PSX5Central
Non Gaming Discussions => Off-Topic => Topic started by: Titan on March 08, 2006, 01:30:51 PM
-
They developed missiles. I dunno why they are starting shit with the US. Its like me picking a fight with a football player. I\'d get messed up. Maybe instead of putting millions of dollars that they barely have on armament, they would put some into getting supplies so their people won\'t starve to death.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/nkorea_missiles;_ylt=ArdPc1.qeHDk_t743mjmk4.s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--
-
should make something that would send the missile they fire at us to the middle east,heh.
-
Don\'t discount North Korea as "silly" or "crazy." Kim Jong-Il is in fact a very rational actor. He knows that nothing short of an actual invasion of South Korea or the transfer of nuclear technology to terrorists will provoke a direct US response, so he continues such "silly" actions. These long-range missiles are being developed to extract economic concessions from South Korea, Japan, and the United States, as happened when they fired the Taepodong over Japan about 3 years ago. North Korea also tests these missiles to draw the US\'s attention away from the Middle East. If it is not high on the US priority list, it cannot expect to extract concessions of any value, simply because the US has bigger fish to fry.
-
Oh trust me, North Korea is crazy.
A squad of NK cheerleaders being arrested because they spoke of what they saw in South Korea when they did a routine? Sounds peachy.
-
Kim Jong-Il is more the nuts. You can be insane and still have a rational. Hell, bin laden is a pretty smart fella..even kicks ass at hide and seek.
-
Originally posted by THX
Oh trust me, North Korea is crazy.
A squad of NK cheerleaders being arrested because they spoke of what they saw in South Korea when they did a routine? Sounds peachy.
That\'s a perfectly sensible thing to do for a regime as Orwellian as this. Kim\'s entire legitimacy relies on the belief that the DPRK is the true government of the Korean peninsula, and that the ROK is merely a puppet of American imperiliasm. He cannot allow images from the outside world, especially those that show the immense wealth of South Korea, to infiltrate North Korean society if he wants to hold onto power.
If Kim Jong-Il truly were crazy, he would not have survived the death of his father. Only a very competent and rational leader could have kept North Korea stable through the nuclear crisis, a decade of negative economic growth, and a famine that killed 2 million people (which is 5% of the population). What do I mean by stable? I refer to the fact that there have been no massive military purges, no massive refugee migrations, and no military coups or palace intrigue despite the calamities that have befallen the North.
Kim is very rational, however morally reprehensible he may be, and he is trying to reform his country by opening up to the world. This is demonstrated by 2002\'s price reform which significantly raised prices to create incentives for producers to increase their supply, increasing marketization, and the normalization of ties with the EU and "middle powers" (Australia, Canada, etc.). Other "quiet" but significant changes involve the dispatching of officials to Australia to learn about economic policies, invitation of many US experts to teach economic policies in North Korea, and the replacement of Russian with English as the required foreign language taught in high school.
North Korea is not crazy, just very insecure (as it should be, when its very existence is constantly at stake). Don\'t believe in the sensationalist images the media projects.
-
Hyper, your well though out, reasoned, and correctly typed replies don\'t belong anywhere near the PSX2C forums.
My prediction is still that the middle east will be a glassed over wasteland by 2020, and North Korea soon thereafter.
-
Haha, thanks. I hope you\'re not saying I shouldn\'t come here anymore, though.
-
Originally posted by Viper_Fujax
Hell, bin laden is a pretty smart fella..even kicks ass at hide and seek.
Jokes on him, we\'re not even looking for him!
:shy:
:rolleyes:
-Dan
-
Kim has his spies kidnap hot Japanese actresses and forces them into sexual relationships.
Can\'t blame him, though. Anyone who looks like William Hung with a bad afro won\'t get too many hotties on his own.
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F%5Bimg%5Di38.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe103%2FStoonod%2Fwil1.jpg&hash=349fbe9d916627e87ef50caf9a4745ddfef95294)
-
Hyper making excuses for Kim Jong Il, go figure :rolleyes:
Who is next? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?
