13
   

How worried am I supposed to be about what's happening between North and South Korea?

 
 
dlowan
 
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 06:45 am
What do you think? Armageddon all over again, or the usual jostling and crap?


Where's Tom Lehrer when we need him?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 13 • Views: 3,969 • Replies: 25
No top replies

 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 06:57 am
It has really become hard to know . . . or. . . maybe it always was hard to know how seriously to take anything. Perhaps, we can only know in hindsight.

Yeah, we do need Tom Lehrer. We need good satire and good news analysis. However, may be what is happening today on all fronts, from the Tea Totalitarians here in the US to Gulf of Mexico disaster to the imminent financial collapse of at least half of Europe is just too much for satire and may be the reason that Bill Moyers is finally retiring.
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 06:58 am
Lehrer is now 82 and hasn't been active since 1965!
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 07:02 am
@plainoldme,
Er, there's a fella named Jon Stewart who is doing pretty well for himself with the political satire.

Dlowan, I know, I wonder the same thing. Will be reading with interest.
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 07:49 am
@sozobe,
How worried are YOU?
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 08:03 am
@dlowan,
Somewhat. I really doubt N.Korea wants a shooting war since at the end of the day, S.Korea has all the resources. N.Korea would have to rely on China to supply food, weapons, money to repair infrastructure. China doesn't want a shooting war because it's bad for business, so if everyone was rational, no problem. The issue is that Pyongyang almost certainly ordered the sinking of the S. Korean ship. You don't accidentally torpedo a destroyer. I can't fathom what N.Korea's thought process is here and that's scary. It could be an attempt to pull China away from the US - European axis, but I think China is pretty savy and goes where it wants.
George
 
  2  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 08:12 am
No one wants a shooting war with a fruitcake nation that's packing nuclear
heat. That's what North Korea is counting on. But who is going to call
their bluff? South Korea? Hell, Seoul is in range of conventional artillery.
So does South Korea seek military redress? (Remember the Cheonan!)

Nope.

The war of words escalates as balloons are launched with pamphlets attached.
0 Replies
 
Sglass
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 08:22 am
@engineer,
China knows its bread is buttered with the Yankee Dollar.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 08:24 am
North Korea wants economic and political concessions so as to maintain and expand their militaristic endeavors. There is nothing new or unusual in this and there is no way to predict the eventual outcome.

If you want something more to worry about try India versus Pakistan.
0 Replies
 
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 08:26 am
@dlowan,
Speaking of Lehrer whose brilliance from early 196os is dead-on-the-money now:

We Will All Go Together When We Go
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frAEmhqdLFs
- or -
on Wernher von Braun:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEJ9HrZq7Ro&NR=1

and another song with some of the best satirical lyrics of all-time:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3f72CTDe4-0&NR=1
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 09:24 am
I follow the DPRK pretty close. Nothing new says I. Mostly the beating of chests. My alert level is pretty low.

What I am worried about is the inevitable transition of power to KJI's son. I believe upon this event, and KJI's death, there will be potentially multiple attempts at a coup. I think the destabilization and potential for it leaking over the boarder will happen then if ever.

A
R
T
rosborne979
 
  2  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 11:50 am
@dlowan,
dlowan wrote:
What do you think? Armageddon all over again, or the usual jostling and crap?

I think it's a little more than the usual jostling. An actual ship was sunk and actual lives were lost.

But I'm not an expert on these things and I don't know much about the politics of those countries.
George
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 01:21 pm
@failures art,
failures art wrote:
. . . What I am worried about is the inevitable transition of power to KJI's
son. I believe upon this event, and KJI's death, there will be potentially
multiple attempts at a coup. I think the destabilization and potential for it
leaking over the boarder will happen then if ever . . .

Yeah, that's gonna be interesting.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 01:32 pm
@failures art,
failures art wrote:

I follow the DPRK pretty close. Nothing new says I. Mostly the beating of chests. My alert level is pretty low.

What I am worried about is the inevitable transition of power to KJI's son. I believe upon this event, and KJI's death, there will be potentially multiple attempts at a coup. I think the destabilization and potential for it leaking over the boarder will happen then if ever.
We'd happily funnel billions in the rebel direction because that's about the only transition that doesn't necessarily involve Seoul becoming a "sea of fire." With millions already dead; I'll continue hoping he dies sooner, rather than later.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 May, 2010 01:39 pm
@dlowan,
Here's how someone put it on Fark.com:

Quote:
Why isn't South Korea going to war with North Korea over that torpedoed ship? Because SK knows it would win, topple the government and be responsible for 24 million welfare cases


U.S. Must Respond Firmly to North Korean Naval Attack

Quote:
North Korean Motives

Most likely, Pyongyang’s attack on the Cheonan was retaliation for North Korea’s defeat in a November 2009 naval clash with South Korea. In that dispute, a North Korean ship was heavily damaged and its crew likely suffered casualties. The Cheonan attack and previous naval clashes took place near a disputed maritime boundary in the West Sea. During the past two years, North Korea has proclaimed that it would adhere to its own interpretation of the military demarcation line, escalated its claim to sovereignty of South Korean waters, increased naval artillery training and augmented ammunition reserves of coastal artillery units in the region, and abrogated the armistice ending the Korean War.

