North Korea

[syd syside]

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

 

"which kills hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians per year."

 

I'm not denying this as much as asking for some specifics... I'm critical of the CIA and US foreign policy, but I think you are making my point in that you are trying to negate my criticism against terrorist groups, religious extremists, totalitarian governments etc by claiming and exaggerating the effects of US foreign policy on the rest of the world. My argument is that one can simply have a more versatile approach to all of the above without needing to make rash unsupported claims.

 

When I say "the real enemies" I mean people, institutions, governments that are in affect completely in favor of totalitarian beliefs and institutions. The United States has some of the best freedom of speech laws in the world. And it has an immense amount of power that does get misused and corrupted in evil ways as well... So we as people should criticize the miss use when we see it, but not to stop there.

 

To not contribute and to claim superiority over others (by calling them idiots or bigots) who communicate a logical distaste for governments like NK and people like Osama Bin Laden is a mistake. Real enemies are the enemies that openly declare to be our enemy. People like Hamas who call for the death and destruction of all Jews while using a "holy book" to justify stoning gay people or oppressing women's rights..... or a government like NK who starve their people and brainwash them/strict them of all basic human rights.

 

I mean need only look at the Syrian civil war to see what the real enemy ideologies and institutions are. There is no hiding from this fact and I don't know why it is so difficult for people who say they are for protecting the individual to focus or comment on this stuff without in so many ways blaming it all on the United States. It is, as I have said, a self-destructive and defeatist attitude that gets us nowhere as a collective. Relies too much on conspiracy, fear, and paranoia to be of any benefit with making positive change.

 

This:

 

Edited April 3, 2013 by compson

[Macca]

http://youtu.be/Pp0Z1EafiWs

[eugene]

Compson: liberal, patriot, fucking idiot.

 

most of watmm would consider themselves liberals, might as well spell out what's your beef with them now that the thread is derailed.

[Guest Iain C]

 

Compson: liberal, patriot, fucking idiot.

 

most of watmm would consider themselves liberals, might as well spell out what's your beef with them now that the thread is derailed.

 

I don't have to do anything; I just got out of a Turkish hospital

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[eugene]

of course you don't have to, but it would be interesting if you did

[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

 

"which kills hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians per year."

 

I'm not denying this as much as asking for some specifics... I'm critical of the CIA and US foreign policy, but I think you are making my point in that you are trying to negate my criticism against terrorist groups, religious extremists, totalitarian governments etc by claiming and exaggerating the effects of US foreign policy on the rest of the world. My argument is that one can simply have a more versatile approach to all of the above without needing to make rash unsupported claims.

 

When I say "the real enemies" I mean people, institutions, governments that are in affect completely in favor of totalitarian beliefs and institutions. The United States has some of the best freedom of speech laws in the world. And it has an immense amount of power that does get misused and corrupted in evil ways as well... So we as people should criticize the miss use when we see it, but not to stop there.

 

To not contribute and to claim superiority over others (by calling them idiots or bigots) who communicate a logical distaste for governments like NK and people like Osama Bin Laden is a mistake. Real enemies are the enemies that openly declare to be our enemy. People like Hamas who call for the death and destruction of all Jews while using a "holy book" to justify stoning gay people or oppressing women's rights..... or a government like NK who starve their people and brainwash them/strict them of all basic human rights.

 

I mean need only look at the Syrian civil war to see what the real enemy ideologies and institutions are. There is no hiding from this fact and I don't know why it is so difficult for people who say they are for protecting the individual to focus or comment on this stuff without in so many ways blaming it all on the United States. It is, as I have said, a self-destructive and defeatist attitude that gets us nowhere as a collective. Relies too much on conspiracy, fear, and paranoia to be of any benefit with making positive change.

 

This:

 

 

I hear you man. I would not wanna visit those countries.

 

I kinda think that it's just a matter of time before technology and social media organically root out these primitive ideologies. Furthermore, I would say that technology and social media will topple all of the totalitarian governments of the world and make everyone scientifically literate (so people stop believe in stolen penises and an earth that was created by a giant invisible bearded man 5,000 years ago).

