| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? 00:11 - Jul 1 with 825 views | Coastalblue |
I guess this could be applied to some other places too, but if North Korea had some valuable resources in abundant qualities would it still exist in the world as it currently is?
Where do we draw the line on what a country can subject its people to before we interfere?
Aside from the fact it appears they are suffering quite badly with covid there's nothing currently happening to provoke this thread, I'm just genuinely interested on what people's opinions are on when and whether the world should interfere, be it N Korea or elsewhere? |  |
| |  |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 00:19 - Jul 1 with 805 views | jeera |
You'd think that probably China would have annexed it if there were those kind of resources i suppose. |  |
| |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 00:38 - Jul 1 with 778 views | Sarge |
Personally I would happily wipe the regimes of North Korea and China off the face of the Earth. Both brutal (and in China’s case, genocidal) dictatorships that do nothing to contribute to world peace and prosperity and instead look to destabilise, subvert and control everyone and everything in their sphere of influence.
Unfortunately military action against the latter would be ineffective and against the former would attract the latter. Something must be done to stop the massive human rights abuses in both countries, but neither will listen and in China’s case, it hurts the West’s pockets too much to intervene. North Korea makes me sad for North Koreans, China makes me sad for the world. |  | | |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 00:51 - Jul 1 with 767 views | Kropotkin123 |
Yes. North Korea has nuclear weapons.
It would need the cooperation of China for us to invade and I'm assuming by "we" you mean a US led interference.
Each situation around the would is different. In this scenario, nuclear weapons would likely be launched at Seoul. If successful, and I use the term loosely, as they'd likely be millions dead, there would then be a massive refugee crisis and likely food shortages. When should we interfere? For a start, when the consequences of our actions are less severe than the causes of our actions. |  |
| Submit your 1-24 league prediction here -https://www.twtd.co.uk/forum/514096/page:1 - for the opportunity to get a free Ipswich top. | | Poll: | Would you rather | | Blog: | Round Four: Eagle |
| |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 00:57 - Jul 1 with 756 views | Coastalblue |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 00:51 - Jul 1 by Kropotkin123 |
Yes. North Korea has nuclear weapons.
It would need the cooperation of China for us to invade and I'm assuming by "we" you mean a US led interference.
Each situation around the would is different. In this scenario, nuclear weapons would likely be launched at Seoul. If successful, and I use the term loosely, as they'd likely be millions dead, there would then be a massive refugee crisis and likely food shortages. When should we interfere? For a start, when the consequences of our actions are less severe than the causes of our actions. |
Understand what you've said there, but by we I mean us as citizens of the world. I know I'm being incredibly simplistic about it, but I wonder where the moral boundary exists for people?
China mentioned above has the sort of power and resources that would mean enormous cost in changing things, a cost too great to bear? N Korea as you say has a form of nuclear weapons so that too would likely involve massive cost to somebody.
I guess the question does then arise, should the world interfere what options do you give those people afterward? Possiblty people who are illiterate and uneducated in a large part and would they know the difference? | |
| |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 01:24 - Jul 1 with 746 views | Kropotkin123 |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 00:57 - Jul 1 by Coastalblue |
Understand what you've said there, but by we I mean us as citizens of the world. I know I'm being incredibly simplistic about it, but I wonder where the moral boundary exists for people?
China mentioned above has the sort of power and resources that would mean enormous cost in changing things, a cost too great to bear? N Korea as you say has a form of nuclear weapons so that too would likely involve massive cost to somebody.
I guess the question does then arise, should the world interfere what options do you give those people afterward? Possiblty people who are illiterate and uneducated in a large part and would they know the difference? |
Yeah, I believe it is morally wrong to inflict millions of deaths upon the South Koreans. Maybe I'm bias as I lived there for two years, have Korean friends and some of my wife's family live there.
China may be able to exert enough pressure on the regime, when Kim Jong-Un dies, to install a stable puppet government. You wouldn't have the same level of control, but it's not like China is a free and fair society. So I think internal change is better.
In the North Korean scenario it isn't even about options afterwards. A realistic death toll figure within a week might be 10m South Koreans. Estimated deaths would be 800k per bomb launched on South Korea. They have about 40 nukes and add about 7 per year. Japan would also be hit. With deaths per bomb estimated to be about 600k.
You can't, in good conscience, initiate something like that. We need to find another way. Our way of evaluating and resolving issues like North Korea needs to evolve. | |
| Submit your 1-24 league prediction here -https://www.twtd.co.uk/forum/514096/page:1 - for the opportunity to get a free Ipswich top. | | Poll: | Would you rather | | Blog: | Round Four: Eagle |
| |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 07:11 - Jul 1 with 604 views | 26_Paz |
Intervening in North Korea would be a huge military operation and cost many, many casualties. That’s even in the unlikely event that China didn’t get involved. If they do it’s world war 3. I think this one has, understandably, been in the ‘too difficult’ box for sometime. |  |
| |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 08:16 - Jul 1 with 526 views | solomon |
They do, it’s just Kim uses all of it for his hair. |  | | |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 09:03 - Jul 1 with 492 views | SouperJim |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 00:19 - Jul 1 by jeera |
You'd think that probably China would have annexed it if there were those kind of resources i suppose. |
Yes, long long ago, making the subject of what would happen *now* if North Korea had these resources pretty redundant... |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 09:20 - Jul 1 with 462 views | cressi |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 09:03 - Jul 1 by SouperJim |
Yes, long long ago, making the subject of what would happen *now* if North Korea had these resources pretty redundant... |
Saudi Arabia got oil and hardly have a great human rights agenda, But we say nothing I wonder why ? | | | |
| Would North Korea exist if it had lots of oil? on 09:59 - Jul 1 with 432 views | Guthrum |
Yes, in much the same way Malaysia, the Gulf States, Saudi Arabia, various Caribbean coastal nations, much of West Africa, etc., still exist.
This is where the argument that Iraq and Syria were just about oil falls down. If the USA were really interested in nothing more than a rapacious resource-grab, there are loads of easier and less geopolitically sensitive places to go after.
For that matter, North Korea does possess abundant, valuable natural resources (if not oil). Mining and exporting those is the main reason they have been able to survive economically. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
