Jump to content

Kim Jong-Unghhh may be Illin

clapclapclap

By clapclapclap
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 6 months later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 4 months later...
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89630

Posted
Posted

That's one healthy 9 year old.  I'd like to take my kids to see a rocket launch in Florida, especially when the US goes back to the moon, but I guess if this is all you got...

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/19/asia/north-korea-nuclear-counterattack-drill-intl-hnk/index.html

Quote

North Korea must be ready to launch nuclear counter strikes at any time to deter war, state media quoted leader Kim Jong Un as saying on Monday, as he accused the United States and South Korea of expanding joint military drills near the country’s doorstep.

Kim’s remarks came after “guiding” combined tactical drills of operational units simulating a nuclear counterattack against North Korea’s enemies over the weekend, which he described as having “greatly improved the actual war capability of the units,” according to the state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

Quote

State media said a North Korean ballistic missile equipped with a mock nuclear warhead that was launched on Sunday flew about 800 kilometers (500 miles) before hitting a target at an altitude of 800 meters (0.5 miles) under the scenario of a tactical nuclear attack.

The drills allowed North Korean troops to become “familiar with any unexpected circumstances and make them more perfectly prepared in their active posture of making an immediate and overwhelming nuclear counterattack [at] anytime,” KCNA quoted Kim as saying.

Quote

Kim, who appeared in state-run media images alongside his daughter, Kim Ju Ae, said it was “very important to continuously organize and conduct such drills under the simulated conditions of an actual war.”

Ju Ae, who is believed to be around 9 years old, has been repeatedly photographed alongside her father at missile launches in recent months.

f_webp

f_webp

Way to draw attention to the guy with the mask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Superhero

Superhero 8828

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

That's one healthy 9 year old.  I'd like to take my kids to see a rocket launch in Florida, especially when the US goes back to the moon, but I guess if this is all you got...

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/19/asia/north-korea-nuclear-counterattack-drill-intl-hnk/index.html

f_webp

f_webp

Way to draw attention to the guy with the mask.

It’s a Japanese mask. 

  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 8 months later...
elfenix

elfenix 34225

Posted
Posted (edited)

probably kim himself

"which of you fuckers voted against me?  don't fucking lie to me!  i know it was you, kim! and you, kim!  i will have your nuts, and your sons' nuts, and your grandsons' nuts in a jar by morning! and son's nuts for smirking!  i see you there!"

Edited by elfenix
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89630

Posted
Posted

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/31/asia/north-korea-reconciliation-south-korea-intl-hnk/index.html
 

Quote

North Korea will no longer seek reconciliation and reunification with South Korea, Kim Jong Un has declared, as his nation vowed to put three new military spy satellites into orbit in 2024.

Kim said inter-Korean relations had become “a relationship between two hostile countries and two belligerents at war,” the state-run news agency KCNA reported.

Quote

“It’s time for us to acknowledge the reality and clarify our relationship with the South,” Kim said, adding that if Washington and Seoul were to attempt a military confrontation with Pyongyang, its “nuclear war deterrent will not hesitate to take serious action.”

“I believe that it is a mistake that we must no longer make to deal with the people who declare us as ‘the main enemy’ and seek only opportunities for ‘[our] regime collapse’ and ‘unification by absorption’ by collaborating for reconciliation and unification,” Kim added.

Quote

Kim’s latest comments on reunification were significant, according to Hoo Chiew-Ping, a senior fellow at the East Asian International Relations CAUCUS (EAIR) and member of the Asia Pacific Nuclear Advisory Panel (APNAP), who said the North Korean leader has been increasingly walking away from “inter-Korean relations” in recent years.

“This will mark a critical milestone on the Korean Peninsula where extending the olive branch by future South Korean administrations will be vehemently rejected by North Korea,” Hoo told CNN.

Quote

Pyongyang was keener to further relations instead with current allies like “China and Russia, and a selected network of countries around the world which will continue to enable its proliferation and financial outreach,” she added.

“The US, South Korea and Japan are excluded from Kim’s strategic outreach for now.”

 

Angry Schitts Creek GIF by CBC

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AUS-97HORN

AUS-97HORN 11757

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Macanudo said:

This could be that he's worried about keeping power and is rattling sabers to do so.  

or, more likely, its been more than 20 months since we talked about him (other than NK sending weapons to Russia)

and he wanted to remind the western media that he still exists.

 

I guess SKorea should be thankful, in the past when NK really wanted to remind everyone they existed they would sink a ship or launch artillery shells to an isolated island

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
bolverk

bolverk 29656

Posted
Posted (edited)

Here's more on Kim's ratcheting up of rhetoric that many see as different this time as he aligns more with Putin's aggression and giving up on any hopes of normalizing relations with the US.

