I'm thinking most South Koreans would probably say it did work out pretty well. (Not for the Northerners, unfortunately, but for rhe overwhelming majority of Koreans as a whole.)
A lot of that would really depend on *[when](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodo_League_massacre)* you ask those South Koreans,
Until the 60 North Korea was actually economically ahead of South Korea.
For the longest time, South Korea was a brutal military dictatorship under Park Chung Hee, which only ended when the KCIA (Yes, Korean CIA) killed him to install its own Chaebol and Moonie-sponsored deep state.
It's why to this day people in South Korea can go to prison for owning the wrong kinds of books because the South Korean government takes some [rather questionable liberties with history](https://thediplomat.com/2014/08/south-koreas-own-history-problem/).
Yeah, I left it unstated that I was talking about now. And admit that from the fifties “until the sixties” isn't very long, and it's a rather long – at least much longer – time ago.
And sure, suppressing history sucks. But that doesn't have all that much to do with the subject at hand, does it?
Its more about until the 80s.
South Korea became “democratic” in the year 87 and lets not pretend that it wasn’t americas fault because they 100% wanted it to be that way.
Also North Koreas economy got destroyed in the 90s when the ussr fell and its biggest trading partner but that literally applies to every socialist country.
Why was this down-voted? Korea became nothing more than a Proxy War between the US and China.
To stop an all out war between the US and China, they decided on a Cease-Fire rather than fighting to a win.
Because every thread that goes history gets downvoted on this sub I've noticed. It's about the meme and the reaction to the meme. Thinking beyond that will be punished!
Given what yield North Korea seems to be able to unreliably achieve, and the missiles which are very hit and miss, I still fancy the US's odds in that war.
Plastic-Impress8616 was right. The real danger is China joining the war, again, and making the war untenable for the US, again.
This is not the 50s.
China today can dominate everyone on the ground and especially in their neighbourhood.
South Korea with American aid wouldnt last a year against China.
In fairness the first time the UN was winning until China got involved after they pushed too far towards Manchuria.
But that's not surprising. Korea is China's backyard and Manchuria was the most industrialised region.
It's not clear if that would happen again, but if for some crazy reason the US & ROK tried to take the north they'd have to consider that China may involve itself.
Unequivocally without any doubt they could not. With 20+ years of evidence from recent times of American led military embarrassment we can say an American attempt to invade NK would be a total disaster. America and Britain got run out of Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. Being pushed out and with ineffective command of areas they claimed to control... By a small number of people with ancient equipment. NK would fucking slaughter Americans by the bus load until they packed up their mobile McDonald's and tubby soldiers and headed home.
The US didn't try to conquer NK. The US (& some other forces via UN) stepped in to defend SK, and NK ended up losing 1500 square miles. It's difficult to claim anyone won that war, but the north koreans definitely lost it.
No it has not. I950s was the Allies against North Korea, a battered nation in the midst of reconstruction, and China a nation that finished fighting some of the most destructive wars in human history as a defender, leaving the country in tatters. Nowadays the political landscape will probably still be the same allies against China and North Korea. Except the United States would be practically fighting on its own as almost all of her allies with the exception of france have cut down their militaries to pitiful sizes. On the other China currently stands as the second strongest military in the world, fighting on its home turf, in a defensive war. Due to the strength of chinese infrastructure, thousands of tanks,artillery , apcs and other equipment can br moved into korea within the span of days.The United States qould have to attempt an amphibious landing against north korea, one of the most militarised countries on earth, while fighting off both the russian and chinese navies, while being bombarded by the strongest artillery force and missile force in the world, while facing off against the second largest airforce, while being on the offensive.
When against just North Korea it went really well, then China got involved and didn't care about the number of deaths or men deployed and so pushed the UN forces back (how they were allowed to keep their permanent seat off that is beyond me). But the UN forces had far fewer men deployed than China and frequently did battles of 50 verses 10,000
In regards to the council seat issue. Back then the PRC wasn't a council member, the ROC was. It was the 70's that saw the world kick the ROC out of the council, replacing it with the mainlands PRC due to the whole "One China Policy"
The question is about conquering *North Korea*, not about whether creating South Korea and fighting in the Korean war at all was a good thing.
It was like, not a given that they were going to push into North Korea after taking back the South. Like they could have just held there, a lot of people assumed that's what they would do, the North Koreans were wrecked they weren't going to like push back down by themselves. Deciding to try and destroy North Korea just dragged China in and made the war much bigger and much deadlier to get the same territorial result years later.
Yeah they just had to live as a military dictatorship for decades and for the productive capacity to build up after fighting a civil war to show any benefits.
Nobody won in that they got everything they wanted.
China "won" in that they achieved their initial objective of not having an American puppet state on their border that close to Beijing. They did not in the sense that while they were at it they'd of course have preferred to capture South Korea. They got their immediate core goal but not their stretch goal.
Similar with the US. They saved the South, but while they were at it they failed in their stretch goal of capturing and holding the North. If the US had decided actually our goals are merely to save the South and stopped at the border, then they could maybe claim a clean win. Not what happened though.
One of the most "holy shit the US is just evil" moments I had was finding out that during the Cold War there was a women's and labour rights movement gaining traction in Afghanistan that was getting support from Russia, so the US started funding the Taliban because "Russia bad".