[syd syside]

AFP's twitter feed:

Quote:

#UPDATE: North Korea approves nuclear strike on US http://bit.ly/14DtDed

Shortly before the US dropped two atomic bombs on Japan, the United Stated showered the Japanese cities of Nagasaki, Hiroshima, and 33 other potential targets with over 5 million leaflets warning civilians of the impending attack. In Japanese, the back of the pictured leaflet read:

"Read this carefully as it may save your life or the life of a relative or friend. In the next few days, some or all of the cities named on the reverse side will be destroyed by American bombs. These cities contain military installations and workshops or factories which produce military goods. We are determined to destroy all of the tools of the military clique which they are using to prolong this useless war. But, unfortunately, bombs have no eyes. So, in accordance with America's humanitarian policies, the American Air Force, which does not wish to injure innocent people, now gives you warning to evacuate the cities named and save your lives. America is not fighting the Japanese people but is fighting the military clique which has enslaved the Japanese people. The peace which America will bring will free the people from the oppression of the military clique and mean the emergence of a new and better Japan. You can restore peace by demanding new and good leaders who will end the war. We cannot promise that only these cities will be among those attacked but some or all of them will be, so heed this warning and evacuate these cities immediately."

An American-controlled radio station on Saipan was broadcasting a similar message to the Japanese people every 15 minutes. Five days after the fliers were distributed, Hiroshima was destroyed by the "Little Boy" atomic device. Following the first attack, the U.S. air force dropped even more leaflets:

America asks that you take immediate heed of what we say on this leaflet.We are in possession of the most destructive explosive ever devised by man. A single one of our newly developed atomic bombs is actually the equivalent in explosive power to what 2000 of our giant B-29s can carry on a single mission. This awful fact is one for you to ponder and we solemnly assure you it is grimly accurate.
We have just begun to use this weapon against your homeland. If you still have any doubt, make inquiry as to what happened to Hiroshima when just one atomic bomb fell on that city.

Before using this bomb to destroy every resource of the military by which they are prolonging this useless war, we ask that you now petition the Emperor to end the war. Our president has outlined for you the thirteen consequences of an honorable surrender. We urge that you accept these consequences and begin the work of building a new, better and peace-loving Japan.

You should take steps now to cease military resistance. Otherwise, we shall resolutely employ this bomb and all our other superior weapons to promptly and forcefully end the war.

Three days after Hiroshima, the "Fat Man" bomb was dropped on Nagasaki.

The distribution of these leaflets, along with the radio broadcasts, does put a dent in the argument that America was unconcerned about the potential civilian deaths as a result of an atomic attack, but the debate over the bombs' necessity in ending the war will never be truly resolved. Also interestingly, one of the original potential bomb sites was the Japanese Emperor's Palace, but it was scratched from the list due to its cultural significance.

http://www.damninteresting.com/ww2-america-warned-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-citizens/

Edited April 3, 2013 by compson

[syd syside]

North Korea dramatically escalated its warlike rhetoric on Thursday, warning that it had authorised plans for nuclear strikes on targets in the United States.

 

"The moment of explosion is approaching fast," the North Korean military said, warning that war could break out "today or tomorrow".

Pyongyang's latest pronouncement came as Washington scrambled to reinforce its Pacific missile defences, preparing to send ground-based interceptors to Guam and dispatching two Aegis class destroyers to the region.

 

Tension was also high on the North's heavily-fortified border with South Korea, after Kim Jong-Un's isolated regime barred South Koreans from entering a Seoul-funded joint industrial park on its side of the frontier.

 

In a statement published by the state KCNA news agency, the Korean People's Army general staff warned Washington that US threats would be "smashed by... cutting-edge smaller, lighter and diversified nuclear strike means".

"The merciless operation of our revolutionary armed forces in this regard has been finally examined and ratified," the statement said.

 

Last month, North Korea threatened a "pre-emptive" nuclear strike against the United States, and last week its supreme army command ordered strategic rocket units to combat status.

 

But, while Pyongyang has successfully carried out test nuclear detonations, most experts think it is not yet capable of mounting a device on a ballistic missile capable of striking US bases or territory.

 

Mounting tension in the region could however trigger incidents on the tense and heavily-militarised border between North and South Korea.

There was no immediate American reaction to the North's latest statement, but US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Pyongyang represented a "real and clear danger" to the United States and to its allies South Korea and Japan.

 

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gpuimXzka5inwGnL0c9vZsbQ54fw?docId=CNG.4eb43e27607cb9d4be6b952b88ddefeb.01

[joshuatxuk]

I think they're trying their best to make the US-ROK conduct preemptive strikes on any suspected missile sites and then call them out as aggressors.

Edited April 3, 2013 by joshuatx

[Alcofribas]

i'm perfectly fine with this as long as NK sends me a little propaganda leaflet before dropping a nuclear bomb on my head.

[syd syside]

Pentagon's number two advocated bombing NK 7 years ago when he was at Harvard.

 

http://nation.time.com/2013/04/03/current-top-pentagon-official-urged-bombing-north-koreawhen-he-was-on-the-sidelines/

[syd syside]

@MattSoleyn

Chosun: PRK (South #Korea) no longer knows where two #DPRK submarines that left base earlier this week are.

