I still don't see any reason to be concerned. The negative effects of retaliation out-weigh the potential benefits, so they will back down from their aggressive reactionary rhetoric within a week.

No it cant, because of nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons are (strangely enough) the reason for the relative peace between the great powers in the later 20th century.

See, the US cant go to war with Russia, or China. Pakistan cant go to war with India. And Russia cant go to war with France or China.

Why? Because of the threat of nuclear annihilation, the greatest incentive of all against war! There might be proxy wars and espionage from one country against another, but there cannot be open warfare.

That is why it's impossible for the Korean conflict to go global like WW1 did.

Yup. Nukes have helped the cause of peace more than anything else. Which is kind of sad, when you think about it.

Peace through POWER*



*everyone being equally powerful, that is

It's too tidy a theory.

For one, that sort of peace is made unsustainable by the "energy-race". It would work as a kind of unchanging standoff, but shifting economic interests and open war (already happened) in the persuit of dwindling energy resources - coupled with rising demand - escalates tensions. The likes of U.S. and China don't have a choice - they have to act to secure oil and natural gas overseas.

Presumably, the threat of nuclear annihalation would be enough to guarantee peace until the end of time? I don't see it working that way.

Most likely not. And sooner or later a group of people who can't be retaliated against will use a nuclear device ("suitcase" nuke or a dirty bomb), then what? No nation will not just stand there and take it.

though i agree it can be argued that nuclear weapons have been a tool of peace more than war.

The conflict over who has the right to such weapons is obviously a major source of conflict.

All this , *never* gonna happen talk. Never is a long time.

Cuban missile crisis wasn't that long ago.

Am I just paranoid?

South Korea is a huge global player. Any war there is going to have severe economic ramifications to all the world markets.

That.

Nukes make this entire situation different. Never before in the world have any countries had this pulling power. Why do you think there hasn't been a world war since 1945?

NK cant even start a WW, because nobody is willing to fight along with. It'll just be another one sided war like the first Iraq war.

It's not that far-fetched that there may never be another world war. Maybe small wars, but most of the major nations seem content with their territory, and a lot of building is being done vertically. We aren't exactly the primitive nations we used to be.

Unless a group thinks that the risk of annihilation is worth it as long as they take their opponents out, too. Something like the mindset of suicide bombers and such.



Dunno if it'll lead to anything. NK has been taking pot shots at SK for years. Sink the boat, fire a missile "accidentally", show off military maneuvers, etc. Meanwhile, the citizens get killed, displaced, and struggle to eke out a living as their crazy governments callously play with their lives.

hmm... Maybe now is the best time to start building some Vaults... :vaultboy:

Heh.

Tensions have been rising for those of you who think this is anything really new. The only thing that's really new is that they're now willing to actually shell each other (also misleading title they didn't "bomb" the south they shelled them. However, the south does have planes on standby to attack North Korea's missile launch sites should there be any further escalation).

It isn't exactly as if the south is really innocent either. They knew full well what they were doing when they were practicing those military drills in disputed territory. Not only that but North Korea did give South Korea a ring and told them to stop otherwise they would have problems. The result as you see is the South Koreans ignoring that message and firing shells into disputed territory albeit they fired at water and not a town.

Articles on the rising tensions:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10129703 on south (though the north denies it as if anyone really believes that :rolleyes: )

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101103/wl_nm/us_korea_north_fishing shoot at a fishing boat

There's also various speculations on why tensions are rising

1. http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20101123/ts_yblog_thelookout/tensions-on-the-korean-peninsula-what-you-need-to-know and so is my son. Military first is the policy and showing that your son and country is still a world player is the name of the game.

Or

2. http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/532071. North Korea has been in need of aid and this could be a possible hey we're going to hold your allies hostage until you give us some lunch money (or just for the US to treat the North Koreans to lunch).

Well we don't live in huts and kill people with pointy sticks anymore. :shifty:

And that's relevant because when we did live in huts and kill people with pointy sticks there were world wars?

Not exactly pointy sticks (that was a joke), but there were hundreds of wars fought over the centuries. Obviously not world wars, because most of the world was unknown and transportation was slow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JPULswVojE

So the only thing that has changed is how far across the world wars can reach. :shrug:

That's only due to technology and the killing power of modern weapons.

The big nations are more civilized now than to go picking on small nations just to assimilate them. Empires vs democracies, etc.

Which turned out to be a mega-fail?

Ah North Korea...

:lol:

That is all. Oh, and it would be nice to have a fair chance at winning on StarCraft II as others have mentioned...

I think what Nami88 was saying is that globally people are more stable, that we have reached/reaching a point where it is capitalism and international relations which dictate the actions of countries. The Treaty of Westphalia is one mile stone, as it gave a country sovereignty; ie, the right to do what it wishes within it's own boundaries. Iraq is a an example of sovereignty not being respected (do not discuss this point people). Boundaries used to be dictated by military might, the expansion and retraction of the Roman Empire is a good example of this, but now we are, globally, and generally, more civil.
[edit] commas

I always thought of "Korea" as a possible duty station, not a prospective war zone, until the recent artillery attacks. Hopefully China doesn't get involved if conflict erupts; I can't imagine they'd gain much by coming to North Korea's aid, but it'd get ugly if they did.


North Korea and South Korea have been at war, in a technical sense, since the war's beginning in the 1950's until today due to the lack of a peace treaty bringing a formal end to the war.

Don't think for a second those Marine deaths will go unanswered for...