As for the no massive refugee assertion - not true.
By 2000, there were frequent reports from reliable sources (such as the UN) of famine in all parts of North Korea except Pyongyang. North Korean citizens ran increasingly desperate risks to escape from the country, mainly into China.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Jong_Il
The reason he hasn\'t been assassinated is due to the "personality cult" he has created - dictators do that quite frequently. Hitler is good example. You can be smart and crazy at the same time.
Lastly, how is North Korea\'s existance at stake? The US has no plans to invade NK and SK just loves them and is looking to reunify which they have been talking about. The thing is - old Kim thinks that if reunification took place Korea would be modeled on the DPKR. Crazy? I think so.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Hyper making excuses for Kim Jong Il, go figure :rolleyes:
Who is next? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?
As for the no massive refugee assertion - not true.
The reason he hasn\'t been assassinated is due to the "personality cult" he has created - dictators do that quite frequently. Hitler is good example. You can be smart and crazy at the same time.
Lastly, how is North Korea\'s existance at stake? The US has no plans to invade NK and SK just loves them and is looking to reunify which they have been talking about. The thing is - old Kim thinks that if reunification took place Korea would be modeled on the DPKR. Crazy? I think so.
Again, this is typical of one who refuses to research the facts.
North Korea has legitimate security concerns. Why?
1) The Korean War ended in an armistice. A written non-aggression pact was never signed. This means that the US and North Korea are technically still at war.
2) North Korea faces a significant conventional and nuclear threat from the United States. There are 37,000 US troops stationed in South Korea and an equal number in Japan. The US also maintains hundreds of Lance-tipped nuclear missiles in South Korea.
3) North Korea is constantly exposed to hawkish rhetoric from top US circles. Bush has identifed North Korea as a part of the "Axis of Evil." The majority of US officials state that "regime change" is the top policy goal regarding North Korea.
4) The gap in military strength between the two Koreas is now insurmountable. The North Korean economy is 1/20 the size of the South Korean economy. This means that for about two decades, the ROK has spent enormously more on its military. The DPRK army has more in numbers, but its weaponry is overwhelmingly 1950s vintage. Because the DPRK faces massive fuel shortages and a flagging infrastructure, it would run into enormous logistics problems in the advent of war.
5) The North has lost the support of Russia and China, its two main patrons. Both Russia and China normalized ties with South Korea more than a decade ago. Thus, the DPRK has no allies to turn to in the advent of war.
6) The Asian region as a whole has one over-arching goal when it comes to North Korea - regime change.
7) What are the visible signs of North Korean insecurity? A significant example is Team Spirit. The US and the ROK held Team Spirit annually as a joint military exercise off the Korean coast. The purpose was to practice tactics, such as amphibious landing, that would be required in the advent of a second Korean War. Although the US and the ROK claimed the exercise was merely for practice, North Korea would mobilise its entire army and place the whole nation under red alert for preparation of a real war. This was because the DPRK could not trust US claims that the exercise was only for practice. Do you see how perceptions differ? Even if we claim that our intentions are benign, the DPRK still sees a threat because of the precarious situation it is in.
Crazy, for me, implies an inability to make rational policy choices. This is not true in the case of the DPRK. Given the situation that the DPRK is in - a failing military, withering US pressure, loss of significant allies - it has done exactly what any other country would do. It has pursued a nuclear deterrent and has been careful to avoid actions that could provoke a direct US military response (such as invading the South or transferring nuclear technology to terrorists). Kim Jong-Il has cut off societal contact with the outside world and pursued a personality cult to maintain power. He has also allowed dramatic economic reforms to reverse his country\'s negative economic growth, even though these reforms contradict his juche philosophy and could potentially undermine his legitimacy. Crazy? No. Rational and dangerous? Yes.
I am not defending the North. All South Koreans want reunification, and I am no exception. Labelling the North as crazy and refusing to accept the fact it has legitimate security concerns, however, leads to dangerous policy making by unnecessarily provoking the North. Instead of regime change, the US should soften its stance and pursue engagement, both economically and politically, to bring the DPRK to a soft landing.