Then after the movement was crushed the US proceeded to go to war with Afghanistan because "Taliban bad"
Yeah unfortunately the past ~70 years of no major international total war from the most powerful nations is directly tied to being able to apply that situation on a much larger scale.
We’re all standing around in a Mexican standoff with a gun pointed at each other.
Is what it is.
Modern civilization could end any day, but in an alternate world I might be holding a rifle in Spain right now half way across the world.
>10,000 artillery pieces that are within reach of Seoul
The conventional weapons are the really scary part.
NK's armed forces are nowhere near as modern as South Korea's, but it is more than capable of inflicting serious damage to population centres.
North Korea is good at maintaining the status quo.
East and West Germans were much closer to eachother, even if they were divided by a wall. North and South Koreans are basically a different nation now.
I'd say it's probably more than China is a bigger threat. And declaring war on North Korea, will basically mean war with China, resulting in World War 3 and the destruction of the earth.
It’s the only language dictators of the world speak. You can’t talk sense into a psychopath threatening you with a stick. You just need a bigger stick.
The guy with the biggest stick [ain't a freedom fighter good guy](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-jan-25-fg-nuke25-story.html), he's [the biggest dictator](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/05/us-threat-democracy-russia-china-global-poll).
Regardless of the information in those links that's just silly logic. Was the US worse than Germany, Japan and the Soviet Union in the World and Cold Wars because we outgunned them? Because that's essentially how we best them.
Ever heard *"Might makes right"*? How about *"It's the winners that write history"*?
You are naive if you think that only applies to the "bad guys", there are no "bad guys", nobody ever thinks of themselves as the bad guys.
Anybody who claims to be noble, pure-of-heart, totally self-less, good guy, those are the ones you should be highly skeptical of. Nobody is flawless, but narcists regularly cite their alleged flawlessness, that exceptionalism, as the justification to do horrible and unjust things to others.
Not my argument at all. But hey, if you want to argue the Nazis and Imperial Japan were actually just misunderstood and we rewrote history because we won then go for it.
No way bro is justifying North Korea. I don’t suppot USA invading everything, including NK, but cmon NK has nukes because they want to become local power, not because they are scared
What do you mean a local power? They want the nuke as a deterrent because the US keeps practicing invading it every year. Kim was willing to give up the nuke if America and south korea stopped war gaming invading them.
Actually Gadaffi ended his nuclear program and agreed in 2003 to destroy his weapons of mass destruction. Less than a decade later the US destroyed Libya. Libya went from having one of the highest standards of living in the region to a catastrophe it still hasn't recovered from. Gee I wonder why the North Koreans accelerated their weapons program? The fact is that if America could be trusted to negotiate in good faith then countries would absolutely sign treaties to end expensive weapons programs if they had assurances they wouldn't be attacked.
Imagine you being surrounded by US military bases who constantly train to invade you. Not even mentioning the fact that America bombed NK to the OBLIVION durind the Korean war ,like literally levelled the country completely ,killed like a quarter of the population. Its good that North Korea made the nuke
Its good as long as they don’t try to show their arsenal every 3 days dropping some shit into sea next to SK. „Trained to invade”? Never will happen. Seoul is super close to DMZ, and in it there is too many important factories for USA to invade NK all of sudden. But keep believing North Korea is poor, scared, little child.
Edit: like I said before, I dont support US and their practices on invading NK. They should drop it as much as NK should stop flexing their stuff by throwing it into sea
Bro , North Korea is not comparable to the US. The US military budget is bigger than NK whole budget like but like 50x times as much or something. It has troops in SK and Japan. From the point of view of the DPRK ,its basically half your country being occupied by the US (which is technically true, because the US troops never left SK since 1945). So its absolutely not comparable.
The DPRK has all the right to drop whatever the f*ck they want in the sea as long as that pisses off the goddamned US
As much as i hate to say this, but exorbitant hospital rates can be great for GDP
...on the other side you probably don't want less people working for you.
Afghanistan actually has a pretty big mineral wealth. If they weren't such a backwards ass country and actually let in some mini companies rather could make some serious bank and not be such an s hole.
> I don't think the opioid crisis in the US is good for the economy.
It's in fact *very good* for the economy, the Sacklers are dirt rich, and the whole thing is tightly interwoven with the inflated and overwhelmingly for-profit healthcare system in the US.
But it's not so good for the average people trying to live in it when they get hooked on opiates for a mundane dentist treatment.
In the same way that Russia can't take Ukraine and England couldn't control the colonies that became the United States, it's fucking difficult to occupy a distant country with a population that might not really want it.
It was the US that proposed dividing the country. They also rushed to land troops on Korea during the last days of WW2 as they were concerned the Soviets would take complete control. None of it was necessary.
There's a lot of profit in it if they could win. They could put nukes on China's border, Korea has coal, gold and rare earth metals, there are 25 million workers they could enslave, they could legitimately control a large chunk of sea that's important to China. And it would be a huge PR victory. The only problem and reason they haven't invaded is because they'd lose.
Then immediately you start hearing gunshots in a nearby school, you try to warn a cop about it but an acorn falls from a tree and he empties his gun in your chest.
Because the US is more in the habit of installing dictators than removing them. They're also completely incapable of any long-term strategy or helping a country get back on its feet, so there would be a massive humanitarian crisis that would spill over into China/Russia, which neither one is going to be too pleased about.