It's just another injection of chaos in world affairs.

  • Russia --> Ukraine/Europe
  • Iran/Hamas/Houthis --> Israel/Global Trade
  • North Korea --> South Korea/Japan
  • China --> Taiwan/South China Sea
  • Venezuela --> Guyana

It certainly makes you wonder if this is being coordinated under some grand plan or if each is ramping up tensions individually, knowing they can spread us thin. I suppose it doesn't fully matter if they all see an opportunity to take advantage, convinced we can't put out fires everywhere by ourselves.

We have two choices: 1) continue to build up our democratic allies to hold them off at the risk of confrontation, or 2) retreat into isolationism and let the world fall under despots, authoritarians, and nationalists. 

We need to brace ourselves for some tough decisions and get ready while hoping we don't tear ourselves apart from the inside. This feels like one of those early 20th Century-type moments.

 

Is Kim Jong-un Really Planning an Attack This Time?
An intensification of nuclear threats from North Korea while the world is preoccupied with other wars has ignited an urgent debate over Mr. Kim’s motives.

North Korea fired hundreds of artillery shells in waters near South Korean border islands on Jan. 5. Last week, it said it no longer regarded the South as inhabited by “fellow countrymen” but as a “hostile state” it would subjugate through a nuclear war. On Friday, it said it had tested an underwater nuclear drone to help repel U.S. Navy fleets.

That new drumbeat of threats, while the United States and its allies have been preoccupied with the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, has set foreign officials and analysts wondering whether the North’s leader, Kim Jong-un, has moved beyond posturing and is planning to assert more military force.

For decades, a central part of the North Korean playbook has been to stage carefully measured and timed military provocations — some aimed at tightening internal discipline, others at demanding attention from its neighbors and the United States, or all of that at once.

But to several close watchers of North Korea, the latest round of signals from Mr. Kim feels different. Some are taking it as a clue that the North has become disillusioned with seeking diplomatic engagement with the West, and a few are raising the possibility that the country could be planning a sudden assault on South Korea.

Spoiler

Two veteran analysts of North Korea — the former State Department official Robert L. Carlin and the nuclear scientist Siegfried S. Hecker — sounded an alarm this past week in an article for the U.S.-based website 38 North [This is pretty fucking bleak], asserting that Mr. Kim was done with mere threats. “Kim Jong-un has made a strategic decision to go to war,” they wrote.

Analysts broadly agree that North Korea has been shifting its posture in recent years, compelled by an accumulation of both internal problems, including a moribund economy and food and oil shortages, and frustrations in its external diplomacy, like Mr. Kim’s failure to win an end to international sanctions through direct diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump. And most agree that the North’s recent closeness with Russia, including supplying artillery shells and missiles for use in Russia’s war in Ukraine, will be a game-changer in some way.

But there is still stark disagreement over where Mr. Kim’s new tack might be leading.

Many say that Mr. Kim’s ultimate goal remains not a war with South Korea, a treaty ally of the United States, but Washington’s acceptance of his country as a nuclear power by prompting arms-reduction talks.

“The North Koreans won’t start a war unless they decide to become suicidal; they know too well that they cannot win the war,” said Park Won-gon, a North Korea expert at Ewha Womans University in Seoul. “But they would love their enemies to believe that they could, because that could lead to engagement and possible concessions, like the easing of sanctions.”

Analysts in China, North Korea’s most vital ally, were also deeply skeptical that Mr. Kim would go to war unless the North were attacked. Prof. Shi Yinhong, at Renmin University in Beijing, asserted that the North’s leadership, not being irrational, ultimately acted out of self-preservation — and that starting a war would work against that goal.

Others noted that the North could assert itself militarily, including through smaller conventional strikes and bolder weapons testing, without necessarily triggering a deadly response.

“There are many rungs of the escalation ladder that North Korea can climb short of all-out war,” said Victor Cha, a Korea expert at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Kim is not that confident in his capabilities to deter U.S. reaction if he were to do something rash.”

If Mr. Kim wants to climb that ladder, recent history suggests that this might be the time.

North Korea has liked to unsettle its enemies at their most sensitive political moments, and both the United States and South Korea are holding elections this year. The North launched a long-range rocket in late 2012, between the United States and South Korean presidential elections. It conducted a nuclear test shortly before the inauguration of a South Korean leader in 2013. In 2016, it conducted another nuclear test two months before the American presidential election.

