North Korea

[Dale]

 

 

Here's an example of a failure in communication: the US flying bombers nearby to North Korea recently. This is incredibly childish and immature.

 

I don't know that I'd call it childish.. but rather a testament to the fact that the administration takes other nations' war threats seriously.

I'm sure N. Korea are fully aware of the extent of the US government's military technology/capabilities - there's no need to parade some bombers nearby - it proves nothing and accomplishes nothing productive at all.

[SR4]

 

 

 

 

I love how NK has been directly threatening the USA for years and no one in our government / military has really done much about it.

 

Meanwhile, we had to make up a bunch of bullshit to create an excuse to go attack Iraq and people don't seem to give a shit.

there are no resources in NK that amoreikkka needs save for eradicating the flow of nuclear/missile technologies proliferation to iran,pakistan,syria,the highest bidder etc.

Exactly. We'll let them shoot missiles at us, that land in the sea, for a while. They may even be able to get away with taking out Hawaii before we start talking really tough.

It isn't about 'talking tough' though. US, if there is any sanity in the government over there, need to think about trying to communicate with N. Korea in their terms. Though I know this may not ever happen, since the US government's standpoint on things when it comes to geopolitics is completely warped and corrupted. I don't believe there are many in the US government who truly care about human progress and having an overall social concern for people on this planet other than narrow minded, corporate interests (see Adam Curtis' films on the history of this). Simply failing to engage in productive conversation and resorting to sanctions upon sanctions will not do the job in sorting out the issue.

 

"Their terms" is a horrible way to negotiate. Remember, you are negotiating with a dictatorship with incredible authoritarian controls over the influx of information to the rest of their citizens. Also remember that Juche philosophy and the constructs of the N.Korean government involve constant compromise or recognition of power between the great leader (Kim) and the high ranking cadre of military officers. At the same time, the ideas of national "self-reliance" are in direct contradiction to ANY form of cooperation whatsoever with the western powers, much less the U.S. itself. The people, or citizenry of N. Korea as we would think of them more or less don't factor into the N. Korean perspective of negotiation. I think that's what a lot of people are being a bit naive about here.

 

The N. Korean gov't is interested in maintaining power and wealth that it's highest members enjoy, aka. regime stability. Period. It just so happens that West-sponsored industrialization helps increase N.Korean economic viability, thus they produce more resources that the top cadre/leader can enjoy. The fact that it might improve the rest of the citizens' lives somewhat is largely irrelevant outside of the context of maintaining the current power structure.

 

So negotiating on "their terms" is somewhat nonsensical, because we are already doing that by co-sponsoring joint economic projects between the two Koreas, and the regime's media and cultural control more or less ensures that any success that derives from these projects will only show positively on the regime and its policies as they currently stand. Think if it in terms of the

 

U.S. and S. Korea, China to a certain extent=hostage negotiator

N. Korea= hostage taker (ie. the majority of civilians)

 

N. Korea knows that the moral implications of millions starving and dying in a war, in addition to rapidly destabilizing the entire region is the one major chip they have in negotiations against the rest of the world. The United States and S. Korea, China have taken the position that perhaps a few million N. Koreans starving to death every year is a "better" situation comparatively speaking, to a war which would cost anywhere from 20 to over 100 million lives, and would absolutely decimate the Korean peninsula, not to mention destabilize the Chinese economy as well.

 

chen is absolutely right in stating that this has to be an incredibly slow gradualist movement towards industrialization and economic growth, the N. Korean people need to be introduced to Westerners and thus outsider ideologies and culture in a slow, non-threatening manner so that they have increasingly direct and first-hand experience of Westerners/capitalists/S. Koreans vs. what they see or hear on propaganda networks.

 

 

U.S. military posturing is just as necessary as N.Korean military posturing, but for very different reasons.

 

N. Korea does it to appease the military ranks and inspire nationalistic sentiments in the people (this was done a LOT in the 1990s arguably to take away public attention to the massive agriculture failures put forth by Kim Jong-Il), thus regime stability. It has pretty much nothing to do with actual negotiations with the United States; pressure might scare the S. Korean gov't to put pressure on the U.S. to resume negotiations, but other than that, its a paper tiger.