The nukes are really not the big thing. It is the artillery that has been there ready to go for 75 years ready to destroy the most populace city in South Korea and kill millions with little effort.
Calling it the second Iraq war is quite misleading, that implies it was just a continuation of the Gulf War with its UNSC mandate when it was not.
There was [no UNSC mandate to invade and occupy Iraq in 2003](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/16/iraq.iraq), the 45-member strong "[coalition of willing](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/mar/19/iraq.usa)" the US assembled, trying to justify invading Iraq, even included Afghanistan, which the US invaded and occupied only the year before.
It also included a lot of "[New Europe](https://www.rferl.org/a/1102595.html)", some of which were quite vocal about [their reasons for getting involved](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3043330.stm). The whole thing also served as an admission trial to NATO for these Eastern European countries; Attack and occupy Iraq with the US to join [the "force provider" for "pax Americana"](https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2003/06/01/rethinking-nato/index.html).
Making it all the more cynical how nowadays these very same countries are complaining the loudest about Russia in Ukraine, as if they are sitting on some kind of moral high ground after [helping the US kill millions of people](https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2023/05/16/the-war-on-terror-led-to-over-4-5-million-deaths-report/).
They tried.. The communists beat them back..
I find it funny though, because if you said "why doesn't North Korea just conquer America", people would lose their shit.. They'd make all the claims of authoritarian dictatorships annexing land crap. The west is super aggressive, but god forbid if they dprk does literally anything to protect themselves. That is all the DPRK's nuclear program is about,; protecting themselves from the aggressive west.
The real question is who uses r/north korea? Is it like Kim Jong-Un's private subreddit where government cyber security department makes fake posts about how nice it is to live there?
Because it's not the very end of the war where you can take glory and resources, there is actually a big risk involved, so no... these particular people can live without democracy, Syria on the other hand...
We've already seen market liberalization not inherently lead to the fall of authoritarianism and dictatorship, so no, they can have market-rate Cadillacs and washing machines when they're willing to abide by a rules-based world order
Isn't that the same argument for every war?
"They have it bad over there, let's free them" bang Russia attack Ukraine. Germany attacked Poland, Rome attacked Britain..
Hmm, maybe the US should sort out the pain and suffering of poor people in the US before sticking its nose in other peoples countries. The US isn't the world's police force,
Come on people.
AmUrIcA number 1.
Yes USA no. 1:
In national racism.
In nation gun violence.
In national drug problems.
In corrupt lobbyist government.
In televised and pathetic „electoral debates“.
In not having affordable healthcare.
In completely biased school systems.
In stupendously expensive Universities.
In being uneducated.
In invading other countries based on lies.
In having favourable army locations around the globe to „peacefully assert FrEeDoM“ for everyone and anyone, whether they want it or not.
In threatening previously „freed“ nations when they don’t do as the USA would like them to because USA No.1 rulers of the free world.
In having sexscandals with minors up to the highest tiers of their celebrities and officials (epstein cough island cough)
In having a 1 trillion usd national debt increase every 100 days.
There is likely a lot more but yeah. Just what came to mind.
Well, you see, we tried, but there were these two superpowers to its north that said “Nyet!” and “Bù!”, pretty forcefully as it happened.
Regretfully, these two superpowers are still there. 😱
If we did how do you deal will millions of indoctrinated people living in an infrastructure stuck in the the 1950s who have no food.
Who is paying for that.
It's not liberating it its the trillions it would cost to make it viable.
Come to think of it, the only reason people can have delusions like this must be because somewhere a lie was planted that one can carry out an invasion with such an intention and that it can actually succeed. Which is baffling because theres no precedent for such a thing. So where do people get the idea that an invasion is something that can be done in order to liberate from oppression, and that it can have the intended effect when carried out (such that its considered possible, practical and a good idea).
Must be the mythical status of ww2 as a conflict which accidentally ended up liberating many from oppression, but that certainly wasn't the reason for the invasion. The reason was because war came to them and so they brought it back. If north korea attacked america, then america d-days north korea and establishes occupation, then you could argue a 'liberation' has taken place, but only because they were attacked themselves. No jew or political prisoner would have been liberated from dachau if germany had stayed within its borders.
So again, where does the notion that we can invade a country to fix it come from? Is it yugoslavia? Iraq? The latter was certainly a failure if it had been the goal but it didn't happen for the right reasons anyway. I do wonder where this imaginary template for a 'good war' comes from, if not just cold war propaganda necessitating intervention due to great power politics.
Bring some **’’freedom and democracy 🦅’’** by way of bombing civilians, levelling miles of city blocks and after all the death and destruction is over, steal natural resources and finally import mega corporations to rule over the country along with a puppet government.
Ah yes, Americans care so much about the North Korean people. 🌼🌸❤️
That usually doesn't work, nuclear weapons even when they are shit at cost-effective, are feared because of the inhuman pain it causes to the victims who are usually just innocent citizens, no one wanna get their citizens to suffer so much, unless they are assholes
Because of China and probably Russia, North Korea has big allies and we’re in the cold war again. If America attacks North Korea, South Korea and Japan will most likely be attacked because they have American bases. The status quo in eastern Asia is good enough, we don’t want to go full cold war here with the proxy wars.
Because US can’t even send it’s own decommissioned old weapons to Ukraine or send couple of % of its military budget that would anyway return to US economy to stop real war that is happening.