North Korea could also attempt provocations in the coming weeks to try to help liberals who favor inter-Korean negotiations win parliamentary elections in South Korea in April, said the analyst Ko Jae-hong at the Seoul-based Institute for National Security Strategy. Through provocations, North Korea hopes to spread fears among South Korean voters that increasing pressure on the North, as the current administration of President Yoon Suk Yeol has tried to do, might “lead to a nuclear war,” he said.

North Korea “will continue to increase tensions until after the U.S. elections,” said Thomas Schäfer, a former German diplomat who served twice as ambassador to North Korea. But “at the height of tensions, it will finally be willing to re-engage with a Republican administration in the hope to get sanctions relief, some sort of acceptance of their nuclear program, and — as main objective — a reduction or even complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Korean Peninsula,” Mr. Schäfer said in a rebuttal to Mr. Carlin’s and Mr. Hecker’s analysis.

Since Mr. Kim came to power in 2011, he has committed to building North Korea’s nuclear capability, using it both as a deterrent and as a negotiating tool to try to win concessions from Washington, like the removal of United Nations sanctions, to achieve economic growth.

He tried it when he met Mr. Trump in 2018 and again in 2019. It failed spectacularly, and Mr. Kim returned home empty-handed and in humiliation.

He then vowed to find a “new way” for his country.

Since then, the North has rejected repeated calls from Washington for talks. It has also rejected South Korea as a dialogue partner, indicating from 2022 that it would use nuclear weapons against South Korea in a war and abandoning its long-held insistence that the weapons would keep the Korean Peninsula peaceful as a deterrent. It has tested more diverse, and harder-to-intercept, means of delivering its nuclear warheads.

There is doubt that the North has yet built a reliable intercontinental ballistic missile that could target the United States. But two of the North’s main enemies, South Korea and Japan, are much closer.

On the diplomatic front, Mr. Kim has taken pains to signal that he no longer views the United States as a critical negotiating partner, instead envisioning a “neo-Cold War” in which the United States is in retreat globally. He has aggressively improved military ties with Russia, and in return has most likely secured Russian promises of food aid and technological help for his weapons programs, officials say.

“I worry that his confidence might lead him to misjudge with a small act, regardless of his intention, escalating to war amid a tense ‘power-for-power’ confrontation with the United States and its allies,” said Koh Yu-hwan, a former head of the Korea Institute for National Unification in Seoul.

Despite its own increasingly aggressive military posture in recent years, China may prove to be a damper on any North Korean military adventurism.

China and North Korea are bound by a treaty signed in 1961 that requires each country to provide military assistance if the other is attacked. But China has little incentive to be drawn into a war in Korea right now.

“A war on the Korean Peninsula would be disastrous for Beijing. An entire half-century of peace in East Asia, a period of unprecedented growth for the P.R.C., would come to a crashing halt,” said John Delury, a professor of Chinese studies at Yonsei University in Seoul, referring to the People’s Republic of China.

The United States has long leaned on Beijing to rein in North Korea. By drawing close to Moscow, Mr. Kim has been putting his own pressure on China’s leader, Xi Jinping.

“It is notable that Kim made his first post-pandemic trip to the Russian Far East, skipping China, and he just sent his foreign minister to Moscow, not Beijing,” Mr. Delury said. By raising tensions, Mr. Kim “can see what Xi is willing to do to placate him,” he added.

 

Edited by bolverk
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29656

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, South Austin said:

I’m not an expert in geopolitics, but I think an assault on South Korea would drive that country beyond any squalor and bleakness it has ever known.

I hear you and am no geopolitical expert either, especially when it comes to East Asia.

In the article written by the former State Department Analyst and Nuclear Scientist that's referenced in the above piece, they conclude we might be "hypnotized by deterrence":

Washington and Seoul cling to the belief that their alliance backed by “ironclad” deterrence will keep Kim on the status-quo trajectory, perhaps with some minor provocations. There is a belief, entirely understandable, that more and more frequent symbols of our intent to retaliate will keep the North at bay, as will our oft-stated conviction that if the North attacks, the counterattack will totally destroy the North Korean regime. Yet, in the current situation, clinging to those beliefs may be fatal.

The evidence of the past year opens the real possibility that the situation may have reached the point that we must seriously consider a worst case—that Pyongyang could be planning to move in ways that completely defy our calculations. Kim and his planners may target the weakest point—psychologically as well as materially—in what the three capitals hope is a watertight US-ROK-Japan military position. The literature on surprise attacks should make us wary of the comfortable assumptions that resonate in Washington’s echo chamber but might not have purchase in Pyongyang. This might seem like madness, but history suggests those who have convinced themselves that they have no good options left will take the view that even the most dangerous game is worth the candle.

