Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Purveyor

(29,876 posts)
Thu Mar 7, 2013, 11:52 PM Mar 2013

North Korea Cancels Peace Agreement With South (cancelling 'hotline')

Source: Associated Press

North Korea is cancelling a hotline and a nonaggression pact with South Korea and reiterating past threats in anger over a U.N. Security Council vote to impose more sanctions on the North for its third nuclear test.

The statement the North issued Friday comes after the council leveled tough, new sanctions targeting the North's economy and leadership. North Korea already has threatened of a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the United States.

North Korea says it will retaliate with "crushing strikes" if enemies intrude into its territory. It also says it is voiding past nuclear disarmament statements between North and South Korea.

It previously said it was canceling a hotline with the United States and the armistice that closed the Korean War in 1953

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/03/07/north-korea-cancels-peace-deal.html

29 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
North Korea Cancels Peace Agreement With South (cancelling 'hotline') (Original Post) Purveyor Mar 2013 OP
From the article. R. Daneel Olivaw Mar 2013 #1
The Bicentennial Man! Demeter Mar 2013 #3
How has North Korea been abused by the world? SkyDaddy7 Mar 2013 #22
Who knows which way the wind blows? SCVDem Mar 2013 #7
China doesn't like the consequences of a nuclear N. Korea to begin with. Gore1FL Mar 2013 #8
OK, China, North Korea is YOUR toddler. You need to put them down for their nap now. nt DRoseDARs Mar 2013 #2
The North Korean Government needs to be put down, permanently davidpdx Mar 2013 #19
If NK were to invade SK again, should we be satisified with 'saving SK' but leaving the NK regime pampango Mar 2013 #23
That is one of the problems Lurks Often Mar 2013 #24
South Koreans aren't anxious to reunite that is true davidpdx Mar 2013 #27
Hypothetically I believe the answer would be davidpdx Mar 2013 #26
I would not take these threats lightly. olddad56 Mar 2013 #4
"I would not take these threats lightly." Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #6
NK threatens us every other week SpartanDem Mar 2013 #10
Ugh. Apparently the Little Un is even more delusional than his dad. This does not bode well. riderinthestorm Mar 2013 #5
Everything was going just fine until we sent the Worm over there. bluedigger Mar 2013 #9
Erm, no. Rodman was a bizarre sideshow from out of nowhere, but this escalation has been long. nt DRoseDARs Mar 2013 #12
Either your snark detector needs recalibrating or I need better material. bluedigger Mar 2013 #13
Head-to-wall smiley threw me off. DRoseDARs Mar 2013 #14
Hah! My false flag operation worked! bluedigger Mar 2013 #15
I hope it is made absolutely clear to them that if they nuke the US, Nye Bevan Mar 2013 #11
We don't need to tell them. The Russians and Chinese already told them first hand. Selatius Mar 2013 #16
The problem is they still need a method of delivery of a bomb davidpdx Mar 2013 #20
Bombing them back to the Stone Age doesn't mean much One_Life_To_Give Mar 2013 #25
Iron Dome? SCVDem Mar 2013 #17
The thing's hardly omnipotent Posteritatis Mar 2013 #18
I have always wondered how ID would work against MIRVs. R. Daneel Olivaw Mar 2013 #28
You can't cancel something that is still in effect davidpdx Mar 2013 #21
They didn't really cancel it. The phone company shut it down because NK was three months behind... slackmaster Mar 2013 #29
 

R. Daneel Olivaw

(12,606 posts)
1. From the article.
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 12:00 AM
Mar 2013
The vote Thursday by the UN's most powerful body on a resolution drafted by North Korea's closest ally, China, and the United States sends a powerful message to North Korea that the international community condemns its ballistic missile and nuclear tests — and its repeated violation of Security Council resolutions.


I wouldn't have expected China to do that.
 

Demeter

(85,373 posts)
3. The Bicentennial Man!
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 12:02 AM
Mar 2013

Never underestimate the petulance of a closed mind. And North Korea has been run by a closed mind for generations....

And it's also been roundly abused by the world, but that's another issue, which N. Korea never raised...

 

SCVDem

(5,103 posts)
7. Who knows which way the wind blows?
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 12:53 AM
Mar 2013

It blows toward thee!

You don't think we would nuke Korea with the wind blowing any direction but toward China, do ya?

Gore1FL

(21,132 posts)
8. China doesn't like the consequences of a nuclear N. Korea to begin with.
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 12:56 AM
Mar 2013

It especially doesn't like the consequences of a chaotic Nuclear N. Korea. (a nuclear Japan being one of these.)

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
19. The North Korean Government needs to be put down, permanently
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 07:40 AM
Mar 2013

The world shouldn't have to put up with their shit anymore. China went along with the resolution, but I'm skeptical about them doing anything else.

pampango

(24,692 posts)
23. If NK were to invade SK again, should we be satisified with 'saving SK' but leaving the NK regime
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 08:43 AM
Mar 2013

as is or saving SK but somehow removing the NK regime (that's ambiguous, I know) with NK still a separate state or take the opportunity to reunite the peninsula under one government. (This all assumes for the sake of argument that NK was not successful in conquering SK by means of such an invasion.)

