Korea war, WW3 and the China dominance

[Darsh]

The war between North and South Korea will be join by China who will protect the North and USA who will protect the South and after some years of war USA will retreat definitly of Korea because they couldn't defeated the Chinese army even if they are inflicted more heavily damages. The South will be invaded and China will becoming the first economical and military power on the world.

[Adar]

The war between North and South Korea will be join by China who will protect the North and USA who will protect the South and after some years of war USA will retreat definitly of Korea because they couldn't defeated the Chinese army even if they are inflicted more heavily damages. The South will be invaded and China will becoming the first economical and military power on the world.

I think your utterly and completely wrong. I don't even think China will be willing to fight USA over Korea since:

1.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

China import materials worth 116.8 billion $. This in combination with labour unrest mean that China cannot afford to dominate the world by warfare. China got two advantages, time and an utter lack of respect for human rights that give them an edge in the world market.

2.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

3.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The US airforce got bases in Japan and Korea. China does not have any possibility to strike mainland USA but USA got the ability to strike anywhere in China.

I only fear two things when it comes to USA maintaining their dominating position in the world. I support a US dominance since they have proven themselves to be far less dangerous than any other superpower in history.

Things that I fear will threaten US dominance in the long term:
1) The problems with their economy.

2) Their tendency to buy more expensive and advanced military hardware. Quantity got a quality of it's own but lobbyists want as much money as possible and therefore push for wasteful projects. In a war with China they need as many bombs as possible much more than they need the ability to fly them there in the flashiest way possible.

[Atatürk]

The USA will collapse under its own weight.

[Tiberios]

I agree with Adar. IMO, China will not go to war, they have everything to loose and very little to gain. The might end up keeping an even more destitue N. Korea and in return have it's relationship with the US and South Korea destroyed, suffer damage and casualties as a result of the war, which would probably also shatter their economic growth.

[Captain Jin]

The war between North and South Korea will be join by China who will protect the North and USA who will protect the South and after some years of war USA will retreat definitly of Korea because they couldn't defeated the Chinese army even if they are inflicted more heavily damages. The South will be invaded and China will becoming the first economical and military power on the world.

Lol yeah right. Another one of those loony ideas that China would fight America over Korea. For crying out loud, it makes no sense. China and America are far more interested in working together on issues than to start a big gigantic war that serves little to no purpose. You just don't understand that. America may want to remain the dominant force on the globe, but it hasn't done much to halt China's own rise and has rather welcomed it to the table and encouraged it to act more on the international stage. If anything China's influence over NK could be one of the only peaceful avenues to solve the NK issue, not vice versa. I don't really get why people think China has some blind obedient need to protect North Korea.

[Vizsla]

The west owes a lot of money to China. If they went to war with us they wouldn’t get it back.
A good 90% of the products I buy say ‘Made in China’. What are all those Chinese workers going to do if they can’t sell us their goods because we’re at war?
So China has a vested interest in bringing US hegemony down by peaceful means. They have the time, the resources and most of the money.

[CiviC]

The west owes a lot of money to China. If they went to war with us they wouldn’t get it back.
A good 90% of the products I buy say ‘Made in China’. What are all those Chinese workers going to do if they can’t sell us their goods because we’re at war?
So China has a vested interest in bringing US hegemony down by peaceful means. They have the time, the resources and most of the money.

I completely agree, China has much more to loose then US/West in case of a war involving both. It's the best way for US to write off all her debts to China and China will loose her export markets. Imagine one year without exports to the West and the effects to Chinese economy and social stability ...

[Stario]

The war between North and South Korea will be join by China who will protect the North and USA who will protect the South and after some years of war USA will retreat definitly of Korea because they couldn't defeated the Chinese army even if they are inflicted more heavily damages. The South will be invaded and China will becoming the first economical and military power on the world.