-
But we would never use the nukes against north korea. We have them but we will never use them. North Korea has the balls to do it. From what you said, what do they have to lose? Everyone is against them so why not take a chance and use nukes?
-
Originally posted by Titan
But we would never use the nukes against north korea. We have them but we will never use them. North Korea has the balls to do it. From what you said, what do they have to lose? Everyone is against them so why not take a chance and use nukes?
Nukes are best used as a deterrent and thus defensive in nature. North Korea knows that firing a nuke would remove any constraints on the US and ROK. This would ensure its eradication and would be suicide. If North Korea truly thought it had nothing to lose, it would not be enacting these reforms to fix its system. What\'s the point of reforming if you\'ve got nothing to lose, right? Kim has seen countries like Cuba survive through decades of US pressure and economic sactions. As long as he does not provoke war, he knows he can ensure North Korea\'s survival while increasing the economic pie through reforms (perhaps based on the Chinese model).
-
Originally posted by hyper
Nukes are best used as a deterrent and thus defensive in nature. North Korea knows that firing a nuke would remove any constraints on the US and ROK. This would ensure its eradication and would be suicide. If North Korea truly thought it had nothing to lose, it would not be enacting these reforms to fix its system. What\'s the point of reforming if you\'ve got nothing to lose, right? Kim has seen countries like Cuba survive through decades of US pressure and economic sactions. As long as he does not provoke war, he knows he can ensure North Korea\'s survival while increasing the economic pie through reforms (perhaps based on the Chinese model).
I see your point but I dunno if they would allow capitalism in Korea. They\'re quite hardcore conservative communists. And I don\'t understand why we still have an embargo on Cuba. They aren\'t any threat and Castro has been quiet for years.
-
Kim Jong Il is a despot and could give a fuck about his starving people. He may not be "medically" crazy but he\'s still fucked in the head. He should end this stupid war, open up his country to the world and shoot himself.
And the man KIDNAPS people from Japan for sexual relationships! Now if that ain\'t crazy, you need to...wait...you don\'t like Japan, do you?
I was room mates with a Korean back in 1985-86 in highschool (boarding school) and he said all Koreans hate the Japapese. Funny thing was, he lived in Japan before heading off to boarding school. Lee Joo-Suk was his name.
-
Originally posted by hyper
Again, this is typical of one who refuses to research the facts.
North Korea has legitimate security concerns. Why?
1) The Korean War ended in an armistice. A written non-aggression pact was never signed. This means that the US and North Korea are technically still at war.
No, SK and NK are still technically at war. Who has refused to sign a peace treaty with SK? Yes I think you know.
Originally posted by hyper
2) North Korea faces a significant conventional and nuclear threat from the United States. There are 37,000 US troops stationed in South Korea and an equal number in Japan. The US also maintains hundreds of Lance-tipped nuclear missiles in South Korea.
[/b]
Those 37,000 US troops would be but a speed bump if NK invaded SK. NK also has thousands of artillery pieces right on the other side of DMZ that can hit the capital of SK with impunity. I think you are mistaken about who threatens who more... You know I would be in favor of the US leaving SK all together and letting the NK invade. In a recent poll most young SK would be in favor of this - lets see how much they like starving, no freedoms and no protection.
Originally posted by hyper
3) North Korea is constantly exposed to hawkish rhetoric from top US circles. Bush has identifed North Korea as a part of the "Axis of Evil." The majority of US officials state that "regime change" is the top policy goal regarding North Korea.
I guess refusing to sign a peace treaty with SK, developing nukes, and firing test missles over Japan doesn\'t warrant them as being labeled as a threat in your eyes.
Originally posted by hyper
5) The North has lost the support of Russia and China, its two main patrons. Both Russia and China normalized ties with South Korea more than a decade ago. Thus, the DPRK has no allies to turn to in the advent of war.
Last time I looked NK and China were pretty close diplomatically.