 

From the U.S. perspective, the military show of force is to continually reinforce the fact that, quite frankly, the N. Korean regime still exists because the outside powers will it, and that the Kim dynasty needs to shirk back from mouthing off too much if they want the business subsidies between the two Koreas to continue.

 

China is an interesting third party in this, because they are stuck between distancing themselves from a very, very annoying and bi-polar and overall unreliable ally in pseudo-communist ideology and geo-strategic positioning, and sticking to quietly supporting certain aspects of the N.Korean regime to maintain stability and thus avoid direct U.S. of S. Korean military intervention. Not to mention the absolutely MASSIVE waves of poverty-ridden, starving, and in many cases ideologically opposed refugees that would flock into the Chinese borders.

Edited April 2, 2013 by Smettingham Rutherford IV

[Dale]

@SR4 - There is not much I disagree with you on, but I did qualify what I meant by 'their terms' here:

 

I admit I am no expert on the Korean issue here, but I think communication is all we have left in order to avoid any kind of conflict or military activity. What I meant by 'their terms' (and I should have qualified this in the first place before mentioning this) is for an attempt to be made to hear them out on what they want exactly, and see if some common ground can be found amongst ongoing communications - without any communication of threat or aversiveness between either side. Have the US tried to mediate something like this to a large extent? Can the US communicate more than they are doing now? It seems to me that these are important questions to be answered.

 

I understand why the US may believe that sending bombers the other day to fly over is the 'right thing to do' - but I am challenging this assertion. Like I said before - it seems to me that N. Korea is quite aware of what the US government has within it's military capabilities. There's no need, from an outside-of-US-government standpoint to send the bombers to fly over, unless you want to provoke further issues and tensions within the N. Korean dictatorship.

[Macca]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL0nOIcrFj4

[syd syside]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL0nOIcrFj4

 

Lol. What a load of shit. I get criticized for calling the NK government evil, while we have many in this thread putting all the blame on the United States as if our history doesn't showcase the versatile range of evil that goes on all over the world by all sorts of people (including the US). It's simply a fiction to think that some group of people can control the world. It is absurd and dangerous.

 

Pretty good post Smetty, but could you expand more on how more access to the outside world for the NK people will in anyway shift the power back to them and away from the regime? It seems to me that any small attempt to dissent or discuss escape sends you and your family to concentration camps where you starve.

Edited April 2, 2013 by compson

[awepittance]

It's a fiction to think a secret group of people conspiring control the world, but it's a fact that the US government is mainly controlled by powerful money interests and has become an engine of imperialism which has in large part caused most of the death and destruction on the planet for the past half century. I think just illuminating this fact acts as a counter balance to even unconscious american exceptionalism.

Edited April 2, 2013 by John Ehrlichman

[syd syside]

It's a fiction to think a secret group of people conspiring control the world, but it's a fact that the US government is mainly controlled by powerful money interests and has become an engine of imperialism which has in large part caused most of the death and destruction on the planet for the past half century. I think just illuminating this fact acts as a counter balance to even unconscious american exceptionalism.

 

Again, if you want to talk about simplification ... black vs white... good vs. evil etc... this is a prime example of absurd claims without much substance. The US Government has been involved in conflicts, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, but to blanket that as "most" of the death and destruction... and to assume that the net outcome of Iraq for instance would have not led to even more deaths (do you have a time / alternate universe machine?) makes your claim unnecessarily simplistic.

 

And to prove my point I only need to lead you to this link: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_other_acts_of_genocide_has_occured_in_50_years

Edited April 2, 2013 by compson

[Lane Visitor]

but it's a fact that the US government is mainly controlled by powerful money interests and has become an engine of imperialism which has in large part caused most of the death and destruction on the planet for the past half century.

 

countries with the most power, money, resources and control are not root cause of all negative world events involving power, money, resources and control. to blame everything on the "powers that be" is childish oversimplification. it's also about human nature, intent, will, ethics and morality.

 

the united states/the west/capitalism is often the target of world ills involving war, destruction, poverty, etc. what i think people forget is that power is relative. If india, nigeria, pakistan, japan, iceland or any other country on earth was the leading world super power with the kind of "by default responsibility" to ethically, morally, financially and politically moderate the workings of the planet (like the U.S. is expected to), they would find themselves in a very similar scenario as far as being blamed for the world's ills.