It is a possibility. I also wonder on which side the "Middle East", Russia, and the former Soviet states will play should such a scenario materialise into reality. With that said it is a fact that our IQ's are increasing with each generation. So hopefully we wont make the same mistake as our forefathers since our IQ's (on average) are now some points higher.

[Tiberios]

It is a possibility. I also wonder on which side the "Middle East", Russia, and the former Soviet states will play should such a scenario materialise into reality. With that said it is a fact that our IQ's are increasing with each generation. So hopefully we wont make the same mistake as our forefathers since our IQ's (on average) are now some points higher.

What would the "Middle East" and Russia gain from entering this conflict?

[Stario]

What would the "Middle East" and Russia gain from entering this conflict?

Simply a weaker USA (assuming USA loses/comes out badly as a result of such conflict). For the Middle East this could mean the end of the occupation by US-forces of the region. As for Russia they currently have strong relations with China and strong trade (they have even elected to use their own currencies and not the US$ with regards to trade between the two sovereignties). If China was to declare support for N.Korea and the USA supported S.Korea there is a chance that Russia might also support China if not to maintain good relations/trade then just to weaken USA and therefore strengthening itself as a "world superpower". If history tells us anything, Russia (or more precisely the Soviet Union) and USA have always been mostly on opposite sides.

[Tiberios]

If North Korea invade the South, USA should help the South and invade NK and China won't stayed without do nothing.

China isn't stupid. A full blown war with the US would be the worst thing that could happen. They would gain absolutely nothing and risk having their economy ruined as she would loose large trading partners and markets and in the worst case end up in a nuclear war with the US.

Simply a weaker USA (assuming USA loses/comes out badly as a result of such conflict). For the Middle East this could mean the end of the occupation by US-forces of the region. As for Russia they currently have stong relations with China and strong trade (they have even decided to use their own currencies and not the US$ with regards to trade between the two sovereignties). If China was to declare support for N.Korea and the USA supported S.Korea there is a chance that Russia might also support China if not to maintain good relations/trade then just to weaken USA and therefore strengthening itself as a "world superpower."

First off as the Middle East is not a united region, parts of the Middle East wouldn't be too interrested in a weakened US. Israel, Saudi Arabia and probably Egypt, Turkey, Iraq and Jordan would not want the US to leave since that would mean that Iran could increase their influence. Syria and Iran wouldn't mind the US loosing influence.

Secondly I cannot see why Russia would want to get involved. China is also a potential threat to Russia and getting involved in a conflict with either the US or China would be stupid, so I guess the RF would stay very neutral. They have nothing to gain.

[intel]

Secondly I cannot see why Russia would want to get involved. China is also a potential threat to China and getting involved in a conflict with either the US or China would be stupid, so I guess the RF would stay very neutral. They have nothing to gain.

You're right, although in case of Russia a better move would be to step in when the outcome of war is already decided.

[Stario]

First off as the Middle East is not a united region, parts of the Middle East wouldn't be too interrested in a weakened US. Israel, Saudi Arabia and probably Egypt, Turkey, Iraq and Jordan would not want the US to leave since that would mean that Iran could increase their influence. Syria and Iran wouldn't mind the US loosing influence.

Secondly I cannot see why Russia would want to get involved. China is also a potential threat to Russia and getting involved in a conflict with either the US or China would be stupid, so I guess the RF would stay very neutral. They have nothing to gain.

For your first point, this could be the conflict to unify them as they are ethnically more similar with each other then the west. This is not a totally new concept when you look at history, such as the Greek warring states and the Greco-Persian wars etc. But hey I am just speculating, no one could really predict what would happen.

For your second point, I am not disputing that Russia wouldn't benefit from being opportunistic and staying neutral until its clearer which side will favour them most, heck they may even support USA; though highly unlikely IMO going by history and their current relations with China. It also depends on how the spoils of war ends up getting divided; if China was to gain too much territory/power then I don't see Russia supporting her. However, if power/territory is to be divided equally then I see this possibility materialising. Russia is also technologically more advanced than China at present (though China is quickly catching up), so knocking out USA will make them the "top dog" (this is what they have to gain), while knocking out China will still make them second best and possibly even weaken her (Russia) as her relations with China is very strong at present. I also doubt Russia would be allowed to stay neutral for too long as both sides would probably pressure her to "get off the fence". Again this is just speculating as it is impossible to predict what would really happen.