North Korea has a large nuclear arsenal, by our estimate of potentially 50 or 60 warheads deliverable on missiles that can reach all of South Korea, virtually all of Japan (including Okinawa) and Guam. If, as we suspect, Kim has convinced himself that after decades of trying, there is no way to engage the United States, his recent words and actions point toward the prospects of a military solution using that arsenal.

If that comes to pass, even an eventual US-ROK victory in the ensuing war will be empty. The wreckage, boundless and bare, will stretch as far as the eye can see.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105079

Posted
Posted
I hear you and am no geopolitical expert either, especially when it comes to East Asia.
In the article written by the former State Department Analyst and Nuclear Scientist that's referenced in the above piece, they conclude we might be "hypnotized by deterrence":

Washington and Seoul cling to the belief that their alliance backed by “ironclad” deterrence will keep Kim on the status-quo trajectory, perhaps with some minor provocations. There is a belief, entirely understandable, that more and more frequent symbols of our intent to retaliate will keep the North at bay, as will our oft-stated conviction that if the North attacks, the counterattack will totally destroy the North Korean regime. Yet, in the current situation, clinging to those beliefs may be fatal.

The evidence of the past year opens the real possibility that the situation may have reached the point that we must seriously consider a worst case—that Pyongyang could be planning to move in ways that completely defy our calculations. Kim and his planners may target the weakest point—psychologically as well as materially—in what the three capitals hope is a watertight US-ROK-Japan military position. The literature on surprise attacks should make us wary of the comfortable assumptions that resonate in Washington’s echo chamber but might not have purchase in Pyongyang. This might seem like madness, but history suggests those who have convinced themselves that they have no good options left will take the view that even the most dangerous game is worth the candle.

North Korea has a large nuclear arsenal, by our estimate of potentially 50 or 60 warheads deliverable on missiles that can reach all of South Korea, virtually all of Japan (including Okinawa) and Guam. If, as we suspect, Kim has convinced himself that after decades of trying, there is no way to engage the United States, his recent words and actions point toward the prospects of a military solution using that arsenal.

If that comes to pass, even an eventual US-ROK victory in the ensuing war will be empty. The wreckage, boundless and bare, will stretch as far as the eye can see.


This is our concern, dude. The age of deterrence is over. The age of FAFO is underway. Again. Echoes of WWI, anyone?
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
immamac

immamac 42838

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


This is our concern, dude. The age of deterrence is over. The age of FAFO is underway. Again. Echoes of WWI, anyone?

Yeah accountability is going to have to happen asap. The issue right now is internally America is quite possibly the weakest it’s ever been and our own accountability piper needs to be paid first. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hookemATL

hookemATL 11707

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, immamac said:

Yeah accountability is going to have to happen asap. The issue right now is internally America is quite possibly the weakest it’s ever been and our own accountability piper needs to be paid first. 

I Guess If You Say So GIF

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30187

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, immamac said:

Yeah accountability is going to have to happen asap. The issue right now is internally America is quite possibly the weakest it’s ever been and our own accountability piper needs to be paid first. 

That is a fascinating question. I’ve often told friends and family members that we will not come together again as a nation until we have some large foreign war to fight that involves the entire country.     See how after the Civil War that animus lingered. For example, Vicksburg did not celebrate the Fourth of July until World War II because that was the day they fell to Grant.    80 years is some grudge.  

The Spanish-American war resulted in more unity, or at least, a common foe, and the Great War involved the entire country drafted and working together toward a common foe. I guess we hate each other less when we jointly hate other people more.  While I think I’m right, that is a really shitty way to develop unity in a country.

Edited by Gatorubet
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27639

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, bolverk said:

We have two choices: 1) continue to build up our democratic allies to hold them off at the risk of confrontation, or 2) retreat into isolationism and let the world fall under despots, authoritarians, and nationalists. 

We need to brace ourselves for some tough decisions and get ready while hoping we don't tear ourselves apart from the inside. This feels like one of those early 20th Century-type moments.

This feels exactly like the interwar period in the early 20th century - lots of agents of chaos stirring the pot so that despots have a more free hand to do their deeds. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dbeasy

Dbeasy 15042

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

That is a fascinating question. I’ve often told friends and family members that we will not come together again as a nation until we have some large foreign war to fight that involves the entire country.     See how after the Civil War that animus lingered. For example, Vicksburg did not celebrate the Fourth of July until World War II because that was the day they fell to Grant.    80 years is some grudge.  

The Spanish-American war resulted in more unity, or at least, a common pho, and the great war involved, the entire country drafted in working together toward a common foe. I guess we hate each other less when we jointly hate other people more.  While I think I’m right, that is a really shitty way to develop unity in a country.