Originally posted by hyper
6) The Asian region as a whole has one over-arching goal when it comes to North Korea - regime change.
If that is the case Kim Jong Il should take a hint.
Originally posted by hyper
I am not defending the North. All South Koreans want reunification, and I am no exception. Labelling the North as crazy and refusing to accept the fact it has legitimate security concerns, however, leads to dangerous policy making by unnecessarily provoking the North. Instead of regime change, the US should soften its stance and pursue engagement, both economically and politically, to bring the DPRK to a soft landing.
Have fun. Let us bring the troops back home and let you South Koreans deal with Kim Jong Il since you think the US is a greater threat to SK than he is. There is nothing in SK the US has an interest in anyway since the Cold War ended. It would be another Vietnam circa 1975 with NK immediately invading and overrunning SK. You really think Kim Jong Il would want to reunify without him being in complete control? That is naive.
The only provokations are coming from North Korea - resuming uranium enrichment, massive military build up, trying to use nuclear power to blackmail the west, etc.
We have a country just to the south of Florida that has a dictator we don\'t like either, yet for the past 35 years or so we have made no physical attempt to remove him from power and with the exception of the Bay of Pigs (which was more Cuban ex patriots than US forces) we have not attempted to invade Cuba. Compared to NK that would be walk in the park.
-
Lil Kim is a film fanatic. He and mm could be twins! If that\'s not crazy I dunno what is. :eek: :D
-
as weird as this may sound, but that baby pic of Kim Jong II does resembles William Hung...
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2F1%2F10%2FKim-il-sung_Kim-jong-suk_Kim-jong-il.jpg&hash=9f660419e3963e05c06040710ce2fa4fefdc063b)
-
Let us end the discussion on the North Korean military threat with an excerpt from a book by David Kang:
Thus the most common measure of power in international relations - economic size and defense spending - show quite clearly that North Korea was never larger than South Korea, has been smaller on an absolute and per-capital basis than the South for at least 30 years, and continues to fall farther behind. Those who see North Korea as threatening need to explain why North Korea - having waited 50 years - would finally attack now that it is one twentieth the size of the South.
...
But for the past 30 years, North Korea\'s training, equipment, and overall military quality has steadily deteriorated relative to the South.
The South Korean military is better-equipped, better-trained, and more versatile with better logistics and support than the North Korean military. Although the military has continued to hold pride of place in the North Korean economy, there have been increasing reports of reduced training due to the economic problems. One of South Korea\'s major daily newspapers quoted that NK\'s air force had made 100 training sorties per day in 1996, down from 300 to 400 before the end of 1995, and that the training maneuvers of ground troops had also been reduced to a "minimum level." American military offficials have noted that individual NK pilots take one training flight per month, compared with the 10 flights per month that US pilots take. This drastically degrates combat readiness.
The bulk of North Korea\'s main battle tanks are of 1950s vintage, and most of its combat aircraft were introduced before 1956. Evaluations after the Gulf War concluded that Western weaponry is at least twice, or even four-times, better than older Soviet-vintage systems. By the 1990s North Korea\'s military was large in absolute numbers but the quality of their forces was severely degraded relative to South Korea\'s and the US military. Michael O\'Hanlon notes that: "Given the obsolescence of most North Korean equipment, however, actual capabilities of most forces would be notably less than raw numbers suggest. About half of North Korea\'s major weapons are of roughly 1960s design; the other half are even older."
To view the North as superior in military terms is a mistake. But even more surprising about many of these accounts is that they measure the strength of the North Korean military only against that of the ROK, without including the US forces, either present in Korea or those potential reinforcements. North Korea knows that it would fight the United States as well as the South, and it is wishful thinking to hope that the North Korean military planners are so naive as to ignore the US military presence in South Korea, expecting the US to pack up and go home if the North invaded. Comparisons between the South and the North that ignore the role of the United States are seriously misleading as to the real balance of power on the peninsula.