[Lane Visitor]

damn...just now..

 

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i_rmAvypzoveMWSivdq-VJnE0KLQ?docId=CNG.8d413e4089153d445404cf346d191280.811

[syd syside]

[syd syside]

On Sky News now:

[From] Reuters: North Korea tells the South to pull out of Kaesong Complex by April 10

[lumpenprol]

though I've been living in China, strangely I haven't been paying attention to any of this. But maybe like Joyrex, as I get older I lose my patience with these sorts of shenanigans. Even Cuba isn't as stupid as this (and I like Cuba and have traveled there).

 

May be time to do some quiet diplomacy to get allies on board, and then do a Zero Dark Thirty on fatboy Un.

 

This is coming from a guy who was very vocal against the second Gulf War, even marched against it. But in that case, we had had inspectors in Iraq, and it was pretty transparent to anyone with half a brain that the Republicans had ulterior motives for raising the "weapons of mass destruction" canard.

 

This is different, I think. If we can verify that they truly seem to be pursuing nuclear materials, I think we have to act. Go in and hit them fast, hard and quietly, with broad support. Then after a time, turn the country over to South Korea, but with pledges for economic support from a broad coalition of countries. Maybe give some buffer territory to China to allay fears about having a Democratic neighbor. Not sure how practical this is, but that's my theory...

[lumpenprol]

lol :-)

 

but srsly, I know I'm being a bit glib here, but what do you think is the right course of action? Just continue to assume it's saber rattling with the main purpose of shoring up domestic support for Un, and leave it at that? Continue the sanctions, with occasional carrot-dangling for good behavior? I'm fine with that but I don't like his rhetoric. Even Ahmanenijad (sp?) is not so bellicose and confrontational.

[joshuatxuk]

This is different, I think. If we can verify that they truly seem to be pursuing nuclear materials, I think we have to act. Go in and hit them fast, hard and quietly, with broad support. Then after a time, turn the country over to South Korea, but with pledges for economic support from a broad coalition of countries. Maybe give some buffer territory to China to allay fears about having a Democratic neighbor. Not sure how practical this is, but that's my theory...

 

Agreed that this is a far more real and literal threat and one with very different circumstances than the 2003 Iraq war. Their missile capability is still very weak but the fact that they could have a warhead to deploy is quite alarming. If Japan, China, and Russia all give a go ahead, even a reluctant one, along with a pretty decent international backing to destroy nuclear facilities and missile sites, I'm inclined to agree that it should be done.

 

The question is, what happens after that? Assassinating Un would be way too dangerous. Assuming a full-on war broke out I'm sure a fair amount of North Koreans would immediately feel and become refugees on the borders but there are millions, perhaps even a majority, of the population who will fight for the DPRK and/or support the government during the initial outbreak of war. The fanaticism might even be a problem for Japan internally with the North Korean expats there. The humanitarian crisis in terms of civilian casualties from the war, not to mention widespread forced conscription and likely starvation among DPRK's soldiers, will be substantial. There will be decades of sorting through human rights abuses (the prison camps, corruption, mass deprivation of resources from the populace, etc) and assimilating the North with the ROK and reconciling peace after 60+ years of perpetual tension. There's no simple endgame and can't imagine how complicated an issue this is for even experts to project hypothetically. Hell, even the East and West Germany reunification, a far more peaceful and easy task in comparison, isn't completely over. I remember a few years ago Stasi records were made public and many East Germans found out officially that their own friends and family members betrayed them to the GDR. I hope the DPRK will fall at some point, even if very gradually, but no matter what it will be a very intense and traumatic transition for Koreans on both side.

Edited April 4, 2013 by joshuatx

[Guest zaphod]

damn...just now..

 

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i_rmAvypzoveMWSivdq-VJnE0KLQ?docId=CNG.8d413e4089153d445404cf346d191280.811

 

johns hopkins think tank...

[syd syside]

North Korea seen moving mid-range missile to east coast

 

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea has moved what appears to be a mid-range Musudan missile to its east coast, South Korea's Yonhap news agency said on Thursday, quoting multiple government sources privy to intelligence from U.S. and South Korean authorities.

It was not clear if the missile was mounted with a warhead or whether the North was planning to fire it or was just putting it on display as a show of force, one South Korean government source was quoted as saying.

"South Korean and U.S. intelligence authorities have obtained indications the North has moved an object that appears to be a mid-range missile to the east coast," the source said.

The Musudan missile is believed to have a range of 3,000 km (1,875 miles) or more, which would put all of South Korea and Japan in range and possibly also the U.S. territory of Guam in the Pacific Ocean. North Korea is not believed to have tested these mid-range missiles, according to most independent experts

South Korea's defense ministry declined to comment.

