View Poll Results: What is the near-term future of the DPRK

Voters
19. You may not vote on this poll
  • It will fall into chaos as a result of renewed famine and poverty, resulting in military crackdowns.

    3 15.79%
  • There will be a military coup that displaces the current leadership, hopefully soon.

    4 21.05%
  • It will continue to remain a closed society, technologically dormant and otherwise insignificant.

    12 63.16%
  • The leadership will eventually make a misstep, forcing military action from the United States.

    0 0%
Results 1 to 20 of 551

Thread: North Korea: 2012-2016

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member Icepack6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    11

    Default

    . . . .with all this new posturing, all I can envision is Kim-Jong-Il stomping his feet, and holding his breath until his cheeks turn blue. . . . .a la Team America.

    Despite all of the needs in the North, the one consistent thing manifested over the years is dear leader wants legitimacy, measured ONLY by bilateral engagement with the US, not a committee of nations or the UN. For all the right reasons, we have rarely engaged KN without the UN, ROK, Russia, Japan and/or China coming along. Stuck in 1953 thinking, NK leadership is big on correlation of forces and wants to play with the big dogs. . . . and force one-on-one engagement with the US, thereby, establishing the legitimacy of the Kim dynasty.

  2. #2
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Windsor, near London.
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Mind you I bet real estate's cheap there...lot of beaches...we could be missing a trick for holiday property. Could be the next Croatia...perhaps with more submarine pens...

  3. #3
    Council Member Icepack6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    11

    Default

    Since KN has retracted from the Armistice, I believe there is an opportunity for moving Red Flag from Nellis to Osan AB, ROK. This would make Russia nervous, as the winds blow westerly from North Korea across Hokkaido Island to points northeast. Watch this space for reports of a large, fire-breathing atomic dinosaur.

  4. #4
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Icepack6 View Post
    Since KN has retracted from the Armistice, I believe there is an opportunity for moving Red Flag from Nellis to Osan AB, ROK. This would make Russia nervous, as the winds blow westerly from North Korea across Hokkaido Island to points northeast. Watch this space for reports of a large, fire-breathing atomic dinosaur.

    You got my vote....if the wittle fellar wants a nuclear weapon we should give him one or two....those neutron ones that only kill people,don't want to hurt any of the little critters roaming around there.

  5. #5
    Council Member Uboat509's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    681

    Default

    My question would be, how much do we really need to worry about this, even if they do decide to attack? I have not been to Korea but I have a number of friends who have and by all accounts the ROK army is a very professional competent force. Add to that the fact that China doesn't want to deal with all the fallout of a war on the peninsula and will not tolerate KN slinging WMDs around. I don't think that they can afford to not become militarily involved. On top of all that add the fact that for all their bluff and bluster the KN army appears to be largely starving conscripts with antiquated equipment and substandard training. While I'm sure that we would provide some air and naval cover, I'm just not convinced that we would need to provide any significant ground forces.

    SFC W

  6. #6
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    I think a major contributing factor to the size of the DPRK's armed forces is the lack of other employment (or busy work) for the population. When the population is conscripted and forced to support the military machine, threats to state stability are minimized -- even if at the expense of internal development or foreign relations. It's a common strategy in many underdeveloped countries (except where the military itself is unreliable, i.e. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia). So I do not think we can accurately conclude that the DPRK wants to "play with the big dogs" on the basis of the size of their armed forces.
    When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Louis Veuillot

Similar Threads

  1. North Korea 2017 onwards
    By AdamG in forum Asia-Pacific
    Replies: 158
    Last Post: 07-08-2019, 01:56 PM
  2. Replies: 24
    Last Post: 02-11-2018, 07:25 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •