Poll of the Day > South Korea elects Conservative leader, promises to be tough on Kim Jong Un

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/south-korea-election-president-yoon-suk-yeol-teach-rude-boy-kim-jong-manners/

"If you give me a chance, I will teach him some manners," Yoon said on the campaign trail, promising to make Kim "snap out of it" if he was elected.

"We are aware of the growing North Korean nuclear threat, and amid the tensions of the U.S.-China strategic competition, we are also faced with the task of strengthening our global diplomatic capabilities," Yoon said in a speech on Thursday, adding that "to protect people's safety, property, territory and sovereignty," South Korea would also "build a strong national defense force."

I don't think Yoon will be able to do much proactive about North Korea but Moon's attempts to kill him with kindness have failed miserably. Lee would've likely kept doing the same thing with the same result. At least Yoon might pay attention to the US aspect of the relationship that Moon didn't/couldn't (I'm willing to cut him slack given his counterpart was Trump for most of his presidency).

Realistically the whole alliance should be building military now. For when Russia attacks. Or when North Korea attacks, or when China finally gets tired to Taiwan doing its own thing like it did with Hong Kong.
This is the era of world war 3. We need to be ready.

SinisterSlay posted...

Realistically the whole alliance should be building military now. For when Russia attacks. Or when North Korea attacks, or when China finally gets tired to Taiwan doing its own thing like it did with Hong Kong.
This is the era of world war 3. We need to be ready.

Didn't you hear the crazies? You have to cut the military budget so more money can be thrown at the useless elements at society, defund the police (oh, but not in THAT WAY, in MY WAY which would totally work and hasn't been a failure before!!!) and other assortment of very intelligent plans which totally won't weaken the country. After all, it's not like our opponents on the world stage ever do anything bad or anything.

Seems to be escalation too because South Korea fired a warning missile at the North

https://news.sky.com/story/south-korea-reportedly-fires-warning-shot-at-north-korean-ship-as-pyongyang-ramps-up-nuclear-testing-12560420

Consider SK relies on the US for its military, I'm not sure what they expect to do. It's not SK's military might keeping NK at bay.

If the new leader is planning on investing in SK's military, that might be different... but then SK would also need a larger standing military.

SomeUsername529 posted...

At least Yoon might pay attention to the US aspect of the relationship that Moon didn't/couldn't (I'm willing to cut him slack given his counterpart was Trump for most of his presidency).

Biden will be strictly worse than Trump when it comes to military expenditures. As for their stances on NK, Trump's willingness to come to the table with KJU was a mixed blessing. Nothing productive came out of the talks, but it might've lessened KJU's need to saber rattle to make himself look strong. And, honestly, at some point world leaders should try to negotiate for reform instead of sticking to the failed policy of isolation, particularly since the isolation policies are dangerous when you have a number of isolated nations who can build into factions -- not that America's leadership ever learned anything from history nor are the guys focused on domestic issues necessarily right for resolving foreign relation problems.

SinisterSlay posted...

Realistically the whole alliance should be building military now. For when Russia attacks. Or when North Korea attacks, or when China finally gets tired to Taiwan doing its own thing like it did with Hong Kong.
This is the era of world war 3. We need to be ready.

I mean, the US's foreign policy of cutting off nations until they play ball is exactly what's going to lead to an actual world war 3. Commerce and international trade had largely served to calm international relations, because it's much more inconvenient to war with a trading partner than a nation with whom you don't have a trade partnership. Which also comes to the issue with sanctions as a tool, because they quickly lose their value.

T... had a foreign policy other than to kiss up to Putin and/or any authoritarian ruler, Kim Jung Un included, because he saw them as strong? How could anyone forget his press conference with Putin at Helsinki where T... looked as if Putin was leading him around by the nose.

The_Viscount posted...

Consider SK relies on the US for its military, I'm not sure what they expect to do. It's not SK's military might keeping NK at bay.

If the new leader is planning on investing in SK's military, that might be different... but then SK would also need a larger standing military.

Biden will be strictly worse than Trump when it comes to military expenditures. As for their stances on NK, Trump's willingness to come to the table with KJU was a mixed blessing. Nothing productive came out of the talks, but it might've lessened KJU's need to saber rattle to make himself look strong. And, honestly, at some point world leaders should try to negotiate for reform instead of sticking to the failed policy of isolation, particularly since the isolation policies are dangerous when you have a number of isolated nations who can build into factions -- not that America's leadership ever learned anything from history nor are the guys focused on domestic issues necessarily right for resolving foreign relation problems.

I mean, the US's foreign policy of cutting off nations until they play ball is exactly what's going to lead to an actual world war 3. Commerce and international trade had largely served to calm international relations, because it's much more inconvenient to war with a trading partner than a nation with whom you don't have a trade partnership. Which also comes to the issue with sanctions as a tool, because they quickly lose their value.

Everything you said is wrong, lol

SomeUsername529 posted...

Everything you said is wrong, lol

Considering your lack of political knowledge and tenuous grasp of history, I shouldn't be surprised by your opinion. The fact you disregard the importance of international trade is nothing short of stunning.