In the event of a full-scale conflict, the United States could reinforce the peninsular with overwhelming power. Currently 36,000 US troops are stationed in Korea, including the US Second Infantry division and 90 combat aircraft including 72 F-16s. In addition, 36,000 troops are stationed in Japan, including the headquarters of the Seventh fleet at Yokosuka naval base, 14,000 Marines, and 90 combat aircraft. This is only the beginning, as more would soon arrive from within the United States.
This economic and military comparisons of North and South Korea shows that North Korea never had a lead over the South, and after the 1960s quickly began falling behind. The end of the cold war marked the beginning of a major change in North Korea\'s fortunes, as North Korea continued to have economic difficulties, while its allies deserted it. This situation has only become more grave in the new millennium.
North Korea is not a threat to start an unprovoked war. North Korea was never in a preeminent position relative to the South, and the real question for the pessimists is why they continue to believe that a nation that is far behind and falling farther behind might still attack.
- Nuclear North Korea: A Debate on Engagement Strategies
Academia has long ago concluded that the main threat from North Korea is not a full-scale invasion. I have to go back to writing my paper, so I\'ll deal with your other points later.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
In a recent poll most young SK would be in favor of this - lets see how much they like starving, no freedoms and no protection.
I tend not to believe this. You have a link to the poll? It just doesn\'t make any sense that these people have it good and yet they want to be part of NK where they oppress their people and abuse them? I mean, you may be right but its like saying that we should have been invaded by the Nazis in WWII. It just doesn\'t make any sense to give up your liberties.
-
I tend not to believe this. You have a link to the poll? It just doesn\'t make any sense that these people have it good and yet they want to be part of NK where they oppress their people and abuse them? I mean, you may be right but its like saying that we should have been invaded by the Nazis in WWII. It just doesn\'t make any sense to give up your liberties.
Poll: Youths Back N. Korea if Attacked
Feb 21 11:08 PM US/Eastern
Email this story
SEOUL, South Korea
Nearly half of South Korean youths who will be old enough to vote in the country\'s next elections say Seoul should side with North Korea if the United States attacks the communist nation, according to a poll released Wednesday.
At the same time, 40.7 percent of the 1,000 young people surveyed said Seoul should remain neutral in the event of hostilities between Washington and Pyongyang, according to the poll by The Korea Times and Hankook Ilbo dailies. Only 11.6 percent said the South should back its longtime U.S. ally.
The poll, conducted Feb. 16-19, surveyed youths between 17 and 23 years old who will be old enough to vote in next year\'s presidential election. The margin of error was plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
The youths named China as South Korea\'s most important partner for maintaining friendly relations, at 39.5 percent, followed by the United States and North Korea at 18.4 and 18 percent, respectively.
A majority of those surveyed, 54.1 percent, said peaceful reunification was the preferred method for ending the division on the peninsula. But 35.5 percent said the status quo should be maintained if the North and South can peacefully coexist.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/21/D8FTU7HO2.html
-
Poll: Youths Back N. Korea if Attacked
Feb 21 11:08 PM US/Eastern
Email this story
SEOUL, South Korea
Nearly half of South Korean youths who will be old enough to vote in the country\'s next elections say Seoul should side with North Korea if the United States attacks the communist nation, according to a poll released Wednesday.
At the same time, 40.7 percent of the 1,000 young people surveyed said Seoul should remain neutral in the event of hostilities between Washington and Pyongyang, according to the poll by The Korea Times and Hankook Ilbo dailies. Only 11.6 percent said the South should back its longtime U.S. ally.
The poll, conducted Feb. 16-19, surveyed youths between 17 and 23 years old who will be old enough to vote in next year\'s presidential election. The margin of error was plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
The youths named China as South Korea\'s most important partner for maintaining friendly relations, at 39.5 percent, followed by the United States and North Korea at 18.4 and 18 percent, respectively.
A majority of those surveyed, 54.1 percent, said peaceful reunification was the preferred method for ending the division on the peninsula. But 35.5 percent said the status quo should be maintained if the North and South can peacefully coexist.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/21/D8FTU7HO2.html
Interesting. That just seems weird to me. But I guess its true.