The Cheonan attack was also motivated by Pyongyang’s desire to increase tensions on the peninsula"a negotiating tactic favored by North Korea. Pyongyang has historically seen raising tensions as an effective means of securing negotiating leverage and forcing concessions from its opponents. North Korea typically alternates provocative actions with seemingly conciliatory behavior in order to gain the diplomatic initiative and dictate the negotiating agenda. Given that last year’s long-range missile and nuclear tests did not achieve North Korean objectives, Pyongyang may have felt obligated to up the ante through a high-risk provocative act, such as sinking the Cheonan.

By attacking the Cheonan, Kim Jong-il was likely hoping to force President Lee Myung-bak to soften his principled engagement policy toward North Korea as well as to prompt the U.N. to reduce the sanctions that have had a strong impact on North Korea’s economy.[5] Such a response would hardly be unprecedented; Pyongyang has often lashed out when it felt weak or was perceived as weak by opponents in what South Koreans refer to as the “barking of a wounded dog.”

Despite the audacity of attacking a South Korean ship, Kim Jong-il would have been confident that neither South Korea nor the U.S. would retaliate militarily. Both countries have suffered several North Korean attacks that led to loss of life, but neither has retaliated.[6] Nor was Pyongyang punished when it brazenly violated the U.S. redline against nuclear proliferation when it helped to build a covert nuclear reactor in Syria.
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2010 10:10 am
@OCCOM BILL,
OCCOM BILL wrote:

failures art wrote:

I follow the DPRK pretty close. Nothing new says I. Mostly the beating of chests. My alert level is pretty low.

What I am worried about is the inevitable transition of power to KJI's son. I believe upon this event, and KJI's death, there will be potentially multiple attempts at a coup. I think the destabilization and potential for it leaking over the boarder will happen then if ever.
We'd happily funnel billions in the rebel direction because that's about the only transition that doesn't necessarily involve Seoul becoming a "sea of fire." With millions already dead; I'll continue hoping he dies sooner, rather than later.

It will be sooner than later IMO. I just think that many higher ups in the DPRK military may try to move to power and in doing so, the game will become mustering support by posturing about who is the toughest against SK and the USA.

A
R
This is where I see a legitimate threat.
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2010 06:39 pm
@failures art,
failures art wrote:
It will be sooner than later IMO. I just think that many higher ups in the DPRK military may try to move to power and in doing so, the game will become mustering support by posturing about who is the toughest against SK and the USA.
After generations of brain-washing, of this I have no doubt... but don't share your fear of it. Anything that can splinter the stronghold Kim currently enjoys is welcome. That little bastard is just too good at quashing rebellion before it begins.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  2  
Reply Fri 28 May, 2010 07:39 pm
@rosborne979,
Sorry everyone, my access to A2k has been pretty much non-existent since I started this thread, hence no replies.

I agree that sinking a boat is a bit of an escalation, isn't it?


How many Koreans have been killed by the other side since
peace" broke out?
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 May, 2010 12:42 am
Strictly speaking the UN should still be involved as it was only a ceasefire, not a declaration of peace. As the ceasefire has been broken by the north many times, it seems the south will not call the UN back short of a full blown invasion. The ceasefire involves China, and the Chinese do not want to get into THAT war again.

US fear of war with China on mainland asia made Vietnam the mess it was, with the US refusing to invade North Vietnam despite many reasons to do so. Since WWII the west particluarly Europe has been reluctant to get into any wars.

North Korea has sent special forces to kidnap japanese citizens from Japan and nothing was done. It seems if they do not invade the south, not much will happen.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Sun 30 May, 2010 08:47 am
I heard that this particular provocation has the S. Korean youth up in arms in ways that other event haven't. Apparently the death of 40+ youthful conscripts has touched a nerve the the younger generation is agitating for a response.
 

Related Topics

Has the Korean topic been done to death? - Discussion by McGentrix
Did Kim Jong Un feed his uncle to dogs - Discussion by izzythepush
Kim Jong Il dead at 69 - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
How sad and cynical is this? - Discussion by blackrose cv
Jimmy Carter sent on A Hostage Run - Discussion by hawkeye10
NORTH KOREA CONDUCTS NUCLEAR TEST - Discussion by oralloy
Delivery of a Nuclear Weapon - Question by gollum
War in 140 Characters or Less - Discussion by jespah
 
  1. Forums
  2. » How worried am I supposed to be about what's happening between North and South Korea?
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.39 seconds on 04/25/2019 at 12:29:03