4 ms·

Eh, that's more like a proxy war stalemate. It's not quite the same thing.

by JulianMorrison 10y ago

ethanbond 10y ago
What is a ceasefire if not a stalemate? Also it's not a proxy war to Koreans, obviously.
- avn2109 10y ago
  A stalemate is when the belligerents have fought to a draw. A ceasefire is when they could fight more but choose not to.
  - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
    In Korea, both sides definitely could fight more. So it's a ceasefire.
    - hga 10y ago
      But you're not counting the "Chinese volunteers" who completely turned around the result of the initial war. After they withdrew, it's very questionable the North could have fought some more.
      - Alupis 10y ago
        > it's very questionable the North could have fought some more China didn't enter the war "just because" - the main reason was the US encroachment on the Chinese border. By comparison, it would be as-if China was warring in Mexico, and the US decided to ensure China didn't continue marching northwards. Both China and the US more-or-less stood-down together, which left both North and South Korea in a tough spot - fighting could absolutely continue, however it would have been more of a drag on both nations without their "big brother" support. So, the ceasefire wasn't because one side of the other couldn't continue the fight - it was because both sides _could_ continue the fight, but both recognized it would be devastating for everyone. If we fast forward to today, it's unquestionable both sides (with or without foreign support) could continue to wage war on the other.
        hga 10y ago
        Well, it's demonstrably not "unquestionable", since I question every paragraph you've written above after the first. And most especially the last, for the North can't even feed its own army, and one of the many things standing in the way of reunification is the major difference in intelligence, height, and so on of the respective populations, the North being stunted from malnutrition. The South's hand has been stayed because they've not been willing to take the costs, especially to Seoul, infamously within heavy artillery range of the North, and of course our moderating influence. And now, of course, we've let the North get nukes....
        Alupis 10y ago
        "Could continue the war" isn't the same as "Want to continue the war". The ceasefire is/was a great way for both sides to "save face" and not admit defeat.
        emodendroket 10y ago
        Pretty impressive that a nation of starving imbeciles can have a successful nuclear weapons program.
        hga 10y ago
        Sort of, it's the least successful known, in that all others managed to light off a successful "full power" device on their first try, their first was a sub-kiloton fizzle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_North_Korean_nuclear_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_North_Korean_nuclear_test). However, one should note that they're part of a worldwide network of nations trying to achieve nuclear status sub rosa, they're definitely not doing it all by themselves. And of course their nomenklatura that's executing this nuclear program is by definition not starving. But the bulk of the nation is, and rather uniquely, that includes the army, and that has decisive implications on their ability to wage a general war against the South.
        emodendroket 10y ago

Eh, that's more like a proxy war stalemate. It's not quite the same thing.

ethanbond 10y ago

What is a ceasefire if not a stalemate? Also it's not a proxy war to Koreans, obviously.

avn2109 10y ago
A stalemate is when the belligerents have fought to a draw. A ceasefire is when they could fight more but choose not to.
- AnimalMuppet 10y ago
  In Korea, both sides definitely could fight more. So it's a ceasefire.
  - hga 10y ago
    But you're not counting the "Chinese volunteers" who completely turned around the result of the initial war. After they withdrew, it's very questionable the North could have fought some more.
    - Alupis 10y ago
      > it's very questionable the North could have fought some more China didn't enter the war "just because" - the main reason was the US encroachment on the Chinese border. By comparison, it would be as-if China was warring in Mexico, and the US decided to ensure China didn't continue marching northwards. Both China and the US more-or-less stood-down together, which left both North and South Korea in a tough spot - fighting could absolutely continue, however it would have been more of a drag on both nations without their "big brother" support. So, the ceasefire wasn't because one side of the other couldn't continue the fight - it was because both sides _could_ continue the fight, but both recognized it would be devastating for everyone. If we fast forward to today, it's unquestionable both sides (with or without foreign support) could continue to wage war on the other.
      - hga 10y ago
        Well, it's demonstrably not "unquestionable", since I question every paragraph you've written above after the first. And most especially the last, for the North can't even feed its own army, and one of the many things standing in the way of reunification is the major difference in intelligence, height, and so on of the respective populations, the North being stunted from malnutrition. The South's hand has been stayed because they've not been willing to take the costs, especially to Seoul, infamously within heavy artillery range of the North, and of course our moderating influence. And now, of course, we've let the North get nukes....
        Alupis 10y ago
        "Could continue the war" isn't the same as "Want to continue the war". The ceasefire is/was a great way for both sides to "save face" and not admit defeat.
        emodendroket 10y ago
        Pretty impressive that a nation of starving imbeciles can have a successful nuclear weapons program.
        hga 10y ago
        Sort of, it's the least successful known, in that all others managed to light off a successful "full power" device on their first try, their first was a sub-kiloton fizzle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_North_Korean_nuclear_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_North_Korean_nuclear_test). However, one should note that they're part of a worldwide network of nations trying to achieve nuclear status sub rosa, they're definitely not doing it all by themselves. And of course their nomenklatura that's executing this nuclear program is by definition not starving. But the bulk of the nation is, and rather uniquely, that includes the army, and that has decisive implications on their ability to wage a general war against the South.
        emodendroket 10y ago