-
And the man KIDNAPS people from Japan for sexual relationships! Now if that ain\'t crazy, you need to...wait...you don\'t like Japan, do you?
Crazy? No. Smart? Most certainly. Japanese chicks are hot..
-
Sorry for the late reply. It took a week for me to recover from finals.
No, SK and NK are still technically at war. Who has refused to sign a peace treaty with SK? Yes I think you know.
I never said the South and North were not technically at war. The US is also a signatory of the armistice treaty. This is why the DPRK is so desperately seeking a written non-aggression pact from the United States.
Those 37,000 US troops would be but a speed bump if NK invaded SK. NK also has thousands of artillery pieces right on the other side of DMZ that can hit the capital of SK with impunity. I think you are mistaken about who threatens who more...
I addressed the military issue with the excerpt from Kang. The first step to correct policymaking regarding the Korean peninsula is to realize that the rest of the world poses a much greter threat to North Korea that the North does to the world.
You know I would be in favor of the US leaving SK all together and letting the NK invade. In a recent poll most young SK would be in favor of this - lets see how much they like starving, no freedoms and no protection.
I am well aware of that poll. Conversely, however, all Koreans (both young and old) responded with alarm when the US announced it would reduce the number of troops in South Korea. This implies that despite their ostensible animosity to the US, most Koreans realize the importance of the US presence.
You\'d be a moron to believe that Koreans want North Korea to invade. Their resentment toward the US is complicated:
1) The US base is right in the middle of Seoul, hindering residential and business development. Imagine how pissed the American public would be if there was a permanent French base in Washington.
2) US troops have committed certain acts, such as the brutal murder of a Korean prostitute and the acquittal of the Marines who crushed two South Korean schoolgirls, that have reinforced Korean perception of US arrogance and disrespect.
3) Koreans look with disfavor at the social consequences of housing one of the largest US bases in Asia. Mixed children who have no job prospects and the scores of brothels are unfortunate daily reminders.
4) Most South Koreans now see North Korea as a younger brother that needs help rather than as a deadly enemy. This is due to the dramatic increase in inter-Korean events, such as the establishing of phone lines, the joint Kaesong venture, connecting of the railroads across the DMZ, and the numerous South Koreans visiting the North. A recent poll notes that 77 percent of the population supports diplomatic means to the nuclear issue and 84 percent approve of North-South economic cooperation. Against this backdrop, South Koreans fear that Bush\'s hawkish stance will unravel the good relations that they have built up with the North. It is no surprise then that your poll shows an overwhelming support for the North. Again, Bush\'s adamant unilateralism reinforces Korean perception of the US as a country that is indifferent to the wishes of its allies.
Like I said, Korean feelings toward the US are complicated. Although many are resentful, there are also those who are grateful for what the US has done. This gratitude is especially visible in the older generation, which sees the US as the staunch ally that saved the South in the Korean War and warded off China and Russia during the Cold War. However, as the national alarm over the troop reductions demonstrate, young South Koreans also realize the importance of the US presence. Think rationally, Giga. No sane person would "like starving, no freedoms and no protection."
I guess refusing to sign a peace treaty with SK, developing nukes, and firing test missles over Japan doesn\'t warrant them as being labeled as a threat in your eyes.
Realize, Giga, that I never said the North was not a threat. I merely pointed out that current US rhetoric reinforces the North\'s fear of the US.
Last time I looked NK and China were pretty close diplomatically.
The only reason that China currently supports the North is to avoid regime implosion, which would have devastating consequences in the region. This is a completely different scenario from a war. China has repeatedly told North Korea that it would not give "unqualified support" if the North becomes embroiled in a conflict with the US.
If that is the case Kim Jong Il should take a hint.
So... you\'re asking a dictator to voluntarily give up his power?
Have fun. Let us bring the troops back home and let you South Koreans deal with Kim Jong Il since you think the US is a greater threat to SK than he is. There is nothing in SK the US has an interest in anyway since the Cold War ended. It would be another Vietnam circa 1975 with NK immediately invading and overrunning SK. You really think Kim Jong Il would want to reunify without him being in complete control? That is naive.
