Hefei Expat - China

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

HFConnect
The Events, News and Sports APP for visitors in Hefei.

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: The Korean Dilemma  (Read 13552 times)

Hills

  • Standing Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 144
  • HFConnect APP
    • View Profile
    • Email
The Korean Dilemma
« on: December 20, 2010, 02:02:17 am »

What a wreck,in a word.The Korean crisis remembered for being forgotten is once again creating an ear full at the corner shops and in the hall of fames.Now what's the catch cos just one thing stands out clear...How much deep in a shit are the inhabitants of the peninsular if this shit goes down straight up................???????????????
« Last Edit: December 20, 2010, 09:54:30 am by Hills »
Logged

rae

  • Guest
Re: The Korean Dilema
« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2010, 03:09:46 am »

And im in a pissed mood of hating china's shity attitued to Japan and korean! only talk talk but dose nothing...
Logged

ryan_madden

  • Guest
Re: The Korean Dilemma
« Reply #2 on: December 20, 2010, 07:58:21 am »

"A car crash waiting to happen" - this would be an understatement, to say the least.

What seems even less comprehensible, to me, is that North and South Korea, should they decide to engage in what's been building up for donkey's ages, will invariably draw in their key allies, China and America, and in doing so,the Korean Peninsula (or, the major contingent of Asia) will effectively become a war-zone.

And I'm in a pissed mood of hating china's shitty attitude to Japan and korea! only talk talk but dose nothing...

China, in my opinion, holds a position of power here: they are North Korea's main (and only?) ally; America and its allies are practically trying to tell China's government what to do, but China is doing what it can to show that it (as a global power) will attempt to exhaust all avenues of diplomacy first, before taking any real action (which is the opposite of America, who appear to hold a level of bias against North Korea, based on its nuclear program).

In doing this, they are showing restraint in a tough situation, and showing that they won't "bow down" to America or anyone else's demands in regards to foreign relations (as America's advice would invariably end the allegiance between China-NK).
« Last Edit: December 23, 2010, 05:52:54 am by ryan_madden »
Logged

Hills

  • Standing Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 144
  • HFConnect APP
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: The Korean Dilemma
« Reply #3 on: December 20, 2010, 09:50:26 am »

thx for the correction Mr Ryan Oxford  ::)guess u didnt notice the appostrophe error too   ???

Quote
(which is the opposite of America, who appear to hold a level of bias against North Korea, based on its nuclear program).

Quote
China, in my opinion, holds a position of power here: they are North Korea's main (and only?) ally;

I literally find those two statements quite contradictory.If considered that China is a key ally to NK,wouldnt that evidently create a bias on China's stands.So how then does America's inclination to the south be termed bias

I think China connects to the issue more as a close neighbour to the peninsular rather than as an ally to the North making it kinda impartial in its words and moves.Dont forget China and the South share huge economic and social ties bonding both countries like two sides of theresame coin.

Gone are the days of the cold war or better put...the Communist /democracy rubbish.The world has been enlighten by their flaws".Economocracy" quickly swapped in for fatouos political ideologies since then

Like I said,its a huge dilemma for China and all other major international players,be it the US or myself ;)
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 12:15:54 am by Hills »
Logged

ryan_madden

  • Guest
Re: The Korean Dilemma
« Reply #4 on: December 21, 2010, 02:46:16 am »

thx for the correction Mr Ryan Oxford  ::)guess u didnt notice the appostrophe error too

Hey, hey, hey - there is no Oxford in Australia; plus, it'd take all the fun out of "self-reflection".  :-P

Enough of my trolling..

Quote
I literally find those two statements quite contradictory.If considered that China is a key ally to NK,wouldnt that evidently create a bias on China's stands.So how then does America's inclination to the south be termed bias

I think China connects to the issue more as a close neighbour to the peninsular rather than as an ally to the North making it kinda impartial in its words and moves.Dont forget China and the South share huge economic and social ties bonding both countries like two sides of the same coin.

Gone are the days of the cold war or better put...the Communist /democracy rubbish.The world has been enlighten by their flaws".Economocracy" quickly swapped in for fatouos political ideologies since then

Like I said,its a huge dilemma for China and all other major international players,be it the US or myself

Granted, those statements may be contradictory, but can you deny that America consistently protests every time there's even the tiniest whiff of news about North Korea and anything related to nuclear, America is always giving their opinion, which invariably is a consistent "stop doing that"? If not, then would that not show that they have some form of bias against the North?

USA's stand with South Korea.. Well, forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't the entire North/South warzone based on who acknowledges what the territorial line betwixt them is? SK believes its the one that the UN drew up; NK has convinced itself that the line is further into SK's territory, and refuses to be told otherwise. So the US (who is part of the UN and SK's ally) believes the one drawn up by the UN, and treats it as such; how does China view that territorial line, being allied to NK?