 

The U.S. is <fill in the blank with imperialist jargon> compared to what model? What other reigning super power? Nothing wrong with criticizing wrongs and we have done plenty wrong, but this "imperialist" nonsense is generalizing, divisive and foolish. I think the overall intentions of the United States and what it's founding fathers stood for, and what we still try to preserve to this day is quite decent. I can't even begin to imagine what the world would be like if the superpower torch was in the hands of say, Saudi Arabia.

[luke viia]

Again, if you want to talk about simplification ... black vs white... good vs. evil etc... this is a prime example of absurd claims without much substance.

 

"The NK people are literally in a totalitarian hell."

 

"NK in its current form is like a cancer. The people who live inside, live in what I think is fair to call hell and the people who run its government are evil."

 

"The new left is becoming more and more fascist and totalitarian in with their double-talk."

[Guest zaphod]

this thread is almost impossible to follow with the quote system as it is.

[syd syside]

 

Again, if you want to talk about simplification ... black vs white... good vs. evil etc... this is a prime example of absurd claims without much substance.

 

"The NK people are literally in a totalitarian hell."

 

"NK in its current form is like a cancer. The people who live inside, live in what I think is fair to call hell and the people who run its government are evil."

 

"The new left is becoming more and more fascist and totalitarian in with their double-talk."

 

Here's a question, would you rather live in the US or North Korea?

 

Do you agree that the NK government currently is so vicious and delusional that most people who escape NK can't even normalize and live happily in SK or the US?

 

And I never said the new left is totalitarian or fascist, I simply said they are moving in that direction by defending states or institutions that are totalitarian or fascist (Islam).

 

If you seriously think you've proven some point, by comparing my statement of NK being evil or totalitarian and Awepittance's point that the United States is the root of most death and destruction of the past 50 years, then yes! you've proven my point that the new left is moving towards fascism and totalitarian beliefs.

Edited April 3, 2013 by compson

[chim]

you have been banned from r/pyongyang

[LimpyLoo]

 

Again, if you want to talk about simplification ... black vs white... good vs. evil etc... this is a prime example of absurd claims without much substance.

 

"The NK people are literally in a totalitarian hell."

 

"NK in its current form is like a cancer. The people who live inside, live in what I think is fair to call hell and the people who run its government are evil."

 

"The new left is becoming more and more fascist and totalitarian in with their double-talk."

 

I mostly agree with all of these statements (except maybe the last one...can you define "new left"?). That said, it is quite possible that I am missing some crucial bits of information.

 

Which brings up an interesting point: often in debates like this there is the (erroneous) belief that everyone is in possession of all the same information, and that the differences in people's position are based solely on different held values (which is the only logical conclusion of the first premise).

 

 

I would hazard a guess that if everyone in this thread experienced some sort of PKDesque anamnesis where we all knew every detail of every single thing that had every happened in the universe, our opinions would align/overlap by 99.99%.

Edited April 3, 2013 by LimpyLoo

[syd syside]

 

 

Again, if you want to talk about simplification ... black vs white... good vs. evil etc... this is a prime example of absurd claims without much substance.

 

"The NK people are literally in a totalitarian hell."

 

"NK in its current form is like a cancer. The people who live inside, live in what I think is fair to call hell and the people who run its government are evil."

 

"The new left is becoming more and more fascist and totalitarian in with their double-talk."

 

I mostly agree with all of these statements (except maybe the last one...can you define "new left"?). That said, it is quite possible that I am missing some crucial bits of information.

 

Which brings up an interesting point: often in debates like this there is the (erroneous) belief that everyone is in possession of all the same information, and that the differences in people's position are based solely on different held values (which is the only logical conclusion of the first premise).

 

 

I would hazard a guess that if everyone in this thread experienced some sort of PKDesque anamnesis where we all knew every detail of every single thing that had every happened in the universe, our opinions would align/overlap by 99.99%.

 

Interesting perspective and I agree. I don't claim to know everything, but I am not afraid to state my viewpoint in a thread like this so that debate and discussion can drive myself and others closer to the truth. Those who are disregarding my attacks against NK and claiming it is instead the United States who is responsible are simply ignoring the reality of the situation and using this issue as a way to spread their agenda imo.

