"All wars end in a political resolutions."

Or you come up with legal loophole that makes them effectively surrender without actually surrendering. Alternatively - indefinite ceasefire.

*Sounds like a plan.

Late night, tired fingers.

Paraguay only surrendered after their leader died, losing like 60% of the population. If he hasn't caught up the war would probably continue.

Reportedly, India has similar last-resort retaliation plan, except it doesn't rely on raw force of nuclear arsenal but rather on guerilla warfare of biological characters in streets of all major cities.

Is the argument here that the only way to win a war is to kill every last man, woman and child in that country until it is empty of human life? Because aside from the impracticality of that, I'm sure other countries would step in, because genocide on that level can not be tolerated. Sure, ethnically cleansing a minority you can get away with, but wholescale extermination of tens of millions is a no-go.

>suppose that a country never surrenders. Never.
You're describing the historical roman state.

War is the means to an end, and at that end is a political resolution. What does a country do with the territory it's conquered via war? That's the political resolution.

What do you do if this country does win, targets everyone, and is victorious? That's yet another political resolution.

Anyways, you don't have to surrender if you don't lose, so a country that never surrenders simply has to win all the time.

>Does that mean the only way of winning is targetting everyone?
That's basically the only conclusion left for North Korea. Diplomacy and sanctions are not working, especially not with China refusing to participate as they are responsible for 90% of Best Korea's trade.

But at the same time, China knows it doesn't want to deal with the refugee crisis that will ultimately result from any military action (military action or assassination of leadership). And everyone knows a bombing of military assets, which will result in a retaliation strike against S. Korea, which will result in full-blown military action, which will ultimately result in a refugee crisis.

The best option is to glass the entire country. No chance of hidden military assets to bite you in the ass, no refugees. Certainly some guns will be fired at Seoul and some dipshits will engage in guerrilla warfare but at the end of the day there are no refugees and loss of life on our side will be absolutely minimal. Given the choice, I'm pretty sure everyone in the world will admit the lives of us are more important than the lives of every North Korean. And in China's case, it would rather blast every North Korean off the face of the planet than try to house and feed them; and if America is willing to do that for them, then it's win-win.

Consider Carthage.

And countries like Australia, who can't do missile defence due to huge landmass + spread out population.

Political doesn't have to mean non-violent and resolution doesn't have to mean a happy or agreeable end. If the government collapses before it surrenders various parts of what's left will do different things. Some people will surrender, some won't and will flee to exile or get killed. Depends on how committed/capable the attacking force is, and if their goal was surrender or something more genocidal.

If America just glassed North Korea, then America would become a pariah. You can't just exterminate a whole country and get away with it. Not to mention the nuclear fallout would poison half of Japan and possibly further. And no political leader is insane enough to contemplate such a horrific act. They'd be spoken of in the same breath as Hitler, Stalin and Genghis Khan.

Because people will be really bothered if you nuke the outback.

Actually the best solution is to relax sanctions and watch as North Korea descends into a post industrial hellscape of crony capitalism and unbreathable air like China
But you don't win votes by suggesting you should let North Korea make money so here we are

Fallout isn't really that much of a concern of you use airburst triggers like any civilized military force.
With AB you also get more Bang for your buck.

All your points are still valid, i just wanted to point that out.

>no political leader is insane enough to contemplate such a horrific act. They'd be spoken of in the same breath as Hitler

I really wish I could agree, but there are political leaders in power right now who seem to me both unstable enough to consider the option of nuclear genocide and unlikely to be deterred by anyone comparing them to Hitler.

Do you want giant spiders? That's how you get giant spiders.

But more seriously: We don't really have a missile defence policy because we've got so many places and directions to cover that the default method (THAAD) doesn't work for us without an utterly beggaring cost so we are needing to invest a lot to work out something a bit more effective for our geography.

>Actually the best solution is to relax sanctions and watch as North Korea descends into a post industrial hellscape of crony capitalism and unbreathable air like China
So the idea is to pump North Korea economy to also surpass the US? What could go wrong.

South Korea would throw a shitfit if someone nuked North Korea. They have a rather significant reunification thing going on and a lot of people have relatives there.

There aren't.