(and I'm willing to bet I've contradicted myself twice now.. and counting)
Logged

Aussie Mike

  • +86 138 667 39353
  • Administrator
  • Long Term Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1188
  • Love Life, Live Life, Be Happy!
    • View Profile
    • Personal Profile
Re: The Korean Dilemma
« Reply #5 on: December 21, 2010, 04:41:05 am »

Here is a link to New World Encyclopedia
Korean Conflict historical background

An interesting dilemma...  ???

Is this book 2?
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 04:44:10 am by Aussie Mike »
Logged
My Focus is Australia China Import Export People and Products

Andy72

  • Guest
Re: The Korean Dilemma
« Reply #6 on: December 21, 2010, 04:51:27 am »

...book 2 - corollary:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6BJ0KH20101220

...they "clearly" say that are working on both sides!! actively!! don't fear Rae!!  ;)

andy
Logged

Aussie Mike

  • +86 138 667 39353
  • Administrator
  • Long Term Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1188
  • Love Life, Live Life, Be Happy!
    • View Profile
    • Personal Profile
Re: The Korean Dilemma
« Reply #7 on: December 21, 2010, 04:55:21 am »

Book 2 shall be called "Resolution"

We had the book WAR and PEACE, this would be CONFLICT and RESOLUTION.

Just a play with words.
Logged
My Focus is Australia China Import Export People and Products

Andy72

  • Guest
Re: The Korean Dilemma
« Reply #8 on: December 21, 2010, 05:05:02 am »

one can hope it is not a "final resolution", like a "final destination' kind of a resolution (referring to the quite funny movies)!!

if NK and SK start resolving their contrast with bombs.. it is much better considering to move back home, far far away!!

;)
Logged

Aussie Mike

  • +86 138 667 39353
  • Administrator
  • Long Term Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1188
  • Love Life, Live Life, Be Happy!
    • View Profile
    • Personal Profile
U.S. Warns China on N.Korea Policy
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2011, 04:03:25 pm »

China seems to have inherited this problem from the Russians.
You could say, Everyone seems to be caught between a ROK and a hard place.
 ;D

I have collected various articles on the topic and posted them here to give a broader understanding.


World Press - U.S. Warns China on N.Korea Policy

U.S. President Barack Obama is warning the United States may have to redeploy American forces in Asia unless China toughens its stance on North Korea.

A senior Obama administration official told The New York Times that Obama delivered that warning to Chinese President Hu Jintao this week during the two leaders' private dinner at the White House, just hours after Hu arrived in the United States.

According to the unidentified U.S. official, Obama said, if Beijing does not help curb North Korea's nuclear ambitions, the United States will have to realign its forces to protect against a possible North Korean strike on American soil.

U.S. officials have increasingly been warning that North Korea poses a direct threat to the United States. Obama is said to have raised the issue with Hu twice in recent weeks -- first during a telephone conversation last month, then again at their private White House meeting.

American officials told U.S. news outlets Friday that China appears to be taking the warning seriously. They credit renewed pressure from Beijing for the quick agreement on new high-level military talks between North and South Korea.


News.Antiwar.com Gates: North Korea Could Nuke US
Defense Secretary Says Situation a 'Direct Threat'
by Jason Ditz, January 11, 2011

Citing North Korea’s continued effort to improve its not entirely effective long range missile program, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates predicted that not only would the nation have a “limited ability” to attack the continental United States within five years, but that they could use nuclear warheads when doing so.

Predictions of this sort are pretty common, and indeed two years ago the administration predicted that North Korea would have that capability in mid-2012. It seems US officials are forever more optimistic about North Korea’s ability to advance these programs than the North is, however.

The endless speculation centers around the Taepodong-2, a missile which has been in development since 1987. North Korea’s government has twice tested the missile, in 2006 and 2009, and it failed both times. US officials seem convinced enough of the missile’s viability, at least to the extent that it can be used to demand major funding of missile defense systems, which themselves don’t work particularly well, to shoot down the missiles on the off chance they ever get them working.

But Gates insists this proves North Korea poses a ‘direct threat’ to the US and that they must be “engaged” soon. Though he mentions negotiation the US has repeatedly rejected the notion of talks with the North Korean government.


FoxNews - Nuclear push could bring North's collapse

SEOUL, South Korea –  
Impoverished North Korea could bring its own collapse if it keeps pouring scarce national resources into its nuclear weapons program and military, a senior South Korean official warned in an interview to be broadcast Monday.

South Korean officials have used tough language against North Korea after two deadly attacks last year killed dozens of people. But it's still rare for a top Seoul official to speak publicly on a potential North Korean collapse and shows the South's growing impatience with its communist neighbor.

