NK in five years or less

a reply to: sdcigarpig

That's ridiculous. The US has the power of projection. You would literally have to have no idea what and how the US military is and how they work to believe this.

There not being troops stationed in south Korea reduces the ability of the US to decimate the north Koreans by precisely zero.

Jaden

a reply to: Gothmog

But it fits. As long as there is an armistice present, there are things in the document that benefits the US. However, if there is a peace treaty, then those benefits go away and the US would not need to have as many us military troops present. And if both North and South Korea hope to have an open border and or say reunification, then the US would need to be out of the picture. The long game is the reunification of Korea, but to do such, neither country wants any other interfering in the process. All sides wants peace, however, that is a very long road to go.

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
I would watch, something tells me that the long game is to end the initial Korean confict, signing and getting the USA to remove/reduce the troops there and then once that happens, strike when the south is at its most vulnerable and proceed with the conquering of the South, leaving the US out of it, unable to act or stop it.

That thought crossed my mind as well, play nice the bodyguard leaves then pummel the target.........it is a possibility

a reply to: Masterjaden

Hence the long plan. As long as the US is stationed there, then they are held at bay. However, once that peace treaty is signed, then the US would be required and obligated to remove all military troops, equipment and persons from South Korea. In short, after the ink is on the final peace agreement, that officially ends the Korean conflict, the US has to leave, removing all troops, persons and equipment from the country. Here is the part in the document that states such: Article IV

Recommendations to the Governments Concerned on Both Sides

60. In order to insure the peaceful settlement of the Korean question, the military Commanders of both sides hereby recommend to the governments of the countries concerned on both sides that, within three (3) months after the Armistice Agreement is signed and becomes effective, a political conference of a higher level of both sides be held by representatives appointed respectively to settle through negotiation the questions of the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Korea, the peaceful settlement of the Korean question, etc.

Once the US is out, then it would not be feasible for them to come back for any reason.

So if you were in the position of North Korea, wanting to take out the south, what would be your long game plan? I would say that the removal of the US would be a number one priority, and ultimately have to end up with a Peace Treaty to end the Korean conflict with the stipulation that the US uphold and honor the Armistice Agreement.

www.ourdocuments.gov...

originally posted by: JHumm

That thought crossed my mind as well, play nice the bodyguard leaves then pummel the target.........it is a possibility

A little history lesson for Kim might stop him from doing this..

a reply to: Masterjaden
Actually I do have an idea about the US military is and how it works.

That projection, is a message, and is used as such. War games, such as done in South Korea, is a 2 fold message, one to the people of South Korea, and the other is to North Korea and China. Many countries will often use public displays and war games as a way of sending messages to other countries, unveiling new weapons, and show how such works or as a bluff.

In this case, if one goes off of the rule of law, and treaty, then what I am stating is a real statement. When there is an official end to the Korean Conflict, the US has to remove all military personnel out of there. The troop levels will have to be greatly reduced and the bases would be turned over to the South Korean military, along with any and all military equipment left behind. That is in black and white as spelled out by the current armistice that paused the Korean conflict. The conflict was never ended, it was just paused.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes


Access of American business interests into China and Russia, American funded companies will pour money in and use the cheap labor to get goods into Russia and China. They will lap it up.

Who is gonna afford a Big Mac there anyway?

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
I would watch, something tells me that the long game is to end the initial Korean confict, signing and getting the USA to remove/reduce the troops there and then once that happens, strike when the south is at its most vulnerable and proceed with the conquering of the South, leaving the US out of it, unable to act or stop it.

If they kept their nuclear arsenal and successfully "decoupled" its plausible. But that also relies on there being a U.S. president who WOULDNT trade LA for seoul.
Or, If they used nuclear weapons in an opening strike, i think its plausible.

Without nuclear weapons, the U.S. could still provide a lot of support via Aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships, and long range bombers. Enough to tip the balance heavily in south koreas favor.
Youd still have a bunch of north korean riflemen running around south korea though, so that would take some time, but now we have IR cameras and little pain in the ass always cut you piece of # IR tags that identify you as friendly, that werent around back in the first korean war.

This seems like a plausible idea.

1.Get in bed with the West

2.Open up lots of sweatshops that make cheap products,so they can be a competitor with the other sweatshops making the stuff that we buy.

3.Open a lot of walmarts and use half of them secretly as detainment camps while using the other half of them to sell a bunch of crap.

4.Fudge the truth about human rights abuses.

5.Give money to corrupt people to look the other way.

Yay!!
Everybody is happy!!!!

Could that be NK is 5 years??

a reply to: Xtrozero

I believe you are correct.

What I don't want is another racket run on them where Kim gets the loans, and his country gets the annual payment shaft.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Xtrozero

I believe you are correct.

What I don't want is another racket run on them where Kim gets the loans, and his country gets the annual payment shaft.

That could be how it starts, unfortunately. Confessions of an Economic Hitman is a great read on how corporations take over countries by making a few at the top rich while enslaving the population and raping the lands.

originally posted by: DrumsRfun
This seems like a plausible idea.

1.Get in bed with the West

2.Open up lots of sweatshops that make cheap products,so they can be a competitor with the other sweatshops making the stuff that we buy.

4.Fudge the truth about human rights abuses.

5.Give money to corrupt people to look the other way.

I'll go with these three. What we have always seen is a country becomes the cheap sweat shops where 3 bucks or less a day is big money to many. We saw this with Japan, then SK then other countries through out the far east. The problem is the populous gets better wants more so then it is time to move on. China is like that now, go back 15 to 20 years and they had 800 million living on 30 bucks or less per month, but they are doing much better now over all.

I guess it is time to move on to the next 30 bucks a month pay system and NK is ripe for that, add in logistics of SK and it is like an almost turn key operation already...

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
Who is gonna afford a Big Mac there anyway?

So about 10% of the population there is the affluent. They live very well, and with many of them, much better then most people in SK. That puts their numbers who can easily afford McD at about 2.5 million. A typical McD serves 3k to 5k per day, so Dennis Rodman can start his McD franchise and open at least 700 if not much more.

Myself and a couple of other guys are working on humanitarian investments. We understand large breasted women are looked down upon so we're going to start bringing them here to live and enjoy life.

Gotta have a plan people!!

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

There are 2 possibilities, one is that what I have stated, a long term goal to reunify the country, though using more forceful means, and the only way to do that would be to end the Korean Conflict. That way the US and all foreign troops have to leave and then attack after the troops have been away for a few months, and the world is looking elsewhere. it will be something staged to provoke condemnation and under the guise of defending itself and to make South Korea look like the aggressor.

Or it is option 2, where it follows history: They talk, make promises, while behind the scenes work towards one goal, and once it has been met, then stop the talks, claim some slight or insult, or feel threatened by the USA and end all negotiations and ultimately call it a victory for themselves.

I do not see that they are going to be too serious about this for a long time.