 

This is an example of the new left/progressive that I am speaking of. For example, Obama supporters and many liberals today would rather suggest that it is simply US involvement in the middle east that is causing the violence, intolerance and ignorance in those regions. When I submit attacks against Islam, as a religious totalitarian parasite, the new left, instead of standing up in agreement and support against intolerance of women's rights, gay rights etc etc, they instead simplify my viewpoint as racist or Islamophobic.

 

For example a couple of days ago Richard Dawkins said this on twitter:

 

 

After backlash against him, the critics accused of him of being ignorant because he had not read the Qur'an. To which he responded:

 

 

A bit later, his facebook account was hacked by Islamic activists/hackers and he was then accused of being an Islamophobe by Salon (well known for their progressive/new left views)

 

http://www.salon.com/2013/03/30/dawkins_harris_hitchens_new_atheists_flirt_with_islamophobia/

 

The New Atheists became the new Islamophobes, their invectives against Muslims resembling the rowdy, uneducated ramblings of backwoods racists rather than appraisals based on intellect, rationality and reason. “Islam, more than any other religion human beings have devised, has all the makings of a thoroughgoing cult of death,” writes Harris, whose nonprofit foundation Project Reason ironically aims to “erode the influence of bigotry in our world.”

 

So essentially, the new left thinks that criticizing Religion or Islam is wrong because it is in no way responsible for the culture and development of the Middle East.

 

So people who claim to be liberal or for social justice are actually directing their attacks more on the West (which is far from some ideal example of social justice) but wishes to suppress people's freedom of speech against Islam. This in of itself showcases how these new leftists are drifting away from the ideals of secularism and freedom of speech. Their viewpoints boil down to Noam Chomsky's simplification that all evil and oppression is caused by Western imperialism when if you look at the Middle East and Arabs, the most free and least oppressed are those who live in Israel.

 

But instead of supporting Israel ideals, they support Palestine and Hamas, who are intolerant of gays, intolerant of freedom of speech, and are incompatible with the ideals that we fortunately have. They call for the destruction and death of all Jews. If you can show me where one western country has called for the destruction and death of all Arabs in the Middle East, you may have a point. But the criticism is not directed towards a race, its directed towards the suppression of human rights. I care deeply for the individual, not for the institutions. And any individual who is gay, a women, or who does not agree with Islam suffers oppression in those regions.

Edited April 3, 2013 by compson

[SR4]

ill try to answer or expand on what i said tomorrow maybe, its late now,

 

but might I suggest that we not get into the whole argument over religion/culture? I like this thread and don't want it to derail too far.

[SR4]

@SR4 - There is not much I disagree with you on, but I did qualify what I meant by 'their terms' here:

 

I admit I am no expert on the Korean issue here, but I think communication is all we have left in order to avoid any kind of conflict or military activity. What I meant by 'their terms' (and I should have qualified this in the first place before mentioning this) is for an attempt to be made to hear them out on what they want exactly, and see if some common ground can be found amongst ongoing communications - without any communication of threat or aversiveness between either side. Have the US tried to mediate something like this to a large extent? Can the US communicate more than they are doing now? It seems to me that these are important questions to be answered.

 

I understand why the US may believe that sending bombers the other day to fly over is the 'right thing to do' - but I am challenging this assertion. Like I said before - it seems to me that N. Korea is quite aware of what the US government has within it's military capabilities. There's no need, from an outside-of-US-government standpoint to send the bombers to fly over, unless you want to provoke further issues and tensions within the N. Korean dictatorship.

 

and also, again even after you redefine "their terms", you need to consider what "their terms" actually are. Namely, preservation of the current regime structure as it exists, and to talk otherwise about ideological/moral agreements is relatively worthless; due to Juche and the Kim dynasties unrelenting anti-American agitprop networks, they have essentially buried themselves into a hole.

 

You can't really conduct meaningful diplomacy without some sort of threat of force; war is diplomacy by other more extreme means (and im not advocating war here, its just pragmatically expected in politics and nation-states). And it's not exactly like the U.S. is in a position to "relax" the tensions between the two Koreas.