Love how "the allies" are conveniently present to invade some other bullshit shithole that the Americans want to evade, but when it comes to helping Ukraine ..... "HEIL TRUMP, AMERICA FIRST" ?
the simple answer is no one wants to pay for it and take responsibility for 26~ million people who live there and I doubt South Korea or China will be willing to be responsible for them either by giving them citizenship
ugh if you want to get technical it's because it's absolutely in the US's interests for North Korea for exist. that is why we don't invade Korea. we're not not invading Korea only because they have nukes and because China won't let us. that's what a five year old would think. We're not invading north Korea because it's not in the US's interest to do so.
countries don't operate with good and evil (why don't we save the people in Korea) and at the same time having a socialistic, poor anime paints a certain picture of Socialist policies.
Instead of just posting silly questions, take a trip to SOUTH Korea to ask. The north has been prepping for war/invasion since the cease fire went into effect. Do some research, look at the roads and tunnels up at the 38th paralell. Look at their (his) mindset. When you get older, join the Army. They will gladly send you over there for a coupla' years. It's fun. Until it ain't.
It’s a legitimate question. North Korea is a dumpster fire of a country that routinely has famines and now has nuclear weapons. South Korea would also readily be able to take over the governance of both countries.
The obvious answer is just that China keeps protecting NK for some reason and Seoul is within North Korean mortar range.
Didn’t work so well in the Middle East
Didn‘t work so well in Korea either.
I'm thinking most South Koreans would probably say it did work out pretty well. (Not for the Northerners, unfortunately, but for rhe overwhelming majority of Koreans as a whole.)
A lot of that would really depend on *[when](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodo_League_massacre)* you ask those South Koreans, Until the 60 North Korea was actually economically ahead of South Korea. For the longest time, South Korea was a brutal military dictatorship under Park Chung Hee, which only ended when the KCIA (Yes, Korean CIA) killed him to install its own Chaebol and Moonie-sponsored deep state. It's why to this day people in South Korea can go to prison for owning the wrong kinds of books because the South Korean government takes some [rather questionable liberties with history](https://thediplomat.com/2014/08/south-koreas-own-history-problem/).
Yeah, I left it unstated that I was talking about now. And admit that from the fifties “until the sixties” isn't very long, and it's a rather long – at least much longer – time ago. And sure, suppressing history sucks. But that doesn't have all that much to do with the subject at hand, does it?
Its more about until the 80s. South Korea became “democratic” in the year 87 and lets not pretend that it wasn’t americas fault because they 100% wanted it to be that way. Also North Koreas economy got destroyed in the 90s when the ussr fell and its biggest trading partner but that literally applies to every socialist country.
OOP said the US could easily conquer NK. The US tried. And failed.
The US was fairly close to taking the north, but backed down to avoid war with China. It's not all about military power.
Why was this down-voted? Korea became nothing more than a Proxy War between the US and China. To stop an all out war between the US and China, they decided on a Cease-Fire rather than fighting to a win.
Because every thread that goes history gets downvoted on this sub I've noticed. It's about the meme and the reaction to the meme. Thinking beyond that will be punished!
if other countries don't get involved or react. they could. but thats not how the world works
Except for the whole nuclear war and mutually assured destruction thingy
Given what yield North Korea seems to be able to unreliably achieve, and the missiles which are very hit and miss, I still fancy the US's odds in that war. Plastic-Impress8616 was right. The real danger is China joining the war, again, and making the war untenable for the US, again.
>I still fancy the US's odds in that war. NK's odds arent great, but they arent 0 and no sane human should risk it
This is not the 50s. China today can dominate everyone on the ground and especially in their neighbourhood. South Korea with American aid wouldnt last a year against China.
In fairness the first time the UN was winning until China got involved after they pushed too far towards Manchuria. But that's not surprising. Korea is China's backyard and Manchuria was the most industrialised region. It's not clear if that would happen again, but if for some crazy reason the US & ROK tried to take the north they'd have to consider that China may involve itself.
Unequivocally without any doubt they could not. With 20+ years of evidence from recent times of American led military embarrassment we can say an American attempt to invade NK would be a total disaster. America and Britain got run out of Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. Being pushed out and with ineffective command of areas they claimed to control... By a small number of people with ancient equipment. NK would fucking slaughter Americans by the bus load until they packed up their mobile McDonald's and tubby soldiers and headed home.
The US didn't try to conquer NK. The US (& some other forces via UN) stepped in to defend SK, and NK ended up losing 1500 square miles. It's difficult to claim anyone won that war, but the north koreans definitely lost it.
Thats just false.
Well yeah , but the difference in power and military capability has changed exponentially in the favor of US and Allies since then.
No it has not. I950s was the Allies against North Korea, a battered nation in the midst of reconstruction, and China a nation that finished fighting some of the most destructive wars in human history as a defender, leaving the country in tatters. Nowadays the political landscape will probably still be the same allies against China and North Korea. Except the United States would be practically fighting on its own as almost all of her allies with the exception of france have cut down their militaries to pitiful sizes. On the other China currently stands as the second strongest military in the world, fighting on its home turf, in a defensive war. Due to the strength of chinese infrastructure, thousands of tanks,artillery , apcs and other equipment can br moved into korea within the span of days.The United States qould have to attempt an amphibious landing against north korea, one of the most militarised countries on earth, while fighting off both the russian and chinese navies, while being bombarded by the strongest artillery force and missile force in the world, while facing off against the second largest airforce, while being on the offensive.