"I think they will come to the point where they can no longer sustain the burden of military expenditures," Chun Yung-woo told "PBS NewsHour," according to part of the interview posted on the U.S. public broadcaster's website.

Chun is South Korea's chief presidential adviser on national security and foreign affairs and once was the South's top negotiator on now-stalled six-nation talks on the North's nuclear weapons program.

"They are already suffering from misery ... I think they will be worse off," Chun said. "I think their obsession with their military capabilities, especially weapons of mass destruction like nuclear weapons, chemical weapons ... that would be a short-cut to their demise."

He said "the energy for changing" North Korea is growing but declined to predict when that change might happen.

North Korea's state-controlled economy was devastated by natural disasters and mismanagement in the 1990s, and a botched 2009 currency reform and massive flooding last year are feared to have worsened it. However, experts say the North still devotes much of its scarce resources to its 1.2 million-member military under its "army-first" policy.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/01/17/skorea-nuclear-push-bring-norths-collapse/#ixzz1Bwl5SHVu


Background information from the CIA Factbook


Disputes - international:

Risking arrest, imprisonment, and deportation, tens of thousands of North Koreans cross into China to escape famine, economic privation, and political oppression; North Korea and China dispute the sovereignty of certain islands in Yalu and Tumen rivers; Military Demarcation Line within the 4-km wide Demilitarized Zone has separated North from South Korea since 1953; periodic incidents in the Yellow Sea with South Korea which claims the Northern Limiting Line as a maritime boundary; North Korea supports South Korea in rejecting Japan's claim to Liancourt Rocks (Tok-do/Take-shima)

Refugees and internally displaced persons:

Trafficking in persons:
current situation: North Korea is a source country for men, women, and children trafficked for the purposes of forced labor and commercial sexual exploitation; the most common form of trafficking involves North Korean women and girls who cross the border into China voluntarily; additionally, North Korean women and girls are lured out of North Korea to escape poor social and economic conditions by the promise of food, jobs, and freedom, only to be forced into prostitution, marriage, or exploitative labor arrangements once in China tier rating: Tier 3 - North Korea does not fully comply with minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and is not making significant efforts to do so; the government does not acknowledge the existence of human rights abuses in the country or recognize trafficking, either within the country or transnationally; North Korea has not ratified the 2000 UN TIP Protocol (2008)
« Last Edit: January 24, 2011, 06:20:46 pm by Aussie Mike »
Logged
My Focus is Australia China Import Export People and Products

Aussie Mike

  • +86 138 667 39353
  • Administrator
  • Long Term Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1188
  • Love Life, Live Life, Be Happy!
    • View Profile
    • Personal Profile
Re: The Korean Dilemma
« Reply #10 on: January 28, 2011, 04:17:33 am »

Bloomberg - South Korea Proposes Feb. 11 Talks as North Renews Overtures
January 26, 2011, 4:43 AM EST


By Bomi Lim

Jan. 26 (Bloomberg) -- South Korea proposed military talks with North Korea for Feb. 11 as Kim Jong Il’s regime renewed calls for unconditional dialogue to ease tensions heightened since its November shelling of a South Korean island.

South Korea sent a notice to North Korea today for the meeting to be held at the border village of Panmunjom, said a defense ministry official who spoke anonymously according to military regulation. The talks are considered “preliminary” and are aimed at working out details for higher-level discussions, South Korea’s government has said.

A meeting would signal easing tension after the South declared North Korea its “enemy” last year following the artillery attack. South Korea’s Unification Ministry said on Jan. 20 it accepted the North’s call for dialogue after the communist nation agreed to discuss the shelling as well as the sinking of a warship in March that killed 46 sailors.

The ministry today called on North Korea to also accept bi- lateral talks on giving up its nuclear weapons program to assure “peace of the Korean peninsula and substantial development of inter-Korean relations.” The two sides last met on Sept. 30 when military officials discussed the ship sinking, which South Korea blames on a torpedo fired by North Korea’s mini-submarine.

Kim’s government today warned against setting terms for negotiations before meeting...

--Editors: Patrick Harrington, John Brinsley

============================================================
The article includes these quotes;

North Korea remains committed to its 2005 agreement to give up its nuclear weapons program and is willing to refrain from provocative acts, according to the statement.

North Korea denies any role in sinking the South Korean warship. North Korea says it shelled South Korea’s Yeonpyeong island near their disputed western sea border to protect its own territory.

============================================================

Is it possible that North Korea didn't sink the South Korean ship?

It wouldn't be the first time an outside country, e.g. Uncle Sam, initiated something like that. for it's own means.

Will future history reveal the truth?


« Last Edit: January 28, 2011, 04:29:42 am by Aussie Mike »
Logged
My Focus is Australia China Import Export People and Products
Pages: [1]   Go Up