You're right, although in case of Russia a better move would be to step in when the outcome of war is already decided.

+1

[King Gambrinus]

Simply a weaker USA (assuming USA loses/comes out badly as a result of such conflict). For the Middle East this could mean the end of the occupation by US-forces of the region. As for Russia they currently have strong relations with China and strong trade (they have even elected to use their own currencies and not the US$ with regards to trade between the two sovereignties). If China was to declare support for N.Korea and the USA supported S.Korea there is a chance that Russia might also support China if not to maintain good relations/trade then just to weaken USA and therefore strengthening itself as a "world superpower". If history tells us anything, Russia (or more precisely the Soviet Union) and USA have always been mostly on opposite sides.

I disagree with the fact that you think Russia would join China's side. They'd much rather join the US in exchange for upper Mongolia and North Korea. All the Russians want is more political power now, eventually taking over from the USA.

The middle eastern extremists would probably just attack both.

[Adar]

Simply a weaker USA (assuming USA loses/comes out badly as a result of such conflict). For the Middle East this could mean the end of the occupation by US-forces of the region. As for Russia they currently have strong relations with China and strong trade (they have even elected to use their own currencies and not the US$ with regards to trade between the two sovereignties). If China was to declare support for N.Korea and the USA supported S.Korea there is a chance that Russia might also support China if not to maintain good relations/trade then just to weaken USA and therefore strengthening itself as a "world superpower". If history tells us anything, Russia (or more precisely the Soviet Union) and USA have always been mostly on opposite sides.

But the problem is that the middle east is divided into at least three major factions. Israel, Iran-Syria and the Sunnite Arabs. Believing the the middle east would unite against America is almost as ignorant as believing that Europe would unite against America in 1914.

The Sunnites are so scared of Iran that they even urged USA to attack Iran for them according to Wikileaks (source):

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Saudi Arabia repeatedly pushed America to attack Iran in a bid to stop it developing nuclear weapons, confidential US documents reveal. Skip related content
Related photos / videos
Wikileaks: Saudi Arabia Urged Attack On Iran
Play video
Wikileaks: Saudi Arabia Urged Attack On Iran Play video
WikiLeaks: Saudi Arabia Urged Attack On Iran Enlarge photo

Related content
Wikileaks: the claims
Iran obtained missiles from North Korea: leaked US documents
WikiLeaks unleashes flood of confidential US cables
Related Hot Topic: Iran

Have your say: Iran

The revelation is among thousands of potentially embarrassing US documents that were due to be published by whistleblower website WikiLeaks, which had said it is under cyber attack.

But newspapers working in partnership with the organisation have begun releasing details of the disclosures of messages sent by US diplomats across the globe.

They show leaders in Saudi insisted an attack on Iran was necessary to "cut the head off the snake" of its nuclear programme.

And separate entries say Iran has sophisticated missiles from North Korea capable of hitting Europe - which it is using as building blocks to assemble longer-range weapons.

The leaked messages also reveal US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told American diplomats to spy on other countries' diplomats at the UN.

Other cables allege links between the Russian government and organised crime and make devastating criticisms of the UK's military operations in Afghanistan.

A member of the Royal family was said to have behaved innappropriately in one message, while Obama was described as having "no feelings for Europe" in another.

The leaks also show London and Washington had grave concerns about the security of Pakistan's weapons programmes.

Chinese government operatives waged a campaign of computer sabotage, according to another leaked message.

Another cable from a US diplomat referred to Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin as an "Alpha dog".