Is it your speciality to put words in my mouth? When did I ever say that the US poses a greater threat to SK than Kim? It is foolish to compare the Korean crisis to Vietnam. Like the Kang excerpt demonstrates, the South has a formidable army to match the North\'s, even without US support. No one disputes that South Korea will win in the advent of a second Korean War. This is why the North has been deterred from invasion for the past 50 years.
There is nothing in SK the US has an interest in? Bring yourself up to the times, Giga. Pulling out from the South means that the US will lose influence in one of the most dynamic economic zones in the world - Asia. It would also cast a deep shadow over the necessity of the troops in Okinawa . Why does the US need these troops? To counter the regional influence of that other thorn in US foreign policy - China. Not to mention that they are a significant deterrent against hawkish Chinese policies toward Taiwan. In short, Asia will be the next hotzone of US foreign policy in the coming decades. The US would be wise to maximize its infuence in the region.
The only provokations are coming from North Korea - resuming uranium enrichment, massive military build up, trying to use nuclear power to blackmail the west, etc.
Read my previous post again. I fear that you missed my entire point.
We have a country just to the south of Florida that has a dictator we don\'t like either, yet for the past 35 years or so we have made no physical attempt to remove him from power and with the exception of the Bay of Pigs (which was more Cuban ex patriots than US forces) we have not attempted to invade Cuba. Compared to NK that would be walk in the park.
Obviously Cuba no longer poses a threat to the US. Like I mentioned in my reply to Titan, Kim has seen Cuba and knows that as long as he does not cross the red line - visibly passing nuclear technology to terrorists or invading the South - he will be safe from US attack.
-
Kim Jong Il is a despot and could give a fuck about his starving people. He may not be "medically" crazy but he\'s still fucked in the head. He should end this stupid war, open up his country to the world and shoot himself.
And the man KIDNAPS people from Japan for sexual relationships! Now if that ain\'t crazy, you need to...wait...you don\'t like Japan, do you?
I was room mates with a Korean back in 1985-86 in highschool (boarding school) and he said all Koreans hate the Japapese. Funny thing was, he lived in Japan before heading off to boarding school. Lee Joo-Suk was his name.
...
:gman:
-
Oh...sorry I don\'t pander to your opinion.
Fine. Kim Jong Il is a very trust worthy leader who would not allow not one of his citizen to starve
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,1101943,00.html
or kidnap Japanese citizens for spying
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2262074.stm
and kidnapping women for "companionship"
(bottom of article)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/783967.stm
Wonderful leader you have there.
-
Dont cry Gman
-
Yeah as if the CIA is full of Angels
Unic, you need to start a seperate thread about Bashing America. I\'ll start one for you.
-
Do whatever you want ;)
You wouldnt have liked a real America bashing thread if I made one. I just mentioned CIA and you got all upset. I ll edit it if it upsets you THAT much :laughing:
ps: Jesus you made a whole fuss in that thread out of nothing. Sheesh. Then you are telling me
-
Oh...sorry I don\'t pander to your opinion.
Fine. Kim Jong Il is a very trust worthy leader who would not allow not one of his citizen to starve
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,1101943,00.html
or kidnap Japanese citizens for spying
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2262074.stm
and kidnapping women for "companionship"
(bottom of article)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/783967.stm
Wonderful leader you have there.
Gman, the debate\'s about Kim\'s supposed irrationality, not whether he is an exemplary leader. I fully agree with you that Kim is morally reprehensible and untrustworthy.
-
Gman, the debate\'s about Kim\'s supposed irrationality, not whether he is an exemplary leader. I fully agree with you that Kim is morally reprehensible and untrustworthy.
If you think his kidnapping of Japanese citizens, starvation of his people by denying humanitary supplies is not irrational, I don\'t know what else to say to you.
Your people are starving. There are food supplies from other sources besides the USA that have no catch 22, why deny them of this food? How is this rational thinking? The man is a kook.