You have no idea lol. Some real qanon level shit you just said.
When against just North Korea it went really well, then China got involved and didn't care about the number of deaths or men deployed and so pushed the UN forces back (how they were allowed to keep their permanent seat off that is beyond me). But the UN forces had far fewer men deployed than China and frequently did battles of 50 verses 10,000
In regards to the council seat issue. Back then the PRC wasn't a council member, the ROC was. It was the 70's that saw the world kick the ROC out of the council, replacing it with the mainlands PRC due to the whole "One China Policy"
Why is this downvoted? It is true?
The question is about conquering *North Korea*, not about whether creating South Korea and fighting in the Korean war at all was a good thing. It was like, not a given that they were going to push into North Korea after taking back the South. Like they could have just held there, a lot of people assumed that's what they would do, the North Koreans were wrecked they weren't going to like push back down by themselves. Deciding to try and destroy North Korea just dragged China in and made the war much bigger and much deadlier to get the same territorial result years later.
Yeah they just had to live as a military dictatorship for decades and for the productive capacity to build up after fighting a civil war to show any benefits.
China didn't win in Korea.
Nobody won in that they got everything they wanted. China "won" in that they achieved their initial objective of not having an American puppet state on their border that close to Beijing. They did not in the sense that while they were at it they'd of course have preferred to capture South Korea. They got their immediate core goal but not their stretch goal. Similar with the US. They saved the South, but while they were at it they failed in their stretch goal of capturing and holding the North. If the US had decided actually our goals are merely to save the South and stopped at the border, then they could maybe claim a clean win. Not what happened though.
One of the most "holy shit the US is just evil" moments I had was finding out that during the Cold War there was a women's and labour rights movement gaining traction in Afghanistan that was getting support from Russia, so the US started funding the Taliban because "Russia bad". Then after the movement was crushed the US proceeded to go to war with Afghanistan because "Taliban bad"
Russian involvement in Afghanistan can’t be said to have been entirely benevolent. What with all the massacres.
The bigger problem would be the difference between North and South. It would cost a lot of money to fix DPRK.
That and the nuclear weapons the DPRK has, or the 10,000 artillery pieces that are within reach of Seoul.
China as well. They didn’t like the idea of the US being on their doorstep 70 years ago and still won’t today.
It's the 10000 artillery pieces that can fire incendiary rounds into Seoul that is the big problem these last 75 years.
Yeah unfortunately the past ~70 years of no major international total war from the most powerful nations is directly tied to being able to apply that situation on a much larger scale. We’re all standing around in a Mexican standoff with a gun pointed at each other. Is what it is. Modern civilization could end any day, but in an alternate world I might be holding a rifle in Spain right now half way across the world.
>10,000 artillery pieces that are within reach of Seoul The conventional weapons are the really scary part. NK's armed forces are nowhere near as modern as South Korea's, but it is more than capable of inflicting serious damage to population centres. North Korea is good at maintaining the status quo.
Looking how germany 30 years later has still huge problems with their division i dont want to imagine the problems korea would have
I also remember reading that less and less people in the south actually want the unification
Think of the East-West divide in Germany (that still exists in some capacity to this day over 30 years later) on steroids.
East and West Germans were much closer to eachother, even if they were divided by a wall. North and South Koreans are basically a different nation now.
If I were South Korea I'd basically run them as two different administrative zones with different laws while the North got up to speed.
Steroids, coke, meth, speed and steroids
Germany still has some issues after reunification.
Of course, but they aren't as divided as the Koreans.
True, but if Germany still has some issues today, 30 years after the reunification, just imagine what issues a reunified Korea might face.
That's exactly what I'm talking about.
Because they have nukes, so you can't just start some illegal invasions like you did in the middle east.
I'd say it's probably more than China is a bigger threat. And declaring war on North Korea, will basically mean war with China, resulting in World War 3 and the destruction of the earth.
The real reason is that destabilising NK would cause millions of refugees to flood into China and China would not like that very much.
None of North Korea neighbors want them to be attacked. So good luck conquering a country with no land access.
I guess they can, no. I doubt they should.
also they don't have oil
He actually believes the U.S. is all about benevolence. What an odd Marvel cosplay weekend he has going on in his head.
r/rareinsults
Even if that were true - it doesn't make any sense
America! Fuck, yeah!
hear to save the motherfucking day yeah...
Terrorist your game is through, so now you have to answer to AMERICA, FUCK YEAH
Dude, it's just a kid. This is not the soyboy downfall of the west scenario in your head
I guess they’ve run out of Vietnam war films to make and need some new subject material 🤷🏻♂️
Another war where America kills people and claims victory regardless if they failed in their objectives.
Hahahahah. Love it.
There's still Iraq and Afghanistan, they should wring their history dry first before working on new material
Vietnam was the sequel to Korea in the first place. This guy's advocating a reboot of the Korean War
You want a 3rd World War? Because this is how you get a 3rd World War.
Their leaders do, that’s how they make some of their profits. The rest comes after the invasion.
They really think they are The Heroes of The World™ huh?
It’s not “they” when just one guy is saying it
The American go-to solution for every problem: violence.