It's important to be recognise why your political enemies are bad instead of just reflexively demonising them. Trump or Kim or whoever you're thinking of aren't interested in nuclear war.

Who said anything about "surpassing the US"? I know I used the example of China but that doesn't mean NK is ever going to be that successful. The North doesn't have the population, natural resources or sheer fucking size to ever be that profitable

Reunification would beggar South Korea though. While the German Reunification didn't really hurt the German economy, Korean Unification would severely damage one of the most powerful economies in Asia.

Reunification is actually not a preferred option for many Koreans.

Isn't support for reunification dropping off though? Or is that more of a younger generation thing that people tend to grow out of?
Not saying that they'd be happy with living on the border to a country sized radiation exclusion zone, but they might not be so upset by it

reflexive demonization is the bread and butter of politics today though. I have never seen a political figure as outright hated by the other side as Trump is today. And I'm sure the same would have been true if Hillary got in.

It's dropping off with younger generations yeah. People who don't know anyone in NKorea.

I didn't say they were chomping at the bit to unload their nuclear boner over the troposphere; I said they'd consider it, and they wouldn't really care if they were criticised by comparison to other horrible bastards of history. I don't consider it an inevitability but I do think it is naive to say that nobody would even contemplate it.

Not that guy, and I agree no one alive is actively interested in nuclear war, but you've got to admit the current state of global politics feels a bit too....amateur hour for something as complex and risky as nuclear brinkmanship
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity springs to mind

I mean, we got 'Hillary is literally a pizza themed child molester' so I think it's pretty safe to say that things wouldn't be any more polite if she'd got in.

Okay, not actually using nuclear weapons. I mean conventional bombardment using petro-based explosives.

Anybody who weeps for North Korea simply does not understand the situation there. If they were shown all the wasted human potential that is exhausted addressing that shitstain of a country for the past 40 fucking years of kicking-the-can-down-the-road diplomacy they would not put up with it anymore. But for the most part people are fucking retarded. You blast the shit out of the country then you fucking inform the bleeding hearts of the world to learn some fucking history about the crater-that-was-once-North-Korea. All the hundreds South Korean, Japanese, and American lives lost outside of wartime having to police that fucking country currently mean nothing, no retaliation was made for those people. If we bombed N. Korea to hell, you look those bitches who cry about the lost lives and demonize America and ask them what the fuck they think about the lives that are already lost today due to the Kim family's power-show fuckery.

Don't get me wrong, the North Korean people are for the most part just living under a veil of fear and acting out of fear of a government that regularly fucks them. They're hard working and just want to eat, drink, and screw just like the rest of us.

But we've run out of time. And every year that passes even more powerful weapons are aimed at Seoul. And the people of South Korea have pretty much come to terms with their doom already. The BEST case scenario at this point is to minimize the number of doomed South Koreans (and would be casualties in the future if we did nothing) and blast North Korea off the map forever.

Is that you, Buck Turgidson?

I disagree

I believe it is theoretically possible to wage war on all of humanity.

Nope
Best case scenario is to let the NK leadership have what the NK leadership has ALWAYS wanted, which is to be left alone to grow fat and rich off the backs of thousands upon thousands of starving peasants. Backing them into a corner with sanctions and military force has only ever made the situation worse, relaxing those sanctions and giving them just enough of a profit to be worth playing nice for will keep the NK leadership sane and quiet

You're forgetting China. China knows damn well what's the situation in N.Korea. And they like it that way for several reasons.

It's either political resolutions or complete extermination. If a losing country isn't willing to surrender then you bomb them until they break or dies. It's just that simple

The problem is that at the moment China is pledged to militarily support North Korea against any pre-emptive attack against them, so going to war with NK effectively means going to war with China. That is an entirely different kettle of fish which obviously nobody wants to get into. The situation is altered if NK makes first strikes; then China will not protect it from retaliation. Hence we play this godawful waiting game, either hoping that NK finally comes to its senses, China decides supporting NK is no longer worth it, or NK finally pushes the button and we can destroy it in retaliation. War with China is the bit that everyone is rattled about, not the state of NK.