 

This topic is just immensely complicated, and I've often found that trying to apply seeming universals or expected rules of discussion fly out the window pretty damn quickly.

Edited April 3, 2013 by Smettingham Rutherford IV

[joshuatxuk]

ill try to answer or expand on what i said tomorrow maybe, its late now,

 

but might I suggest that we not get into the whole argument over religion/culture? I like this thread and don't want it to derail too far.

 

Yeah what Compson posted has very much perked my interest but it's very far off from the North Korea topic

[syd syside]

 

ill try to answer or expand on what i said tomorrow maybe, its late now,

 

but might I suggest that we not get into the whole argument over religion/culture? I like this thread and don't want it to derail too far.

 

Yeah what Compson posted has very much perked my interest but it's very far off from the North Korea topic

 

Perhaps I will make a thread on this topic sometime. As I agree, this is off-topic. The only reason I brought it up is that I find the perspective of the New World Order (even casual suspicion) or US imperialism being the root or cause of most evil elsewhere in the world unnecessary; as it waters down the issues and casts westerners against their own institutions and ideals (unknowingly).

 

Once you make these extraordinary claims, you essentially put yourself in a self destructive mindset. The mindset that we westerners also live in a totalitarian state. A state where you and I as individuals have no individual power to improve reality unless we overthrow our government. A momentous challenge indeed and a dangerous one as well. One that divides us by relying not on facts but conspiracy (so in that sense, kind of like a Religion).

 

What I think we need are more liberals standing up for our ideals and criticizing anyone who tramples on them (including the US government). Not with force necessarily, but sometimes. As our world becomes more and more interconnected (globalism) we need to realize that there are governments, religions, and dare I say terrorist organizations (gasp) that do not agree with our ideals and wish to impose their supreme authority on us and on individuals who were simply by chance born into it. Think for a second about growing up in a extremist Islamic terrorist organization, being brought up in that way... where there is no real free will to dissent or disagree with their violent/religious motivations.

 

This is the real enemy. By oversimplifying and exaggerating this issue as some kind of NWO conspiracy we are dividing our nation further and allowing more violent and oppressive outlets from getting their much needed fair share of criticism.

 

Abby Martin does a great job of bringing the evils of the US Government to light, but without a more balanced and nuanced approach, she is in essence suggesting all problems are rooted from a dozen or so elite bankers. Our understanding of human nature and the world is too small to suggest this.

 

In no ways is my declaration that the NK Government is a repugnant/evil example of civilized society a simplification. It's a clear understanding of what we are dealing with. And only through a more united and less divisive United States can we begin to attempt to remove the corporate power that keeps us divided and fearful (two party system). If we can at least agree on what we stand for and who is against us we might make some progress with diplomatic pressure and activism.

[Guest Iain C]

Compson: liberal, patriot, fucking idiot.

[syd syside]

lol

[LimpyLoo]

 

 

ill try to answer or expand on what i said tomorrow maybe, its late now,

 

but might I suggest that we not get into the whole argument over religion/culture? I like this thread and don't want it to derail too far.

 

Yeah what Compson posted has very much perked my interest but it's very far off from the North Korea topic

 

Perhaps I will make a thread on this topic sometime. As I agree, this is off-topic. The only reason I brought it up is that I find the perspective of the New World Order (even casual suspicion) or US imperialism being the root or cause of most evil elsewhere in the world unnecessary; as it waters down the issues and casts westerners against their own institutions and ideals (unknowingly).

 

Once you make these extraordinary claims, you essentially put yourself in a self destructive mindset. The mindset that we westerners also live in a totalitarian state. A state where you and I as individuals have no individual power to improve reality unless we overthrow our government. A momentous challenge indeed and a dangerous one as well. One that divides us by relying not on facts but conspiracy (so in that sense, kind of like a Religion).

 

What I think we need are more liberals standing up for our ideals and criticizing anyone who tramples on them (including the US government). Not with force necessarily, but sometimes. As our world becomes more and more interconnected (globalism) we need to realize that there are governments, religions, and dare I say terrorist organizations (gasp) that do not agree with our ideals and wish to impose their supreme authority on us and on individuals who were simply by chance born into it. Think for a second about growing up in a extremist Islamic terrorist organization, being brought up in that way... where there is no real free will to dissent or disagree with their violent/religious motivations.