I think the country is so broken that even a war against an aggressor that is clearly in the wrong still won’t bring the country together. Just look at Ukraine. Now it’s all about self interest, elections, and power, not good vs evil. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
elfenix

elfenix 34225

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

I think the country is so broken that even a war against an aggressor that is clearly in the wrong still won’t bring the country together. Just look at Ukraine. Now it’s all about self interest, elections, and power, not good vs evil. 

there's a big chunk of americans that had to be dragged kicking and screaming to fight the nazis.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jingtingler

jingtingler 36

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

I think the country is so broken that even a war against an aggressor that is clearly in the wrong still won’t bring the country together. Just look at Ukraine. Now it’s all about self interest, elections, and power, not good vs evil. 

Brother when was war ever about anything but self interest and power? Vietnam Iraq Afghanistan- these conflicts and many others destroyed the illusion for a lot of people that we are ‘good’ fighting against ‘evil’. P.s. I can’t believe north korean threats still get news coverage the norks have been on verge of invading the south for as long as I can remember.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
South Austin

South Austin 52456

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

That is a fascinating question. I’ve often told friends and family members that we will not come together again as a nation until we have some large foreign war to fight that involves the entire country.     See how after the Civil War that animus lingered. For example, Vicksburg did not celebrate the Fourth of July until World War II because that was the day they fell to Grant.    80 years is some grudge.  

The Spanish-American war resulted in more unity, or at least, a common foe, and the Great War involved the entire country drafted and working together toward a common foe. I guess we hate each other less when we jointly hate other people more.  While I think I’m right, that is a really shitty way to develop unity in a country.

Seems like as good a time as any to band together and declare war on the Canadian aggressors. U-S-A, U-S-A, U-S-A!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89630

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, South Austin said:

I’m not an expert in geopolitics, but I think an assault on South Korea would drive that country beyond any squalor and bleakness it has ever known.

A bunch of members of the South Korean boy band BTS are currently doing their mandatory service in the South Korean Army.  If the Norks attack, tens of millions of women/teen girls from around the world will be heading to South Korea looking to fuck up some North Koreans.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89630

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, bolverk said:

It's just another injection of chaos in world affairs.

  • Russia --> Ukraine/Europe
  • Iran/Hamas/Houthis --> Israel/Global Trade
  • North Korea --> South Korea/Japan
  • China --> Taiwan/South China Sea
  • Venezuela --> Guyana

It feels like a lot of things are coming to a head and/or coordinated, but broken down, the individual reasons behind them make a lot of sense.  And the individual reasons maybe more terrifying/chaotic than some massive conspiracy, because the individual reasons leave some of these leaders feeling like their backs are to the wall and they have nothing to lose.

  • Russia is in a demographic crisis, and has been for a few years - for the past year or two, and from here on out, the amount of men reaching military service age is declining every year. This also affects the economy.  Putin is also thinking about his legacy, and being the ex-KGB that he is, he’s paranoid as well that other nations will take advantage of their demographic problems (because he would do that). If he is stopped in Ukraine, he can’t and won’t go anywhere else other than Belarus and Georgia.  
  • Iran has a lot of internal pressure (youth being angry about the clothing and religious restrictions and rioting, etc,) that’s looking for an outlet, and an outside enemy is just the thing. The Houthis are opportunists, but they are also being used by the Iranians. Hamas succeeded far beyond what they expected, and Iran and the Houthis took advantage.  Iran would also like something that sees the US getting out of Syria/Iraq..  Of course, Iran also exchanged missiles with Pakistan, which is not desirable for them.  Iran will push as hard as they can to make us bleed and try to get us out of Syria/Iraq.. Iran still wants to find the line that’s too far for us.  
  • North Korea is a hot mess, but he knows how to stay in power, and has his lines he won’t cross. It’s like the Russian state media calling for nuking the West since Feb. 2022. Lil Kim and Putin know they put big targets on their backs if they fuck around too much.  
  • China has a looming demographic crisis as well as economic crisis, and it’s watching other Asian countries pick up some of its business. A war with Taiwan and the US would destroy their economy and dump hundreds of millions of hungry and unemployed Chinese into the streets and those jobs and Western investments will be gone for ever.  They saw the Western sanctions impacting Russia, so they don’t provide major military hardware to Russia and they are now restricting their banking connections to Russia. And they are now questioning the corruption in their military. 
  • Venezuela has its problems, particularly upcoming elections. Those oil discoveries would help them out, but Brazil, the US, and the UK and some other countries have basically told them to back down, and they don’t have the military to seize and hold the oilfield and Guyana.  