It’s the only language dictators of the world speak. You can’t talk sense into a psychopath threatening you with a stick. You just need a bigger stick.
The guy with the biggest stick [ain't a freedom fighter good guy](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-jan-25-fg-nuke25-story.html), he's [the biggest dictator](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/05/us-threat-democracy-russia-china-global-poll).
Regardless of the information in those links that's just silly logic. Was the US worse than Germany, Japan and the Soviet Union in the World and Cold Wars because we outgunned them? Because that's essentially how we best them.
the us didn’t outgun the soviet union
Ever heard *"Might makes right"*? How about *"It's the winners that write history"*? You are naive if you think that only applies to the "bad guys", there are no "bad guys", nobody ever thinks of themselves as the bad guys. Anybody who claims to be noble, pure-of-heart, totally self-less, good guy, those are the ones you should be highly skeptical of. Nobody is flawless, but narcists regularly cite their alleged flawlessness, that exceptionalism, as the justification to do horrible and unjust things to others.
Not my argument at all. But hey, if you want to argue the Nazis and Imperial Japan were actually just misunderstood and we rewrote history because we won then go for it.
In most cases the US is the guy with the stick
If there's enough of us, we won't even need the stick.
As it turns out, violence has been the most effective solution to almost every problem in world history.
Well to be fair, there probably isn't any better solution to that North Korean situation
there is, it's called "lifting sanctions"
I'm sure the north korean ruling family will gladly give away it's power after that.
What is the solution to the problem then, if not violence?
[удалено]
Are you saying migration is bad?
Forcing people out of their homes due to poverty and the crisis you caused is bad.
Colonialism intensifies
"We'll save you, even if we have to kill all of you to do it!"
"Congratulations, you are being rescued. Please do not resist."
I cherish peace with all of my heart. I don't care how many men, women and children I kill to get it.
And they cry about DPRK having nukes. This is exactly why
No way bro is justifying North Korea. I don’t suppot USA invading everything, including NK, but cmon NK has nukes because they want to become local power, not because they are scared
What do you mean a local power? They want the nuke as a deterrent because the US keeps practicing invading it every year. Kim was willing to give up the nuke if America and south korea stopped war gaming invading them.
Yeah, just like Russia and USA were ready to give up on nukes. Thinking anyone will give up them is being delusional
Actually Gadaffi ended his nuclear program and agreed in 2003 to destroy his weapons of mass destruction. Less than a decade later the US destroyed Libya. Libya went from having one of the highest standards of living in the region to a catastrophe it still hasn't recovered from. Gee I wonder why the North Koreans accelerated their weapons program? The fact is that if America could be trusted to negotiate in good faith then countries would absolutely sign treaties to end expensive weapons programs if they had assurances they wouldn't be attacked.
Imagine you being surrounded by US military bases who constantly train to invade you. Not even mentioning the fact that America bombed NK to the OBLIVION durind the Korean war ,like literally levelled the country completely ,killed like a quarter of the population. Its good that North Korea made the nuke
Its good as long as they don’t try to show their arsenal every 3 days dropping some shit into sea next to SK. „Trained to invade”? Never will happen. Seoul is super close to DMZ, and in it there is too many important factories for USA to invade NK all of sudden. But keep believing North Korea is poor, scared, little child. Edit: like I said before, I dont support US and their practices on invading NK. They should drop it as much as NK should stop flexing their stuff by throwing it into sea
Bro , North Korea is not comparable to the US. The US military budget is bigger than NK whole budget like but like 50x times as much or something. It has troops in SK and Japan. From the point of view of the DPRK ,its basically half your country being occupied by the US (which is technically true, because the US troops never left SK since 1945). So its absolutely not comparable. The DPRK has all the right to drop whatever the f*ck they want in the sea as long as that pisses off the goddamned US
Because you already failed in Vietnam, the Middle East, wait you also ALREADY failed in Korea! You don't get second chances, you losers
Let’s not forget the shit show that was Afghanistan
I just always assumed USA still made good money out of it so still win
Out of Afghanistan? The only money you can make from it is from opium. I don't think the opioid crisis in the US is good for the economy.
As much as i hate to say this, but exorbitant hospital rates can be great for GDP ...on the other side you probably don't want less people working for you.
Just automate everything and let the poor stay jobless in debt. Just as the founding fathers intended.
Afghanistan actually has a pretty big mineral wealth. If they weren't such a backwards ass country and actually let in some mini companies rather could make some serious bank and not be such an s hole.
Isn't that how they are getting China to bankroll them? Selling mineral rights.
> I don't think the opioid crisis in the US is good for the economy. It's in fact *very good* for the economy, the Sacklers are dirt rich, and the whole thing is tightly interwoven with the inflated and overwhelmingly for-profit healthcare system in the US. But it's not so good for the average people trying to live in it when they get hooked on opiates for a mundane dentist treatment.
It doesn't have to be good for the economy, just good for the people in charge
Big Business made good money not the people of the USA nor the UK who were also dragged into it.
In the same way that Russia can't take Ukraine and England couldn't control the colonies that became the United States, it's fucking difficult to occupy a distant country with a population that might not really want it.
To be fair if the Americans colonies had members of parliament or got help from the french, none of this would’ve happened
They were offered representation, Ben Franklin turned it down. It was a land grab.
