Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Generational Dynamics World View
(09-23-2017, 02:04 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: > But Putin especially and also Xi somewhat are supporting North
> Korea because they think the US will back down. The reason they
> think this is because the US usually has backed down when North
> Korea acts up. If we actually launch war against north Korea,
> Putin would probably back down immediately since the fundamental
> assumption behind his support for kim-jong-un would have just been
> proven false. Regarding China, the Chinese were able to rationally
> look at India's capabilities and defuse the situation (at
> doklam). They therefore would be able to look at the US resolve
> and back down. This does not even necessarily mean that China has
> to give up potential military expansion, they would just have to
> expand in directions away from the US and its treaty allies (most
> likely into interior Asia). This may still lead to a WW3 but that
> would be a very different war than the one that is currently more
> likely.

For one thing, a lot of people believe that China and Russia are quite
content to have North Korea build an arsenal of nuclear missiles
targeted at the US, since they won't be targeted a China or Russia.

But OK. Let's take your scenario. In fact, let's take the most
optimistic scenario: there's an American strike on North Korea that
kills the regime and destroys all the missiles and nuclear materials,
and there's no retaliation on South Korea, and no retaliation on the
US from China or Russia. Can we think of anything more optimistic
than that?

Then what happens next? Will China and Russia go to the UN Security
council and sponsor a resolution thanking and congratulating the
United States for doing such a great job? Hardly.

The response by Russia and China will be vitriolic and belligerent.
They'll say that the US used far more force than necessary; they'll
say that a diplomatic solution was close to working; in fact, they'll
claim that the diplomatic solution had already worked, and that the
strike was completely unnecessary; and they'll say that now that now
that there's no danger from North Korea, the US has to withdraw all
troops, THAAD missiles, and other weapons from South Korea. They'll
threaten the US with war if the US tries anything else military
around the Korean peninsula.

Of course, with the Kim regime destroyed, China will already have
moved in and taken over the government in Pyongyang, to make sure that
things run smoothly, and that there's no humanitarian disaster. (Of
course there will be a huge humanitarian disaster, but we're assuming
the rosiest, most Pollyannaish, most optimistic scenario.)

What will the highly nationalistic and xenophobic people of China
think? Will they suddenly love the US for taking out the Kim regime
and his nuclear missiles? Hardly. They'll be furious about what
happened, and they'll be spreading rumors about how the South Koreans
and the Americans are jointly planning an attack on China. They'll
demand that their leaders prepare for war with the US.

This is the optimistic scenario, and the tensions will be worse than
they are today. The Americans will refuse to withdraw from South
Korea, and with China in control of North Korea, the South Koreans
will be fearing an attack from China, and so they will not want the
Americans to withdraw. It's not war yet, but even the optimistic
scenario is solidly on the path to war.

You say this would be a different WW3 than the one we're headed for
now. Well I guess so, but I'm not sure what the difference would be.
Either way, it will lead to an all-out generational crisis war, with
every nuclear weapon in the world used on someone before the war ends.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by radind - 05-14-2016, 03:21 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by radind - 05-23-2016, 10:31 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by radind - 08-11-2016, 08:59 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by SomeGuy - 01-18-2017, 09:23 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 02-04-2017, 10:08 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 03-13-2017, 03:33 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by SomeGuy - 03-15-2017, 02:56 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by SomeGuy - 03-15-2017, 03:13 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 05-30-2017, 01:04 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 07-08-2017, 01:34 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 08-09-2017, 11:07 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 08-10-2017, 02:38 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by John J. Xenakis - 09-23-2017, 05:10 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 10-25-2017, 03:07 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by rds - 10-31-2017, 03:35 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by rds - 10-31-2017, 06:33 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by noway2 - 11-20-2017, 04:31 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 12-28-2017, 11:00 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 12-31-2017, 11:14 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 06-22-2018, 02:54 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-11-2018, 01:42 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-11-2018, 01:54 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-19-2018, 12:43 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-25-2018, 02:18 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-11-2018, 01:58 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 08-18-2018, 03:42 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 08-19-2018, 04:39 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 09-25-2019, 11:12 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 03-09-2020, 02:11 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Camz - 03-10-2020, 10:10 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 03-12-2020, 11:11 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 03-16-2020, 03:21 PM
RE: 58 year rule - by Tim Randal Walker - 04-01-2020, 11:17 AM
RE: 58 year rule - by John J. Xenakis - 04-02-2020, 12:25 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Isoko - 05-04-2020, 02:51 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 01-04-2021, 12:13 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by CH86 - 01-05-2021, 11:17 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-10-2021, 06:16 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-11-2021, 09:06 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-12-2021, 02:53 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-13-2021, 03:58 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-13-2021, 04:16 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-15-2021, 03:36 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 08-19-2021, 03:03 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 08-21-2021, 01:41 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 02-27-2022, 06:06 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 02-27-2022, 10:42 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 02-28-2022, 12:26 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 02-28-2022, 04:08 PM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Why the social dynamics viewpoint to the Strauss-Howe generational theory is wrong Ldr 5 4,808 06-05-2020, 10:55 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Theory: cyclical generational hormone levels behind the four turnings and archetypes Ldr 2 3,396 03-16-2020, 06:17 AM
Last Post: Ldr
  The Fall of Cities of the Ancient World (42 Years) The Sacred Name of God 42 Letters Mark40 5 4,677 01-08-2020, 08:37 PM
Last Post: Eric the Green
  Generational cycle research Mikebert 15 16,251 02-08-2018, 10:06 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
Video Styxhexenhammer666 and his view of historical cycles. Kinser79 0 3,335 08-27-2017, 06:31 PM
Last Post: Kinser79

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 8 Guest(s)