The “good news” is that Russia woke up a lot of nations and they are ramping up military spending and production, and the world saw that economic sanctions can fuck up a lot of things.  Everybody is pursuing new drone and missile technology, etc. People are also seeing how shit the Russian hardware can be.

I’d be more worried about China if they were sending major military aid to Russia, but their recent economic moves over the past few weeks show they worry about being caught up in Russian sanctions.  North Korea and Iran are already suffering economic sanctions, so it’s not a big deal to supply Russia.

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29656

Posted
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

It feels like a lot of things are coming to a head and/or coordinated, but broken down, the individual reasons behind them make a lot of sense.  And the individual reasons maybe more terrifying/chaotic than some massive conspiracy, because the individual reasons leave some of these leaders feeling like their backs are to the wall and they have nothing to lose.

  • Russia is in a demographic crisis, and has been for a few years - for the past year or two, and from here on out, the amount of men reaching military service age is declining every year. This also affects the economy.  Putin is also thinking about his legacy, and being the ex-KGB that he is, he’s paranoid as well that other nations will take advantage of their demographic problems (because he would do that). If he is stopped in Ukraine, he can’t and won’t go anywhere else other than Belarus and Georgia.  
  • Iran has a lot of internal pressure (youth being angry about the clothing and religious restrictions and rioting, etc,) that’s looking for an outlet, and an outside enemy is just the thing. The Houthis are opportunists, but they are also being used by the Iranians. Hamas succeeded far beyond what they expected, and Iran and the Houthis took advantage.  Iran would also like something that sees the US getting out of Syria/Iraq..  Of course, Iran also exchanged missiles with Pakistan, which is not desirable for them.  Iran will push as hard as they can to make us bleed and try to get us out of Syria/Iraq.. Iran still wants to find the line that’s too far for us.  
  • North Korea is a hot mess, but he knows how to stay in power, and has his lines he won’t cross. It’s like the Russian state media calling for nuking the West since Feb. 2022. Lil Kim and Putin know they put big targets on their backs if they fuck around too much.  
  • China has a looming demographic crisis as well as economic crisis, and it’s watching other Asian countries pick up some of its business. A war with Taiwan and the US would destroy their economy and dump hundreds of millions of hungry and unemployed Chinese into the streets and those jobs and Western investments will be gone for ever.  They saw the Western sanctions impacting Russia, so they don’t provide major military hardware to Russia and they are now restricting their banking connections to Russia. And they are now questioning the corruption in their military. 
  • Venezuela has its problems, particularly upcoming elections. Those oil discoveries would help them out, but Brazil, the US, and the UK and some other countries have basically told them to back down, and they don’t have the military to seize and hold the oilfield and Guyana.  

The “good news” is that Russia woke up a lot of nations and they are ramping up military spending and production, and the world saw that economic sanctions can fuck up a lot of things.  Everybody is pursuing new drone and missile technology, etc. People are also seeing how shit the Russian hardware can be.

I’d be more worried about China if they were sending major military aid to Russia, but their recent economic moves over the past few weeks show they worry about being caught up in Russian sanctions.  North Korea and Iran are already suffering economic sanctions, so it’s not a big deal to supply Russia.

 

Yeah, this might all be mostly bluster to probe the limits of the Western World's (including East Asian democracies) tolerance for putting up with their shit. And, yes, I'll concede the notion that it's not being coordinated according to some grand scheme (it likely isn't, but I'm sure there's at least some cooperation).

But none of that takes away that this is a dangerous time, precisely because the leadership in each of those countries has their backs against the wall to some extent or another, AND they see the success (really the only) they've enjoyed in undermining democratic norms across Europe and within the U.S.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. For Putin/Xi/Maduro, that might mean invading a neighbor. For the Mullahs, that might mean stirring up a bunch of shit without intending to actually fight. For Kim, it might mean pushing the button and committing suicide. 

Militarily, we're probably at risk of being stretched too thin right now (I'd bet this is why we've been focused on de-escalation in the Middle East). Our allies also need to step it up while having full confidence we're there to help. But I'm really concerned about what might happen if we decide to turn away and focus instead internally on hating ourselves and the institutions that have made us strong. 

Edited by bolverk
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89630

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, bolverk said:

But none of that takes away that this is a dangerous time, precisely because the leadership in each of those countries has their backs against the wall to one extent or another, AND they see the success (really the only) they've enjoyed in undermining democratic norms across Europe and within the U.S.

That's why I think they are more dangerous on an individual basis than if a group of countries got together and cooked up some scheme.  At least if it was a group, you could drill down and work out how to peel off or isolate/defeat some members and cause it to eventually collapse.  Even with conflicts in various areas, you’re ultimately dealing with a single entity you need to weaken.

