LogFAQs > #877270261

desuno-to posted...

darkknight109 posted...

unlike Iraq, this would very likely not be a contained conflict where all the fighting takes place in one country).

Please elaborate. Assuming we consider both Korea's as "one" country, I don't see how this is going to spread outside, aside from some missiles being fired out of NK.

Well, first of all, both Koreas aren't one country, which means that there will likely be enormous South Korean casualties. Secondly, "some missiles being fired out of NK" is rather a more concerning idea than you seem to be giving credence to. Thirdly, China is right next door to North Korea and that's the dragon that will be woken up by this fight. China does not want North Korea or the Kim regime destabilized, because the resultant humanitarian crisis would be a huge drain on them (given that they share a land border with North Korea, a healthy chunk of the refugees - especially those wanted by South Korea or the US - would be fleeing that way), because China does not want US troops on the Korean peninsula effectively right in their backyard, and because the Kims are still useful in an "I have a rabid dog in the backyard, so be nice to me or I might just look the other way while he jumps the fence" kind of way.

You can bet that if war broke out, China would get themselves involved immediately. What exactly they would do I can't predict - they could shield the Kim regime a la Russia and Assad, they might try and forcibly quell the fighting, or they could attempt a takeover of North Korea. Difficult to say, but either way once China is involved the war becomes infinitely more complicated.

Again, this is not Saddam Hussein in Iraq where the fighting was restricted to one country and no external powers are threatening to jump in to gum up the works; this is a country which is seen as a borderline vassal state by one of the most powerful countries in the world and who borders on multiple American allies; even ignoring the fact that North Korea's army is enormous (which people seem to be woefully downplaying in this topic), this is not that simple. If it was, one of the more hawkish presidents would have dealt with the Kims decades ago.

helIy posted...

see, the thing is, if you destroy their entire country, including their leaders, they have absolutely nothing to fight for.

Yeah, because annihilating an entire country is super easy and inexpensive to do and totally wouldn't constitute genocide or anything.

helIy posted...

Iraq was different because we couldn't do that.

Why not? What was different about Iraq that would make the calculus around that strategy any different?
---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!