The whole world is on fire, isn't it?

[T.Lex]

Seems to me that an end to the ceasefire helps S. Korea. Day +1, start sending people across the border. DPRK would fold overnight.

We go to China the day before and say, "Hey, your little friend is going to fall. Why don't we do a Taiwan type thing. The new DPRK will have a puppet gov't, but it has to be normalized to play well with the rest of the world."

I think China is almost as frustrated as we are. (Ok, maybe not, but more frustrated than they used to be.) If we can figure out an arrangement that keeps a NK as a buffer state, they would probably accept it.

And, the point of the OP was more meta than just NK/SK, I get that. But I'd been thinking the same kind of thing.

 

[printcraft]

Vice guide to NK 3 parter.

The VICE Guide to North Korea | VICE United States

N.K. is a weird joint for sure.

They are the ones behind the Rodman trip I believe.

 

[88GT]

Sorry. Not in the mood to play games with you. I made a legitimate comment in your post and asked a legitimate question. No need to get butthurt.

Translation: oh, ****, I just stepped in it and now I'm trying to look like I meant to do that.

 

[Liberty1911]

Translation: oh, ****, I just stepped in it and now I'm trying to look like I meant to do that.

Not quite. I really have no idea what you're getting at. Sounds like you just want to play games.

If you have a point, make it.

 

[88GT]

Not quite. I really have no idea what you're getting at. Sounds like you just want to play games.

If you have a point, make it.

Fine. You made a wildly unrelated comment to a post, got called on it, and now you can't answer a simple question about how you got from A to B.

In answer to YOUR question: the original post actually has a couple of parallel points.

First, that contemporary observers to events see them through their own personal prisms. What is unimportant or trivial to some may be earth-shattering to others.

Second, any of these events, even the seemingly mundane ones, really could be the spark that ignites the conflagration. Who would have suspected that the assassination of the ArchDuke would have touched off WW1? Or that the election of Hitler would eventually lead to WW2?

Third, current events may be terrifying and horrific in their own right, but when viewed by disinterested eyes 30, 40, 50 years down the road, amount to nothing more than a blip in geopolitical relations, having no long-term consequences of any import.

I could have used any one of a dozen news stories to prove the point. I just picked that one because as far as INGO goes, it hasn't received a lot of coverage lately.

So how is it that you thought my post was about the SKoreans needing help again?

 

[Liberty1911]

Fine. You made a wildly unrelated comment to a post, got called on it, and now you can't answer a simple question about how you got from A to B.

In answer to YOUR question: the original post actually has a couple of parallel points.

First, that contemporary observers to events see them through their own personal prisms. What is unimportant or trivial to some may be earth-shattering to others.

Second, any of these events, even the seemingly mundane ones, really could be the spark that ignites the conflagration. Who would have suspected that the assassination of the ArchDuke would have touched off WW1? Or that the election of Hitler would eventually lead to WW2?

Third, current events may be terrifying and horrific in their own right, but when viewed by disinterested eyes 30, 40, 50 years down the road, amount to nothing more than a blip in geopolitical relations, having no long-term consequences of any import.

I could have used any one of a dozen news stories to prove the point. I just picked that one because as far as INGO goes, it hasn't received a lot of coverage lately.

So how is it that you thought my post was about the SKoreans needing help again?

My comment was directed at the specific example you cited, the end of the cease fire. From that, I was just making the point that we really have no business being involved, in my opinion. S. Korea is perfectly capable of defending themselves sans intervention from China.

So, it shouldn't be something that "sets the world on fire" from our perspective unless we choose to have it be so. Which we will undoubtedly do anyway.

That observation seemed completely relevant to me as far as your OP was concerned. Whether or not I elaborated well enough for everyone to understand, or if you think that point is "wildly unrelated", then that's fair enough.

But sheesh, don't be such a drama queen next time. If you have a problem with something I posted, make your point, or ask for clarification. No need for all the histrionics. I'm not trying to troll your threads, or purposely derail them. It's just the internet, no need to take anything personally.