-
If you think his kidnapping of Japanese citizens, starvation of his people by denying humanitary supplies is not irrational, I don\'t know what else to say to you.
Your people are starving. There are food supplies from other sources besides the USA that have no catch 22, why deny them of this food? How is this rational thinking? The man is a kook.
Kim\'s a dictator. Like all dictators, he abuses his power within reasonable limits to satisfy his whims. But do his personality quirks lead to irrational policy choices? I have shown you in my previous posts that they do not. You are too seeped in this "Kim is mad" paradigm and refuse to acknowledge evidence that suggests otherwise.
Regarding your second point. It\'s clear you\'ve either been misled or don\'t know enough. Kim has kicked out humanitarian organizations because South Korea and China together supply enough aid to support the DPRK. Unfortunately, most of this aid goes to appease military officials, not to the people, simply because they are the only real threat to Kim\'s power. In short, Kim is doing precisely what you yourself expect him to do - 1) cut off aid sources that have a catch (not "catch 22," Gman...); 2) accept unconditional South Korean and Chinese aid; 3) kick out humanitarian organizations that may bring in destabilizing information about the outside world.
Why do I keep refuting Kim\'s irrationality? Because resorting to his "craziness" does not offer clear policy implications. You can superficially explain everything by saying Kim is crazy. He wants nuclear weapons? Oh, that\'s because he\'s crazy. He\'s kicked out humanitarian organizations? Yep, he\'s crazy. Firing missiles over Japan? Crazy, I tell ya. Turning to Kim\'s irrationality leads to a policy dead-end because it really explains nothing. But by actually analyzing North Korea\'s unique security and domestic concerns, one is able to find the real causes for Kim\'s behavior and negotiate with him.
Don\'t make this an emotional issue with the "your people are starving!" crap. I want Kim dethroned just as much as you do. But consider the implications of the regime instability or collapse that Kim\'s removal might cause. A North Korea in anarchy will become an open warehouse for anyone who wishes to take its nuclear weapons. Millions of refugees will flow into South Korea and China, severely destabilizing the regional and global economy. Some estimates predict that the number of refugees from North Korea will outnumber the total worldwide. Most importantly for me, South Korea will have to bear the largest burden of absorbing the North. Think about the costs of trying to modernize 20 million people stuck in the 1950s. Or the costs of renovating the North\'s tattered infrastructure. Or the costs of a potential transitional civil war with an exiled North Korean government. It is because of these concerns that South Korea wants to bring the North to a "soft landing" with economic and political engagement. Gradual reunification, not a sudden regime change, is the best outcome for the peninsula and the region as a whole. Update yourself on these issues, Gman, before shouting, "Kim is evil! We must take him down now!" Clouding your mind with such emotional baggage only leads to poor policy making.
-
Yeah as if the CIA is full of Angels
Do you ever NOT talk about America in these threads? Maybe one of these days you\'ll actually talk about the matter at hand.
-
I had my reasons for directing it to GmanJoe.
-
Yeah and in doing so you\'re pissing the rest of us off.
-
And that because?
-
You have no grounds and you turn every topic in this section of the board into something about America and its annoying. This thread is a perfect example.
-
^^
That pretty much sums it up.
-
You have no grounds and you turn every topic in this section of the board into something about America and its annoying. This thread is a perfect example.
You can just ignore it. Its not like I posted a composition. And it doesnt even have to do with American bashing. You are the ones that actually bash other countries.
See title-->perfect example.
Its ok for you people to bash other countries but when someone else posts a fact that doesnt even imply "America sucks" you get offended.
---->See this and other topics as perfect examples.
Its your fault if you get offended because for you when something that isnt rosy in a country implies that, that country sucks and you dont hesitate to bash that country whenever you get the chance to.
So when you hear something you dont like about the US from a different mouth you automatically translate it to America bashing because you are the ones that actually do this with other countries.
So dont complain for seeing your own personal problems in others.
-
Just die.
-
You can just ignore it.
"You" meaning everyone?
-
Just die.
Only after you