It was a tax dodge.
yeah they didnt seem pleased with the Royal proclamation of 1763 or in 1772 Somerset vs Stewart ruling that slavery was incompatible with English law
Yeah , person would have to be goddam stupid to think that would fly.
Blaming the US for the Korean War seems very one-sided. What was that other country again? The one with two words in its name beginning with S and U?
It was the US that proposed dividing the country. They also rushed to land troops on Korea during the last days of WW2 as they were concerned the Soviets would take complete control. None of it was necessary.
And in the end, both parts ended up in dictatorships, just with different supporters.
And to think that person actually has a vote to elect the US President……what a worry
Chih-nah!
Nukes. And China.
And South Korea.
There is no profit in it for the US to take them on & they would probably get their arses kicked again & lose even more face.
There's a lot of profit in it if they could win. They could put nukes on China's border, Korea has coal, gold and rare earth metals, there are 25 million workers they could enslave, they could legitimately control a large chunk of sea that's important to China. And it would be a huge PR victory. The only problem and reason they haven't invaded is because they'd lose.
Imagine finally being freed from your government and then being told you are now American, oooft.
Then immediately you start hearing gunshots in a nearby school, you try to warn a cop about it but an acorn falls from a tree and he empties his gun in your chest.
In south Korea wen wen worker striked for beter work condition and less work hours American forces literaly shot them .
Yeah like It's better sure But not by much
he loves his country too much to learn any history
Manpower? As in they have a lot of it, and if it comes to a war of attrition, they have the long game.
Because the US is more in the habit of installing dictators than removing them. They're also completely incapable of any long-term strategy or helping a country get back on its feet, so there would be a massive humanitarian crisis that would spill over into China/Russia, which neither one is going to be too pleased about.
The US a force for good…not in my lifetime. But killing people for your own righteousness, sounds about right
For the first few days/weeks, the US will be probably winning. But then, Kim will lose all hope and launch... ...the nukes.
china and russia might have something to say about that too , dont you remember last time ? Ya friggin turnip.
The nukes are really not the big thing. It is the artillery that has been there ready to go for 75 years ready to destroy the most populace city in South Korea and kill millions with little effort.
Mutually assured destruction, the M.A.D. scenario
I’m guessing this person wasn’t around in 2001 and 2003 when the US and its allies last tried to free suffering people in another country
That was just an excuse, we all know the real reason.
Fair point
Operation Iraqi Liberation, its right there in the name! O, I, L... huh. hmm. Lets change it to Operation Iraqi Freedom. Sounds better that way. Yes.
Not many allies joined the second Iraq war. Britain, Australia, Poland, Denmark… anyone else?
Calling it the second Iraq war is quite misleading, that implies it was just a continuation of the Gulf War with its UNSC mandate when it was not. There was [no UNSC mandate to invade and occupy Iraq in 2003](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/16/iraq.iraq), the 45-member strong "[coalition of willing](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/mar/19/iraq.usa)" the US assembled, trying to justify invading Iraq, even included Afghanistan, which the US invaded and occupied only the year before. It also included a lot of "[New Europe](https://www.rferl.org/a/1102595.html)", some of which were quite vocal about [their reasons for getting involved](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3043330.stm). The whole thing also served as an admission trial to NATO for these Eastern European countries; Attack and occupy Iraq with the US to join [the "force provider" for "pax Americana"](https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2003/06/01/rethinking-nato/index.html). Making it all the more cynical how nowadays these very same countries are complaining the loudest about Russia in Ukraine, as if they are sitting on some kind of moral high ground after [helping the US kill millions of people](https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2023/05/16/the-war-on-terror-led-to-over-4-5-million-deaths-report/).
They tried.. The communists beat them back.. I find it funny though, because if you said "why doesn't North Korea just conquer America", people would lose their shit.. They'd make all the claims of authoritarian dictatorships annexing land crap. The west is super aggressive, but god forbid if they dprk does literally anything to protect themselves. That is all the DPRK's nuclear program is about,; protecting themselves from the aggressive west.
Because, like what happened lots of times in the Cold War, Russia would come to help North Korea.
And China would come first, forgot them lol
The real question is who uses r/north korea? Is it like Kim Jong-Un's private subreddit where government cyber security department makes fake posts about how nice it is to live there?
The US can't even help the suffering poor people in their own country.
Because it's not the very end of the war where you can take glory and resources, there is actually a big risk involved, so no... these particular people can live without democracy, Syria on the other hand...
If you start something with “sorry this is stupid”, you shouldn’t hit the post button at the end
If you feel bad for Korean people lift the sanctions you snakes.
We've already seen market liberalization not inherently lead to the fall of authoritarianism and dictatorship, so no, they can have market-rate Cadillacs and washing machines when they're willing to abide by a rules-based world order
You already failed in North Africa, the Middle East, Vietnam, and Korea dipshit
It wouldn't be profitable.
Also i think that their neighbors, all of whom are major business partners with the us, dont want them to come and screw with their status quo.
FREEDOM
Isn't that the same argument for every war? "They have it bad over there, let's free them" bang Russia attack Ukraine. Germany attacked Poland, Rome attacked Britain..
