dude.

Korea and Okinawa are like night and day. You can't compare them on those grounds. Where was North Korea's high water mark in the war, and what forced them back? You can doubt America's prime motives, but you can't question their commitment to keep South Korea free from N. Korean invasion - it's already happened before.

 

[Crni Vuk]

though I do think that a war with North Korea would leave the US in a rather weak situation. Not cause of a military conflict but from what happens after the military has won. Those kind of situations are a real money drain and huge preasure on economy. And its not like the precense in Afghanistan and Iraq anrent already overstraining the US budged.

 

[Alphadrop]

Well it would be a U.N action so the Americans don't have to stay.

 

[thegaresexperience]

The UN? Do their "peacekeepers" actually engage in battle? I'm curious

 

[.Pixote.]

Self defense only...and that only means when they are openly being attacked by another party. They wont interject if two separate parties are killing one another - Rwandan Genocide - Tutsi and Hutu.

The UN's mandate forbids intervening in the internal politics of any country unless the crime of genocide is being committed.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Well it would be a U.N action so the Americans don't have to stay.

Well ... but who would want to stay in such a hell hole ? After the war. To secure the area.

Anyone can be to have here the asian version of Iraq or Afghanistan.

I think realisticaly only the chinese army could stay there without a high risk to be attacked.

 

[thegaresexperience]

Self defense only...and that only means when they are openly being attacked by another party. They wont interject if two separate parties are killing one another - Rwandan Genocide - Tutsi and Hutu.

The UN's mandate forbids intervening in the internal politics of any country unless the crime of genocide is being committed.

Thought so, I couldn't be sure though. Yep, they're the best people to send in for the job , they can be the stereotypical British policeman "Stop or I'll say stop again!"