Isn't the entire point of that forever war that they keep switching alliances between the three power blocs? Two-thirds of humanity ganging up on the reminder really isn't waging war on all of humanity, really its just punching down

But that will be seen by NK as the cowardly West caving to glorious NK demands, which will in turn fuel their rhetoric even more and the next time they might even have a nuke that can reach Guam in one piece.

I don't think China would support North Korea at this point, most of the shitfits the North has had recently have ended with Beijing delivering increasingly stern and exasperated messages to Kim telling him to shut the fuck up
The only reason the Chinese would get involved is to prevent the creation of a US backed democratic government on its border

>China wouldn't get involved
>Oh wait, China would get involved, actually
I never said they'd join in because they want to see a smile on Kim's chubby face

And you actually believe their rhetoric is what THEY actually believe?
They want a war with the US even less than anyone else does, but they keep threatening one because it gets people to listen, while presenting the image of an NK people don't want to deal with. If the leaders were rich and secure enough they felt they didn't need those grand demonstrations that rhetoric would climb down as well

I don't doubt the N. Koreans are rational actors and any significant strike from them will result in complete annihilation. However, unlike most countries we cow, they are completely UNWILLING to relinquish their pursuit of nuclear arms, and that is the singular difference between them and some shithole like Libya.

Of course China knows. But even China has realized that their atmosphere is fucked due to their investment in coal, and even China has taken a hard industrial turn towards clean energy. And with that understanding they will also know that letting any dipshits have weapons that allow them to salt the earth for 30-40 years is unacceptable. If China actually decided to stop poisoning its people, North Korea having nuclear weapons is clearly something they won't tollerate; they will permit a strike in secret with Western forces, publicly condemn it, but everyone will know their inaction to defend N. Korea will mean they silently approved.

North Korea's remains will be a monument, a final time hopefully, when humanity decided collectively that it will not allow dipshits to have nuclear weapons. And before someone says it, no, fucking Pakistan, the United States, or Israel are not fucking dipshits compared to North Korea.

Nah, you just kill everyone in the government, dissolve it, and proclaim a new government or new country in its place. If the entire civilian population isn't willing to go with that for the sake of living peacefully, THAT's when you glass the place.

Could it not theoretically be possible that the powerful in those blocs were actually working together? Totalitarian nations need external threats. The entire war could have been a semi hoax. Load soldiers onto massive floating fortresses and have them invade countries only to be devastated by artillery. Declare victory when it is convenient to do so for the purposes of propaganda. Have some random bombings of your own cities organized.

No one in 1984 has any information of what is actually going on. Ignorance is an ideological pillar and all three nations have similar ideologies. Saying the government is wrong is illegal and half of the population works for the Stazi. Eventually all knowledge of the concept of freedom could pass from the collective human consciousness. If you perpetuated the myth of the war long enough you could reduce humanity to nothing more than morons to staff your factories and get thrown onto battlefields.

We actually tried that and rather the make their country not a shit hole if only slightly through pursuing economic endeavors they just kept the money and worked on keeping the oppression machine going.

Fortunately, Duterte doesn't have a vested interest in North Korean genocide, and the Phillipines don't have access to nuclear armaments. Now, the current POTUS, on the other hand...

>punching down
That's kind of what you want for war if you can manage it.

1984 govs are pretty clearly in collusion and switch around the conflict constantly so it continues and the war measures/population controls can stay in place.

HAY Veeky Forums HELP ME DISCUSS THIS /pol/ TOPIC ON Veeky Forums BECAUSE Veeky Forums IS NOW /pol/, 'KAY GUISE??????

The country is made of orcs.

I think the difference is that was a fringe element on the chans whereas the Hitler thing was public journalists. It's the difference between believing in ghosts in private and openly declaring yourself to be a member of the ghostbusters (new shitty movie edition).

The whole idea is simply "If I'm going down I'm taking you with me"

>If America just glassed North Korea, then America would become a pariah.

No they wouldn't, people would protest but no one would actually do anything because to do so is suicide. The US is incapable of being truly militarily defeated, attacking the nation itself is doomsday because it'll launch its massive nuclear arsenal if in a no other way out position, and you can't economically sanction it because the US dollar is the world currency standard and a sanction would cripple the entire world economy.