This stuff though, you’re dealing with a bunch of conflicts with a bunch of individuals and weakening or beating one will have no real impact on the others, at least in the short term. I shouldn’t say that - if we hammered Iran’s missile and drone factories, it would help in Israel, the Red Sea, and especially in Ukraine, so not everything is isolated.

22 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Desperate times call for desperate measures. For Putin/Xi/Maduro, that might mean invading a neighbor. For the Mullahs, that might mean stirring up a bunch of shit without intending to actually fight. For Kim, it might mean pushing the button and committing suicide. 

I would rank them from least likely to most likely to start or continue shit:

  1. Maduro. This feels more like election year nonsense and he will remain in power. Brazil made a lot of noise that seems to have shut him up, and I’m sure the Brits sending in some ships to Guyana sent a message. He doesn’t have the ability to really hold the oilfield either.
  2. Lil Kim likes his lifestyle and nobody is threatening him for power. Who knows what the COVID stuff truly did.
  3. Xi.  Over the past two months he’s deescalated with the US, he’s refrained from openly supplying Russia serious military hardware, he’s now ordering Chinese financial institutions to be careful about their Russian dealings because of the potential for Western sanctions, he’s having to purge a lot of corrupt officials, and the entirety of their actual military force has been called into question because of the corruption (not helped that so much is based on Russian stuff which has turned out to be shit). He’s also having to reassure Western companies that he won’t do something stupid that would force them out of China. Those companies are still setting up in other countries as a precaution, even as China tries to woo them.  Xi also has to solve his road and belt problems.
  4. Iran. They are really pushing hard, and they are using groups like the Houthi and Hamas that are not rational. Their little missile exchange with Pakistan shows they could stumble into something directly, but they could also be targeted for supplying weapons or intelligence. Of course, the leadership is very much on edge with the populace as well. Their actions in Syria/Iraq could be what kicks things off and not the Houthi or Hamas.
  5. Putin.  Already happening, it’s just a matter of either what his defeat looks like, or whether he wants to go farther if he holds on with what he has.  Belarus and Georgia are fucked though, unless he’s out of power

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89630

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Militarily, we're probably at risk of being stretched too thin right now (I'd bet this is why we've been focused on de-escalation in the Middle East). Our allies also need to step it up while having full confidence we're there to help.

Our allies….what we are starting to hear out of Europe is quite a few of them getting their shit together and realizing the long-term implications of Ukraine (and what could happen if we pull back), so we have that going for us. Finland joining NATO was still one of the things that maybe pointed to in the future as a defining moment of the 2020s.

Military strength….In some ways yes, some ways no.  Manpower yes, but that’s the problem with a decent economy and no overriding patriotic reason. Our military is trying to transition rapidly as well in doctrine and equipment - Ukraine is proving to be a lab that is making us rethink a lot of things.  For instance, we are converting a decent number of cannon artillery units over to rocket (HIMARS) as we see them employed in ways we didn’t in the Guif War or Iraq/Afghanistan in the 2000s, we are investing heavily into drones and where they fit from the platoon to the regimental level, we are having to think about close air support once again in a contested battlefield (A-10s don’t get to go BRRRRRTTTTTT if there’s a lot of MANPADS floating around), and the anti-tank weapons debate is raging once again. We got to mostly skip those discussions over the last 35 years.  We are also re-thinking air defense, now that our systems are being used against contemporary Russian stuff,

We have some solid systems coming online (and the F-35 is being improved as we speak) and we are able to get our new stuff mass-produced unlike the Russians. We are boosting production, and our NATO Allie’s are buying a shitload from us, which helps keep the parts supplies flowing and costs down, and in some cases we are clearing out older inventory to European allies  (that’s still great against Russian stuff) which helps bring in the new stuff. 2-3 years from now, the Russians will still be using main battle tanks based on early 1960s designs with 1980s or maybe 1990s upgrades (still behind us), and they might have a few dozen more Su-57s (sanctions  are hurting them).

I like to talk trash about the Navy, but at the end of the day, they can still put on a master class in terms of forward power projection and cruise missile and aircraft platforms. Russians and the missile attacks against Ukraine pale in comparison to what we do.