North Korea has threatened a nuclear strike on the United States and missile attacks on its Pacific bases, including in Guam. Those threats followed new U.N. sanctions imposed on the North after it carried out its third nuclear test in February.

The missile was moved to the coast by train. The North has a missile launch site on the northeastern coast, which it has used to unsuccessfully test-fire long-range rockets in the past.

The Yonhap report did not say if the missile had been moved to the missile site.

Japan's Asahi Shimbun newspaper issued a similar report on Thursday, saying the North had moved what appeared to be a long-range missile to its east coast

 

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE93301S20130404?irpc=932

 

Seems like things are really heating up?

[lumpenprol]

of course we all assume that north korea and Un in particular are rational actors. But dude invited Dennis Rodman over. That's not a very good indicator of mental health :-)

[chenGOD]

 

 

 

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?

 

 

I just had to comment on this, since you know, I've actually had some experience with NK refugees. The one I know best is my friend's girlfriend. They live together in Seoul, and she has a great time there.

Some of the other NK refugees do not have such a wonderful existence, it's true. However, the general trend is that it tends to be discrimination on the part of South Koreans that causes much of their unhappiness after escaping South Korea.

 

as to the other stuff:

http://www.nknews.org/2013/04/north-korea-threatens-to-permanently-close-kaesong/

Sensationalist headline, rational article.

 

http://www.nknews.org/2013/04/north-korean-military-has-approval-to-launch-nuclear-attacks-on-u-s/

 

In the second article, note the following phrases:

 

"Speaking at a press conference Wednesday, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said that the U.S. thought “that the ban ought to be lifted”."

The ban here refers to the ban on SK workers entering the Kaesong complex. Now, that seems totally reasonable yeah? But think of yourself as a North Korean - who for years have been saying , "we think the sanctions on our country should be lifted."

 

"Several moves made by the United States in the past few weeks, including the use of B-2 bombers and F-22 fighters during joint military exercises with South Korea, indicate that it is taking North Korea’s threats seriously."

From a North Korean perspective, it is taking the threats posed by the US/South Korean military exercises seriously, especialy with B-2 bombers in the region.

 

You know, it's tempting to think of the North as evil, after all, you've been fed the line about them starving their people for decades and swallowed it whole (never mind those pesky famine conditions - it must be the evil government!!). You're probably even thinking about how North Korea started the Korean War (which I am not disputing). Those godless communists, attacking a free nation. Whose president had recently been elected in a scandal filled election, with his primary opponent assassinated by Korean military, and the US still called those elections fair and transparent.

Never mind the oppression of communists and violent uprisings that happened in the southern part of the peninsula prior to the war (by the way, did you know that at the time of the split, there were actually more communists in the south than in the north?). Never mind that the division of the nation was undertaken without consulting any Koreans, and done by two junior US officers at the request of MacArthur. Never mind any of the history...just concentrate on the modern day rhetoric and propaganda....(from which government though?).

 

 

ps. NKNEWS is actually a fantastic site if you're interested in following North Korea.

[syd syside]

Thanks for the source, will use this as another outlet for information.

 

When you say from a North Korean perspective, what has SK or the US said that is equivalent to the amount of threats being made by NK? It seems pretty clear one side is threatening war while the US is responding seriously to those threats. Not to mention if you look at the recent history of attacks being carried out by NK.

 

And real quickly what should be the policy of the United States in regards to NK? Is it as simple as lifting sanctions and giving them food? And do you deny their use of concentration camps? I'd be interested to learn more about what your friends girlfriend description of life in NK was like.

Edited April 4, 2013 by compson

[Friendly Foil]

Nothing will happen. EZ

[joshuatxuk]

Never mind the oppression of communists and violent uprisings that happened in the southern part of the peninsula prior to the war (by the way, did you know that at the time of the split, there were actually more communists in the south than in the north?). Never mind that the division of the nation was undertaken without consulting any Koreans, and done by two junior US officers at the request of MacArthur. Never mind any of the history...just concentrate on the modern day rhetoric and propaganda....(from which government though?).

 

It's bit sickening to think that many Westerners and most young Americans, not us WATMMers of course, are completely unaware the ROK was a dictatorship in the 1980s whose then leader was actually sentenced to death (later pardoned) for the Gwangju_Massacre among other offenses in office. We really are fed such stark and simplistic rhetoric regarding the North and South division and conflict. Even as someone who is probably more informed than many of my peers (which is saying much) I still learned a lot of things I had no idea about regarding Korean society and culture from friends who taught in South Korea last year. Likewise I always find your posts extremely informative chengod.