The US would get a bad reputation, but it's in a unique position where it can basically do what it wants without consequence. The ultimate form of might makes right. The only thing that can ruin the US now is itself.

>The only thing that can ruin the US now is itself.
That's exactly what America is doing though.

>The US is incapable of being truly militarily defeated

Not really, all the factories that we get our shit from are in China. If we went to war with them we'd be pretty fucked.

Underrated

>If we went to war with them we'd be pretty fucked.
Economically. China has shown that they fight in terms of quantity, not quality, which is why they tend to get BTFO.

Rome survived worse than what we're going through when they were in higher levels of instability.

It doesn't matter if we run out of food clothing and medicine 6 months into the war. All of our material goods are produced overseas. Are there even shoe factories in America anymore?

>Duterte

Everyone acts like he's some anomaly, but really he's kind of a standard run of the mill SEA authoritarian. They all do this shit, using purges and death squads. It's in their blood.

A true modern war isn't going to last 6 months

If they nuke us, they will never recover all the debt that we owe them

No. Most people won't fight, and eventually the government will collapse. Their surrender, or lack their of, is irrelevant when they no longer have any resources or control of territory.

China has their own issues though. While their factories are fairly major their armies are mostly landlocked. A good chunk of their money comes from the US. Basically The united states can just move their cheap labor to India or another hellhole and let the businessmen deal with the problem.

It's one of the major reasons no one wants a China-USA war. Both sides would get fucked over by the other doing something self destructive. Add in that Europe doesn't want to see anything bad happen to the US because that's their defense in case shit goes tits up and you have a clusterfuck no one wants.

Kind of the least of our problems there

>being this wrong
lol

Thinking on it the bigger problem is their deep hold on rare earth metals. Because those are both hard to get and needed to keep a lot of vital shit running.

>A good chunk of their money comes from the US.

Isn't like a third of their entire economy US debt? The whole country could basically be shut down by us stopping payment.

>is to kill every last man, woman and child in that country until it is empty of human life?
Depends on the time setting. If its medieval or earlier, just enslave the population and move on.

Eventually you don't need someone to say "I surrender" because there will be no one with rights left.

>Europe doesn't want to see anything bad happen to the US
>because that's their defense in case shit goes tits up
If shit really goes down on the old continent it's gonna be a civil war. I'm not entirely sure how much can US help with that. Or if they would want to get involved at all.

Actually the best resolution is to just let Nkorea be. No embargos, no penalizations, no blockades. Just let them be and commerce with them as you would commerce with any other country. This war against monarchy is fucking retarded. An entire country shouldn't have to suffer because the leader has brain damage.

>never surrenders
>this is called an unconditional surrender

LL Bean, Red Wing, New Balance, Wolverine and a bunch of other shoes are made in the US. So are combat boots.

>Food

That's.. ah.. Okay. The United States is the largest food exporter on Earth, and produces far, far more food then it needs.

>Medicine

Biotech in America is extremely advanced and there are a large number of essential medicines that are very hard to find any source outside the US. There are effectively no essential medicines the US imports outside of a few natural feedstocks.

In fact.. there's a bunch of strategically vital materials that aren't available outside the US.

High end charge coupled devices are produced only in the US. Without them it's very hard to build modern short ranged anti-air missiles.

Large solid fuel rocket boosters, used for missiles, are produced in the United States. They are also available from Russia and China, but with much lower reliability.

Talking more about how Europe tends to keep their military budget low as hell because they know if shit goes wrong they can call on the biggest army to handle it while front loading their economy and the likes with the money they get from keeping their budget so low.

Poll wise utterly no one wants China to get a dominate military lead on the USA. Like even fucking Iran and Pakistan said they prefer the USA over China having the strongest army. In any case where it seems like there could be a war like that Europe would lose their damn minds making sure the US wouldn't lose.

>Poll wise utterly no one wants China to get a dominate military lead on the USA. Like even fucking Iran and Pakistan said they prefer the USA over China having the strongest army.

Because China wouldn't give a shit. They would just let wars break out as long as it doesn't threaten them or the neighboring countries they consider protectorates.