And if shit hits the fan with China, a friend who served on a cruiser and a couple of destroyers in the 90s and early 2000s keeps beating the drum about the media and analysts not realizing that the Chinese navy will be tied down with escorting troops from mainland China to Taiwan, and they won’t be able to roam freely like American ships.  It pisses him off, because everybody talks about how hard it is for them to move men over open water for 100 miles and how they don’t have the experience or the ships to do it properly, but many don’t realize that the Chinese navy will be sitting ducks as they run convoys to Taiwan.  Hell, even I didn’t really think about it until he posted some long comments on FB.  He was posting pictures  of the English Channel in June of 1944, and how much of a naval force we and the Brits put into place to protect the landing and troop transport ships.  The Chinese have to do that over a distance four times as long, and they don’t have a channel they can block off on the ends - it’s all open water.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ABSR

ABSR 5308

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

I think the country is so broken that even a war against an aggressor that is clearly in the wrong still won’t bring the country together. Just look at Ukraine. Now it’s all about self interest, elections, and power, not good vs evil. 

I am a huge pro-Ukrainer, but that’s not our war….yet.

Look at 9/11, that galvanized the country…for a time, but it takes that type of event or war that strikes a home nerve.

If you look at our history, even in WW2 there was divisions.  Before Pearl Harbor especially, but even after and through the war.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19449

Posted
Posted

It's been amazing to watch a significant portion of this country attempt to justify the actions of Vladimir Putin.  Some would even blow him if a certain person asked them to.  But watching them defend Kim Jong-Un because somebody famous country is buddies with him is going to be an absolute shitshow that would make all of our grandparents turn over in their graves.  But you fucking morons have at it.  Not much else you can fuck up this week...

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CooterBrown

CooterBrown 18004

Posted
Posted

The biggest problem with Kim Jong-Un is that he's been raised and lives in a North Korean version of The Truman Show.  His entire life experience has been that Best Korea has the greatest military, economy, and divine leadership in the world.  Do you think anyone in his immediate circle has ever told him the truth about anything?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chad Fuck

Chad Fuck 17660

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

That is a fascinating question. I’ve often told friends and family members that we will not come together again as a nation until we have some large foreign war to fight that involves the entire country.     See how after the Civil War that animus lingered. For example, Vicksburg did not celebrate the Fourth of July until World War II because that was the day they fell to Grant.    80 years is some grudge.  

The Spanish-American war resulted in more unity, or at least, a common foe, and the Great War involved the entire country drafted and working together toward a common foe. I guess we hate each other less when we jointly hate other people more.  While I think I’m right, that is a really shitty way to develop unity in a country.

This is a historical truth about humans that you can find over and over.  It's not unique to the US.  When people don't have an external enemy to focus upon, they'll focus on internal enemies.  That usually doesn't work out well for the polity eating itself.  

image.png.736d925229bdbb1735c16a8d99dcdc6a.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89630

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, CooterBrown said:

Do you think anyone in his immediate circle has ever told him the truth about anything?  

He gets out of North Korea once in a while (usually places like Russia) so he probably sees more than people realize.  And there's another aspect - the North Korean elite have a very different lifestyle than the peasants - they most likely have access to at least fancy electronics, etc., that are not made in NK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AUS-97HORN

AUS-97HORN 11757

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, CooterBrown said:

The biggest problem with Kim Jong-Un is that he's been raised and lives in a North Korean version of The Truman Show.  His entire life experience has been that Best Korea has the greatest military, economy, and divine leadership in the world.  Do you think anyone in his immediate circle has ever told him the truth about anything?  

he has been confirmed as attending Swiss boarding schools. from as young as possibly 7.  His actual birth year isnt known, so he could have been as old as 9 when he started.  and probably until the age of between 16-18 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pescado_Rojo

Pescado_Rojo 19416

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

he has been confirmed as attending Swiss boarding schools. from as young as possibly 7.  His actual birth year isnt known, so he could have been as old as 9 when he started.  and probably until the age of between 16-18 

This. I'm sure he had handlers that never let him out of their sight, but he's seen enough of the West to know he's the ruler of a shithole. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
HiggyBaby

HiggyBaby 2529

Posted
Posted
On 1/22/2024 at 8:09 AM, CooterBrown said:

The biggest problem with Kim Jong-Un is that he's been raised and lives in a North Korean version of The Truman Show.  His entire life experience has been that Best Korea has the greatest military, economy, and divine leadership in the world.  Do you think anyone in his immediate circle has ever told him the truth about anything?  

Maybe he just wants to break free a la Truman?

 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C23QiH5uWPC/?igsh=MWJwbGg3Zjd0MWZlNg==

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rimbo

Rimbo 25913

Posted
Posted
On 1/21/2024 at 10:47 AM, immamac said:

Yeah accountability is going to have to happen asap. The issue right now is internally America is quite possibly the weakest it’s ever been and our own accountability piper needs to be paid first. 

Weakest it's ever been? We're nowhere near as bad off as we were in the 1970s. Or, say, anytime before 1945 or so.

We were barely a blip on the geopolitical map until the 1900s.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...