Blackstone
Brigadier
DPRK's threat of nuclear weapon usage is enough for me to support and demand my government do something about it.
China's strategy in Korean peninsula
- Thread starter Phead128
- Start date
Blackstone
Brigadier
That's probably more accidental than by conscience choice. I say that because there are overwhelming historical evidence to show US as one of the most successful and ruthless great powers in recorded history. The common thread is strong American adherence to national interests by whatever means necessary. If all else being equal, US gives the nod to the less tyrannical entity.
Agreed, and it highlights the truism nations follow their interests, and great powers have more ability to get their way. Kim Jun-un and the DPRK elites should keep that in mind.
Blackstone
Brigadier
So, America uses its comprehensive national power to pursue its important interests. What of it? It's how the world works.
Except in its relation to the native Americans, I wouldn't say the US was even close to being the most ruthless great power of the recent past, The US is actually more conflicted, and often more willing to let the intangibles stay its hand, then most in dealing with other nations and peoples.
For true ruthlessness one can look at Britain, who repeatedly implemented policies that predictably starved tens of millions of Indians to death throughout 19th century in order to maximize the profit from the mercantile trade network it carefully imposed on India, and over a span of 200 years made amongst the richest and most productive one fifth of humanity into amongst its most impoverished and femine beset. The fall of china from 1750s to 1937 is nothing compared to the fall of the Indian subcontinent over the same period. As recently as WWII, Winston Churchill consciously ordered policies towards India that starved 10 million of them to death in just 1943 alone, while quiping that there are too many Indians and they breed too fast.
For consciously implementing policies that would lead to the death of millions, Britain in India far surpassed Stalin in Ukraine, or Hitler with European Jews, in terms total number of deaths.
For true ruthlessness one can look at Britain, who repeatedly implemented policies that predictably starved tens of millions of Indians to death throughout 19th century in order to maximize the profit from the mercantile trade network it carefully imposed on India, and over a span of 200 years made amongst the richest and most productive one fifth of humanity into amongst its most impoverished and femine beset. The fall of china from 1750s to 1937 is nothing compared to the fall of the Indian subcontinent over the same period. As recently as WWII, Winston Churchill consciously ordered policies towards India that starved 10 million of them to death in just 1943 alone, while quiping that there are too many Indians and they breed too fast.
For consciously implementing policies that would lead to the death of millions, Britain in India far surpassed Stalin in Ukraine, or Hitler with European Jews, in terms total number of deaths.
Last edited:
On the other hand, Iran was never subjected to the strategic bombing campaign by the United States and was never threatened with use of US nuclear arsenal(during the Korean war).
North Korea, on the other hand, was. And first nuclear weapons on the peninsula weren't North Korean ones, to begin with.
So, from their point of view, it's just them trying to return the favor.
Very simple: America uses its own, so does North Korea.
And since America continues its policies elsewhere in the world, but not in the North(arguably the most hostile regime to the US in the world) - they get positive feedback.
Not negative one, as many in America hope for.
However it is important to note that the primary factors that make the US exceptional is circumstantial or derived from circumstantial advantages that fall under the umbrella of geographic determination, not sociopolitical factors that are the promoted rationalization for "American exceptionalism".
That's highly debatable especially when compared to what local sociopolitical developments could have created and in many places did create but were then derailed.
Actually the US being a superlative benefactor in that sociopolitical regard is what US propaganda has been promoting and continues to promote with unparalleled loudness, frequency, and disturbing levels of deceit and conceit for decades.
I don't care about the promotional rationalization. America is in material fact a power exceptional in her relative invulnerability, endowment of natural advantages in large variety of mineral and geographic resource, and a demography that bucks the normal adverse evolutionary trend which besets all other developed countries and china. Those are the things that count, not promotional rationalization.
It is easy for a side that's long been weak and resentful of being treated as weak to point out the arrogance of those who had been strong, as if it itself would have avoid such arrogance if it had itself been similarly strong. And it is usually the memory of this self deceit which allows the same weak side, when it does eventually become strong, to dismiss all signs of the development of own new found overweening arrogance imparted by its own higher station in the pecking order.
Last edited:
Blackstone
Brigadier
There's zero chance DPRK would give up their nuclear weapons, not unless they're crazy and didn't know what happened to Libya and Ukraine. The game at this point is to poleaxe their long-range ballistic missile development by any means necessary.
But of course nations pursue their interests, and great powers do it with aplomb. So, it's core interests against core interests, and we'll see if Trump has the fortitude to see it though.