The Paraguayans seem to have had an abnormal tolerance(70% of men over 18 in this case), but every population has its breaking point. I doubt they were that far from surrender with or without the presidency.
Incidentally post war Paraguay had to be great for the >tfw no gf crowd.

There ain't no gorillas in India, son.

If they will not capitulate you crush their military and enslave, crush and otherwise brutalize the civilian population

this country is called afghanistan

Fun fact: Everything runs on microprocessors.

80%+ of all microprocessors are made in the US. Fucking Samsung makes most of their microprocessors in Texas.

There's evidence in the books that Ingsoc has manufactured the entire political landscape of the world, and there is potentially an entire world that they're not telling the populace about.

>missing the point: the post
The war exists to fuel the totalitarianism, not the other way around. If anything, is wrong only in the example given because there was no real war to begin with in 1984. Humanity was defeated immediately and unconditionally by collective sollipsism, nihilism and misanthropy without anything truly resembling military action.

You just switch to bullets dipped in pig blood until they learn.

Don't be an edgy dumbass, even hardcore fundies only believe its a sin if you willingly consume pork.
Better to just spread rumours about certain known members breaking Sharia, wathch the holier than thous turn on each other for brownie points.

I heard they've even designated specific streets to hit first.

Yeah but what about peak oil and climate change? The system in 1984 will collapse at some point, even disregarding all the stuff Asimov said in that famous review

o lord

So psyops on steroids?

(Using Wikipedia here, because I don't have another source handy.)
The "War of the Triple Alliance" was Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay (made into a puppet state by Brazil) versus Paraguay. A reasonably sane individual would have realized that Paraguay could not fight three other nations and win; the total population of Paraguay at the time was around 450,000 people versus the 11 million of the Triple Alliance. The Paraguayan leader, Francisco Solano Lopez, does not come across as a particularly sane individual. Among other things, he declared war on both Brazil and Argentina.

This is just one little slice of the madness:

>In 1868, when the allies were pressing him hard, he convinced himself that his Paraguayan supporters had actually formed a conspiracy against his life. Thereupon, several hundred prominent Paraguayan citizens were seized and executed by his order, including his brothers and brothers-in-law, cabinet ministers, judges, prefects, military officers, bishops and priests, and nine-tenths of the civil officers, together with more than two hundred foreigners, among them several members of the diplomatic legations (the San Fernando massacres). During this time, he also had his 70-year-old mother flogged and ordered her execution, because she revealed to him that he had been born out of wedlock.[24]

And this is how he died:

Fighting a fairly stupid losing war, he wound up in northern Paraguay with about 200 men, chased by two detachments of Brazilian troops. Once Lopez's men learned about said troops, a number of them essentially defected, intending to join the Brazilian forces and lead them to Lopez.

>Upon hearing about this, López called a last war council with the remaining officers of his general staff in order to decide the course of action for the upcoming battle: whether they should escape into the hill range or stay and make a stand against the attackers. The council decided to stay and end the war once and for all by fighting to the death.[26]

The Brazilian force reached the camp on the 1 March. During the battle that ensued, López was separated from the remainder of his army and was accompanied by only his aide and a couple of officers. He had been wounded with a spear in the stomach and hit with a sword in the side of his head and so was too weak to walk by himself.[27] They led him to the Aquidabangui stream, and there they left him on the pretext of getting reinforcements. While Lopez was alone with his aide, General Câmara arrived along with six soldiers and approached him, calling on him to surrender and guaranteeing his life. López refused and shouting ¡Muero con mi patria!, (I die with my nation),[28] tried to attack Câmara with his sword. Câmara ordered him to be disarmed, but López died during the struggle with the soldiers who were trying to disarm him.[29] This incident marked the end of the war of the Triple Alliance.

So that's what happens when you fight a stupid, stupid war and never surrender.

There wouldn't BE protectorates or neighboring countries if china had the strongest army. They can barely show restraint on their expansionism now for christ's sake

Well, I mean, this is basically how Rome didn't lose the 2nd Punic War. By simply not surrendering after Hannibal defeated them utterly and completely, like 6 times in a row

Yeah because appeasing an aggressive, nationalist power for the sake of peace has never backfired. Oh wait