They all have drawbacks. Leaving the NK regime intact just 'pushes the can down the road' in some sense; removing the current NK regime but keeping the country intact might be acceptable to China but how do you do it; reunifying the peninsula would require China's agreement which seems unlikely.

Leaving the Kim family dictatorship intact seems to be the best option to me - as unappealing as it is. Even if NK were to be defeated militarily, Kim could always nuke Seoul or Tokyo (if his missiles can reach that far) even if they cannot reach the US now. (This kind of proves that nuclear weapons are a dictator's best friend.)

 

Lurks Often

(5,455 posts)
24. That is one of the problems
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 09:16 AM
Mar 2013

No one wants North Korea.

South Korea doesn't want it because it inherits a population of which the vast majority will be incapable of working at anything but the most basic work and it will wreck the South Korean economy for years to come fixing the problems that exist in North Korea.

China doesn't want to see a united Korea under South Korean rule on it's border, but doesn't want North Korea for itself for the same reasons listed above.

Any war will be short, violent and lead to North Korea being defeated. Of course this presumes that neither China or Russia is stupid enough to get actively involved in the shooting.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
27. South Koreans aren't anxious to reunite that is true
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 10:32 AM
Mar 2013

Any kind of a reunion would have to be a very gradual one over the course of a decade. The question of what would happen in terms of the US military would be an issue. Japan and China are well armed and both have invaded Korea in the past. The lingering disputes over the different islands (between all three countries) doesn't help either.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
26. Hypothetically I believe the answer would be
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 10:28 AM
Mar 2013

(whether the North attacked or collapsed) that Kim and the military would have to be taken out because they couldn't be controlled nor trusted. Some sort of alternative leadership would have to be put in place. The two countries would have to remain separate for quite a long time (we are talking a decade at a very minimum due to cost issues). The UN would have to send in peacekeepers (I read that an assessment that I believe stated 750,000 would be needed, but I can't remember where). A public project works program would have to be developed to start to repair the infrastructure in the country which would create jobs (much like it did in the 60s in South Korea), but the money would have to come from donations and alternative financing. Any nuclear material would need to be collected and if possible removed from the country. Restarting their farming industry would be a high priority to give them some way to at least partially self-sustain themselves. Rice would probably be donated by South Korea.

Now all this assumes things take place in a fairly peaceful way. It will probably be much messier than this. My understanding is the US has a contingency plan in place for the fall of North Korea.

 

Spitfire of ATJ

(32,723 posts)
6. "I would not take these threats lightly."
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 12:31 AM
Mar 2013

I would.

In international circles North Korea is taken about as seriously as Donald Trump but with no money.

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)
11. I hope it is made absolutely clear to them that if they nuke the US,
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 01:22 AM
Mar 2013

Pyongyang will be gone. And I mean gone. I would bet that our nukes are better than theirs.

Selatius

(20,441 posts)
16. We don't need to tell them. The Russians and Chinese already told them first hand.
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 02:29 AM
Mar 2013

During the Cold War, it's hard to imagine Russia or China not sharing information on the capabilities of American nuclear warheads with Pyongyang.

Their nukes bare more resemblance to the ones dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 15 to 25 kilotons.

Still, even their biggest tests have not breached the 10 kiloton threshold. They're newbies in atomic weapons design.

However, even a 7 kiloton device would kill tens of thousands in one hit if dropped on an urban area, such as South Korea's capital, and that should still be taken into consideration whenever confronting the DPRK.

On the other hand, their threats to hit the United States are laughable. They lack the missiles capable of going that far, and even if they currently did, their accuracy at that range is unproven, and it's likely their primitive atomic weapons designs are still too heavy for their missiles.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
20. The problem is they still need a method of delivery of a bomb
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 07:46 AM
Mar 2013

and their technology is shotty even at a short range. I don't think a nuke is a big threat for South Korea. Artillery would still be the bigger threat. Even then they would be bombed back to the stone age with in minutes of launching an artillery strike. I think I read in another article that simulations of a war started by North Korea would end within 24 hours and the US occupying North Korea.

My FIL is from a village outside Kaesong and still has relatives up there (who we have no idea).

One_Life_To_Give

(6,036 posts)
25. Bombing them back to the Stone Age doesn't mean much
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 09:21 AM
Mar 2013

when they never left the Stone Age.

Reminds me of Carpet bombing Hanoi and threats we made at that time.

Posteritatis

(18,807 posts)
18. The thing's hardly omnipotent
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 07:15 AM
Mar 2013

A few mortar rounds or rockets is one thing; thousands of artillery pieces is another.

 

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)
29. They didn't really cancel it. The phone company shut it down because NK was three months behind...
Fri Mar 8, 2013, 09:11 PM
Mar 2013

...on its bill.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»North Korea Cancels Peace...