Further revelations suggest US diplomats pressed other countries to resettle Guantanamo detainees.

One diplomat also said in a cable that Libyan leader Colonel Gadafi was accompanied everywhere by a "hot", voluptuous, blond Ukranian nurse.

Afghan president Hamid Karzai was said to be "driven by paranoia" in another cable.

Reports have now emerged that the source of the leaks was a US serviceman, in the Intelligence Corp, who has been arrested.

Sky News' foreign affairs editor Tim Marshall said: "There is no question (the disclosures) will be deeply damaging for the Americans."

International security expert Bob Ayers told Sky News: "It's mind-blowing, it's all-encompassing and touches on all aspects of US foreign relations.

"The repercussions are going to continue for days, weeks and months.

"We'll see a tendency for diplomats to be much more reserved in what they say because they are afraid they are going to end up on the front of the newspapers."

American ambassador to the UK Louis Susman said he "condemned" the disclosures and that the US government was "taking steps to prevent future security breaches".

He also claimed the disclosures had "the very real potential to harm innocent people" but insisted the cables "should not be seen as representing US policy on their own".

He said the leaks were "harmful to the US and our interests".

"However, I am confident that our uniquely productive relationship with the UK will remain close and strong, focused on promoting our shared objectives and values," he said.

"Releasing documents of this kind place at risk the lives of innocent individuals - from journalists to human rights activists and bloggers to soldiers and diplomats.

"It is reprehensible for any individual or organisation to attempt to gain notoriety at the expense of people who had every expectation of privacy in sharing information."

Downing Street also condemned the leaks.

A White House statement said: "President Obama supports responsible, accountable, and open government at home and around the world, but this reckless and dangerous action runs counter to that goal."

More information follows...

[Haakon]

The war between North and South Korea will be join by China who will protect the North and USA who will protect the South and after some years of war USA will retreat definitly of Korea because they couldn't defeated the Chinese army even if they are inflicted more heavily damages. The South will be invaded and China will becoming the first economical and military power on the world.

Im sorry but this is stupid beyond words. You seem to be terrible at analysis, so terrible had this been the field of music you would be tone deaf.
There is no way any of what you write would ever happen, but the most disturbing part is the lack of questionmarks which indicates you are not asking, that you actually believe in this scenario.

[DarkArk]

The one thing I'm going to say to people that say China going to defend North Korea makes no since is: people are not rational actors.

People gave the exact same argument before WWI, and they were right. It was terrible and horrifying and significantly weaken Europe's power base. That didn't stop the war from happening.

If there's going to be a reason why China and the USA prevent go to war, it isn't going to be over their economic ties. It's going to be because the war will likely be over in about six hours. I do however somewhat question China's ability to have MAD. They only have about a hundred missiles that can hit the mainland US, and that isn't enough to completely destroy the country.

[Darsh]

Wars are always coming for stupid and irrationnal reasons, like WW1 USA and China could join a war because of a chain reaction and not loose the face.

If North Korea invade the South, USA should help the South and invade NK and China won't stayed without do nothing.

[NotYetRegistered]

Wars are always coming for stupid and irrationnal reasons, like WW1 USA and China could join a war because of a chain reaction and not loose the face.

If North Korea invade the South, USA should help the South and invade NK and China won't stayed without do nothing.

And then an economic disaster for China.

Suure.

[Captain Jin]

Ugh too many people watching movies and playing video games coming up with fantastical chain reactions that will lead to a big war. The stupid thing is to think that Europe wasn't ready and willing to go to war in WWI. I'm sorry, it may have been a chain of events that led to the war, but let's try and not forget the fact that Europe was a hotbed of wars for the previous hundreds of years that often involved multiple countries and alliances over a broad amount of the continent. The biggest difference about WWI was that it was many players now going to war with outdated tactics and new technology that made killing easier. I'm sure if the Napoleonic wars were fought with WWI technology they'd have been equally cataclysmic if not more so. And how many wars came after that?