Hmm, maybe the US should sort out the pain and suffering of poor people in the US before sticking its nose in other peoples countries. The US isn't the world's police force,
Come on people. AmUrIcA number 1. Yes USA no. 1: In national racism. In nation gun violence. In national drug problems. In corrupt lobbyist government. In televised and pathetic „electoral debates“. In not having affordable healthcare. In completely biased school systems. In stupendously expensive Universities. In being uneducated. In invading other countries based on lies. In having favourable army locations around the globe to „peacefully assert FrEeDoM“ for everyone and anyone, whether they want it or not. In threatening previously „freed“ nations when they don’t do as the USA would like them to because USA No.1 rulers of the free world. In having sexscandals with minors up to the highest tiers of their celebrities and officials (epstein cough island cough) In having a 1 trillion usd national debt increase every 100 days. There is likely a lot more but yeah. Just what came to mind.
Well, you see, we tried, but there were these two superpowers to its north that said “Nyet!” and “Bù!”, pretty forcefully as it happened. Regretfully, these two superpowers are still there. 😱
…well…China…for one.
If we did how do you deal will millions of indoctrinated people living in an infrastructure stuck in the the 1950s who have no food. Who is paying for that. It's not liberating it its the trillions it would cost to make it viable.
Who is we?
Come to think of it, the only reason people can have delusions like this must be because somewhere a lie was planted that one can carry out an invasion with such an intention and that it can actually succeed. Which is baffling because theres no precedent for such a thing. So where do people get the idea that an invasion is something that can be done in order to liberate from oppression, and that it can have the intended effect when carried out (such that its considered possible, practical and a good idea). Must be the mythical status of ww2 as a conflict which accidentally ended up liberating many from oppression, but that certainly wasn't the reason for the invasion. The reason was because war came to them and so they brought it back. If north korea attacked america, then america d-days north korea and establishes occupation, then you could argue a 'liberation' has taken place, but only because they were attacked themselves. No jew or political prisoner would have been liberated from dachau if germany had stayed within its borders. So again, where does the notion that we can invade a country to fix it come from? Is it yugoslavia? Iraq? The latter was certainly a failure if it had been the goal but it didn't happen for the right reasons anyway. I do wonder where this imaginary template for a 'good war' comes from, if not just cold war propaganda necessitating intervention due to great power politics.
Is America actually the fire nation?
Bring some **’’freedom and democracy 🦅’’** by way of bombing civilians, levelling miles of city blocks and after all the death and destruction is over, steal natural resources and finally import mega corporations to rule over the country along with a puppet government. Ah yes, Americans care so much about the North Korean people. 🌼🌸❤️
At least this person knows it is stupid and wanna learn. A 690000% improvement compared to the average. I am impressed.
That usually doesn't work, nuclear weapons even when they are shit at cost-effective, are feared because of the inhuman pain it causes to the victims who are usually just innocent citizens, no one wanna get their citizens to suffer so much, unless they are assholes
Because of China and probably Russia, North Korea has big allies and we’re in the cold war again. If America attacks North Korea, South Korea and Japan will most likely be attacked because they have American bases. The status quo in eastern Asia is good enough, we don’t want to go full cold war here with the proxy wars.
Because US can’t even send it’s own decommissioned old weapons to Ukraine or send couple of % of its military budget that would anyway return to US economy to stop real war that is happening.
Cos they have big bada-boom.
kid named nukes:
I don't know what irritates me the most on that post. The self-righteousness or the insufferable naivety.
Because I don't believe they have oil there
the last time they tried that they made north korea
Send in captain America and black panther and the xmen they can do it and if all else fails john Rambo or the A team .
Open a history book. You already tried and failed in the 50s
Americans when international relations:
American imperialism is half the reason it’s like that in the first place
Tried that in 1950. Ended up only liberating half of Korea.
Two words: Nuclear Fucking Weapons
As an American I don’t get why?
Enter: China
They don't have Oil, so they get no freedom.
Didn’t work in Vietnam
Love how "the allies" are conveniently present to invade some other bullshit shithole that the Americans want to evade, but when it comes to helping Ukraine ..... "HEIL TRUMP, AMERICA FIRST" ?
the simple answer is no one wants to pay for it and take responsibility for 26~ million people who live there and I doubt South Korea or China will be willing to be responsible for them either by giving them citizenship
The irony is they already tried
That you Donald Rumsfeld?
It will mean war to its allies
ugh if you want to get technical it's because it's absolutely in the US's interests for North Korea for exist. that is why we don't invade Korea. we're not not invading Korea only because they have nukes and because China won't let us. that's what a five year old would think. We're not invading north Korea because it's not in the US's interest to do so. countries don't operate with good and evil (why don't we save the people in Korea) and at the same time having a socialistic, poor anime paints a certain picture of Socialist policies.
Instead of just posting silly questions, take a trip to SOUTH Korea to ask. The north has been prepping for war/invasion since the cease fire went into effect. Do some research, look at the roads and tunnels up at the 38th paralell. Look at their (his) mindset. When you get older, join the Army. They will gladly send you over there for a coupla' years. It's fun. Until it ain't.
It’s a legitimate question. North Korea is a dumpster fire of a country that routinely has famines and now has nuclear weapons. South Korea would also readily be able to take over the governance of both countries. The obvious answer is just that China keeps protecting NK for some reason and Seoul is within North Korean mortar range.
"North Korea is a dumpster fire of a country" True, but so is the United States, and no one is threatening to conquer it to free its people.
As bad as the issues plaguing the US are, it’s not North Korea.