 

This is the real enemy. By oversimplifying and exaggerating this issue as some kind of NWO conspiracy we are dividing our nation further and allowing more violent and oppressive outlets from getting their much needed fair share of criticism.

 

Abby Martin does a great job of bringing the evils of the US Government to light, but without a more balanced and nuanced approach, she is in essence suggesting all problems are rooted from a dozen or so elite bankers. Our understanding of human nature and the world is too small to suggest this.

 

In no ways is my declaration that the NK Government is a repugnant/evil example of civilized society a simplification. It's a clear understanding of what we are dealing with. And only through a more united and less divisive United States can we begin to attempt to remove the corporate power that keeps us divided and fearful (two party system). If we can at least agree on what we stand for and who is against us we might make some progress with diplomatic pressure and activism.

 

And don't forget the U.S. government, which kills hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians per year.

 

 

As far as being a threat to humanity, they are worse than all of the terrorist groups in the world combined.

[syd syside]

 

 

 

ill try to answer or expand on what i said tomorrow maybe, its late now,

 

but might I suggest that we not get into the whole argument over religion/culture? I like this thread and don't want it to derail too far.

 

Yeah what Compson posted has very much perked my interest but it's very far off from the North Korea topic

 

Perhaps I will make a thread on this topic sometime. As I agree, this is off-topic. The only reason I brought it up is that I find the perspective of the New World Order (even casual suspicion) or US imperialism being the root or cause of most evil elsewhere in the world unnecessary; as it waters down the issues and casts westerners against their own institutions and ideals (unknowingly).

 

Once you make these extraordinary claims, you essentially put yourself in a self destructive mindset. The mindset that we westerners also live in a totalitarian state. A state where you and I as individuals have no individual power to improve reality unless we overthrow our government. A momentous challenge indeed and a dangerous one as well. One that divides us by relying not on facts but conspiracy (so in that sense, kind of like a Religion).

 

What I think we need are more liberals standing up for our ideals and criticizing anyone who tramples on them (including the US government). Not with force necessarily, but sometimes. As our world becomes more and more interconnected (globalism) we need to realize that there are governments, religions, and dare I say terrorist organizations (gasp) that do not agree with our ideals and wish to impose their supreme authority on us and on individuals who were simply by chance born into it. Think for a second about growing up in a extremist Islamic terrorist organization, being brought up in that way... where there is no real free will to dissent or disagree with their violent/religious motivations.

 

This is the real enemy. By oversimplifying and exaggerating this issue as some kind of NWO conspiracy we are dividing our nation further and allowing more violent and oppressive outlets from getting their much needed fair share of criticism.

 

Abby Martin does a great job of bringing the evils of the US Government to light, but without a more balanced and nuanced approach, she is in essence suggesting all problems are rooted from a dozen or so elite bankers. Our understanding of human nature and the world is too small to suggest this.

 

In no ways is my declaration that the NK Government is a repugnant/evil example of civilized society a simplification. It's a clear understanding of what we are dealing with. And only through a more united and less divisive United States can we begin to attempt to remove the corporate power that keeps us divided and fearful (two party system). If we can at least agree on what we stand for and who is against us we might make some progress with diplomatic pressure and activism.

 

And don't forget the U.S. government, which kills hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians per year.

 

 

As far as being a threat to humanity, they are worse than all of the terrorist groups in the world combined.

 

Can you be more specific with that death toll per year?

[LimpyLoo]

read some Chomsky, bro

read "What Uncle Sam Really Wants" (it's a very short book, easy to breeze through)

 

 

here is the U.S. government for you:

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/21/lindsey_graham_puts_drone_deaths_at_4700/

 

 

 

I'm just gonna flat out say it:

 

the U.S. government (and U.S.-backed "rent-a-thugs") routinely commits atrocities much worse than 9/11

Edited April 3, 2013 by LimpyLoo

[SR4]

alright, i guess this thread is derailed?

[MadameChaos]

Is this real, or propaganda to enable a preeemtive strike on North Korea?