10 interpretations of who started WW1

[crazy canuck]

My answer is unchanged.  I think President Boehner feels he has to respond but is unwilling to go too far or else risk all out war with China.  I think a major bombing raid over various DPRK cites linked to the Kim family and the military will be hit, and then matters are over.  I also think China and ROK are given a quiet heads up to limit the risks of escalation, and to allow ROK to prepare for potential counter-attack.

There are some factors that are unknown here. If no allies will support us (South Korea, Japan), there is only so far we can go. But I think you are wrong--we wouldn't back off short of something that could pass for regime change.

Really?  You're going to risk WWIII with China over an Obama being assassinated (and remember this is President Boehner we're talking about)?

Yes.  It's a serious attack not just some slight.  The US should go to war over something like that.  One of things that keeps the peace is the knowledge that states will fight if sufficiently provoked.  There should be no ambiguity on whether the US would respond, if there is it only invites further and worse attacks.  It's similar to the principle that the US would kill millions of people if the Soviet army founded itself in the wrong neighborhood of Berlin.

Great, so some terrorist cell manages to kill the President, blames China and the US blows up the world.  Just great.

[Ed Anger]

It needs blowing up.

[crazy canuck]

It needs blowing up.

That is a separate issue that deserves its own thread

[Ed Anger]

The United States, in its final death rattle, should empty its nuclear aresnal in a final fuck you gesture.

[alfred russel]

Since 1945 the US has become a master at using it's military might in only limited means.  From sending STUXNET to Iran, to bombing Libya in the 1980s, bombing Serbia in the 90s, supporting various coups or opposition groups... The US has multiple means of responding, and even using its "fancy weapons systems", without resorting to full scale "boots on the ground" war.

I think the outcome would need to be something that resembled regime change. If that could be achieved through a computer virus or other technique, then I agree. Since we are presupposing the support of China, I'm not sure it can be done.

CC--the hypothetical assumes that North Korea had the president killed and China backed them up.

[crazy canuck]

CC--the hypothetical assumes that North Korea had the president killed and China backed them up.

Ah, I see.  That changes my view.

[Barrister]

CC--the hypothetical assumes that North Korea had the president killed and China backed them up.

Ah, I see.  That changes my view.

Does it?

The hypothetical is that North Korean agents assassinate Obama (and Biden too,apparently).  China gives some level of support to North Korean, or at least warns the US it does not have carte blanche in responding to the situation.

So what does newly sworn President Boehner do?

[Ed Anger]

Cries.

[alfred russel]

Does it?

The hypothetical is that North Korean agents assassinate Obama (and Biden too,apparently).  China gives some level of support to North Korean, or at least warns the US it does not have carte blanche in responding to the situation.

So what does newly sworn President Boehner do?

I don't know if this breaks the hypothetical or not, but I get the sense that China recognizes the North Koreans are crazy. In the actual event, I think China and the US would agree to some sort of regime change with a Chinese backed government in North Korea.

[Barrister]

Does it?

The hypothetical is that North Korean agents assassinate Obama (and Biden too,apparently).  China gives some level of support to North Korean, or at least warns the US it does not have carte blanche in responding to the situation.

So what does newly sworn President Boehner do?

I don't know if this breaks the hypothetical or not, but I get the sense that China recognizes the North Koreans are crazy. In the actual event, I think China and the US would agree to some sort of regime change with a Chinese backed government in North Korea.

I think it does break the hypothetical because we're trying to make an analogy to AH's actions in the summer of 1914.  It would not have been a valid option in 1914 for Russia to say "tell you what - we'll just invade Serbia for you instead".

Besides, China has a very odd relationship with NK.  It's a "we know they're crazy, but they're our crazy friend and we don't want them hurt too badly".  They've been quite clear they want to preserve their relationship with NK.

[Razgovory]

CC--the hypothetical assumes that North Korea had the president killed and China backed them up.

Ah, I see.  That changes my view.

Does it?

The hypothetical is that North Korean agents assassinate Obama (and Biden too,apparently).  China gives some level of support to North Korean, or at least warns the US it does not have carte blanche in responding to the situation.

So what does newly sworn President Boehner do?

He should go ahead and beat the shit out of North Korea.  You have to drawn the line somewhere, if you don't set it at assassinating the President, where do you set it?  Like I said, same thing with West Berlin.

Remember, that Pakistan had strong relations with Afghanistan before 9/11, they cut those relations because they knew the US was going to fight.  The certainty of how a state will react decreases the chances of wide spread wars.

[Sheilbh]

Cries.

[Jacob]

Besides, China has a very odd relationship with NK.  It's a "we know they're crazy, but they're our crazy friend and we don't want them hurt too badly".  They've been quite clear they want to preserve their relationship with NK.

I don't think it's so much "they're our crazy friend and we don't want them hurt too badly" but rather "they're our crazy friend, and if we stop being his friend the craziness will cause way more trouble than maintaining the friendship does" is more likely. China won't stand by North Korea if the calculus suggests it's not worth it.

[crazy canuck]

CC--the hypothetical assumes that North Korea had the president killed and China backed them up.

Ah, I see.  That changes my view.

Does it?

The hypothetical is that North Korean agents assassinate Obama (and Biden too,apparently).  China gives some level of support to North Korean, or at least warns the US it does not have carte blanche in responding to the situation.

So what does newly sworn President Boehner do?

It would change my view if China had something to do with killing the President - that is what I thought AF meant by "backed them up".  That to me would be beyond the pale and essentially an act of war.

But if the hypothetical is N. Korea does something incredibly stupid like killing the President then the US would likely not go to war if it meant war with China - I think it much more likely that something else would be worked out short of war with China.

[chipwich]

None of the historians who said Britain or Russia actually built a case for that.