25
   

North Korea: What to do?

 
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 01:54 am
@Ionus,
Got me there. I had to look it up, and yes, it's a military after a fashion. They're all civilians and subject to civil authorities, but it's effectively a military, albeit a pretty weak one by most standards.

Edit: I take most of that back. I should've read the post immediately after yours before replying. Egg on my face. Doh!
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 12:39 pm
China to take a more active role...

Quote:
YEONPYEONG ISLAND, South Korea — China called for emergency talks on resolving a crisis on the Korean peninsula on Sunday, and Seoul and Tokyo said they would study the proposal, as the U.S. and South Korean militaries started a massive drill.

Beijing's move to bring the two Koreas to the negotiating table comes after global pressure on China to take a more responsible role in the standoff and try to rein in ally Pyongyang. Source
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 01:31 pm
@Eudaimon,
Quote:
But see, this in no case justifies what N.K. did. We could say that we can understand that, but to say that was right is actually the same as to justify American war crimes. I think that's the main thing that your opponents want you to admit.


What would I admit to? I've never said that what NK did was right. I've only pointed up the absolutely nutso American position, ie. it has continually threatened NK just as it constantly threatens other countries around the globe.

You only have to look at the US response to 9-11 to see how immoral they are. They attacked two innocent countries, killed over a million people and we're talking about my "position".

Again, if the shoe was on the other foot, if there was someone/some country who had constantly threatened the USA sitting with the same geographic proximity to the USA as there is to NK, there would have been hell to pay for whoever that was. You wouldn't have seen anywhere near the restraint that NK has shown or that Cuba shows or that Guatemala shows or that Haiti shows or that Venezuela shows or that Chile shows or that Nicaragua shows or that [fill in the blank with tens of countries] shows.
failures art
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 02:44 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:
I've never said that what NK did was right.

You're right. You've been too busy making this about the USA to even give proper commentary on the actual event that took place.

But then...
JTT wrote:
I've only pointed up the absolutely nutso American position, ie. it has continually threatened NK...

So North Korea was "threatened," and it was just defending itself from the USA, eh? So why did they fire on South Korea and not the US Navy? A "nutso" position is one where you blame the US for NK firing on SK.

You're clueless. As I predicted, China is stepping in as peace maker. When are you going to admit that this wasn't about North Korea standing up to the USA, but the reality that it's the DPRK theater as usual? Next act: NK demands a show of good faith in the form of supplies.

A
R
T
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 02:47 pm
@failures art,
All of that, but remember that North Korea shelling a civilian population is not a war crime because they are different than the US.
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 02:51 pm
@roger,
roger wrote:

All of that, but remember that North Korea shelling a civilian population is not a war crime because they are different than the US.

We know it is. We just aren't allowed to say so until we morally elevate ourselves to JTT's level. Only he can say this is a war crime...

...but doesn't.

A
R
T
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 05:30 pm
@JTT,
Which country has you in their employ as a propagandist ?
Do you live in Gaza ?
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 06:11 pm
@failures art,
Quote:
You're right. You've been too busy making this about the USA to even give proper commentary on the actual event that took place.


But you haven't. You've been too busy trying to blame NK, weaving all sorts of fanciful tales about who they'll attack next, all meant to deflect attention away from the biggest PRINCIPLE involved in this.

And just who might that be; why it's the biggest troublemaker on the planet, a country that is responsible for the deaths of upwards of 6 million just since WWII. A country that has been terrorizing NK since 1953, something that you just keep avoiding.

Answer this. How would the USA react if some country had killed 30% of the population and continued to commit terrorist acts against it?

Quote:
So North Korea was "threatened," and it was just defending itself from the USA, eh? So why did they fire on South Korea and not the US Navy? A "nutso" position is one where you blame the US for NK firing on SK.


You stupid little ****. The USA would love that to happen. They wouldn't have to concoct another lie. Wait a second, maybe they wouldn't. Lying comes so naturally that I guess it'd be a tossup.

Quote:
You're clueless. As I predicted, China is stepping in as peace maker.


Speaking of clueless, look at your last comment.

Yeah, that was some brilliant prediction, Art. Your talents are being wasted by the DoD. With your smarts, you ought be headed straight to the Pentagon.

Quote:
When are you going to admit that this wasn't about North Korea standing up to the USA, but the reality that it's the DPRK theater as usual? Next act: NK demands a show of good faith in the form of supplies.
[/quote]

Gee, that country that I mentioned, you know, the one being terrorized by the USA and its cronies, the one that is having its supplies cut off, might want to get goods anyway that it can. That's a real shocker, isn't it?

This is exactly what the USA did to Japan before WWII and look where that went. Get the **** out of Korea. Y'all have butchered way more Koreans than you should have. Let the Koreans work things out.

You did the same bloody thing in Vietnam, in the process butchering 3 or so million people and they have worked things out just fine. In fact, the ole USA is actually trading with COMMUNIST Vietnam, after years of punishing them with a brutal illegal embargo.

The embargo came off in a grand hypocritical move only when other countries wouldn't put up with the US's bullshit any longer and all of a sudden the US's principled stand fell to your normal insatiable greed.
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 06:13 pm
@roger,
Quote:
but remember that North Korea shelling a civilian population is not a war crime because they are different than the US.


Stop being so ******* stupid, Roger.
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 06:56 pm
So anyway...

A few more details as to what NK is doing in response to these specific exercises:

http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2010/11/29/2010112900429.html
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 07:40 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
You're right. You've been too busy making this about the USA to even give proper commentary on the actual event that took place.


But you haven't. You've been too busy trying to blame NK, weaving all sorts of fanciful tales about who they'll attack next, all meant to deflect attention away from the biggest PRINCIPLE involved in this.

NK is too blame. There is no principle in trying to move the conversation away from this. Deflect attention? That's a laugh. OP posed the question of what to do (read: what happens next), so it's not me deflecting attention away from the issue, it's you.

JTT wrote:

And just who might that be; why it's the biggest troublemaker on the planet, a country that is responsible for the deaths of upwards of 6 million just since WWII. A country that has been terrorizing NK since 1953, something that you just keep avoiding.

There is nothing to be avoided. This is your vacant rambling. No amount of US terrorizing of NK would justify firing rockets on SOUTH KOREA.

JTT wrote:

Answer this. How would the USA react if some country had killed 30% of the population and continued to commit terrorist acts against it?

As you said before, it was not only NK, but all of Korea. Why isn't SK lashing out at us? For that matter, China, Russia, and Japan as well.

This isn't about how the USA might react. This is about how North Korea did act, and it wasn't against us, it was against South Korea.

JTT wrote:

Quote:
So North Korea was "threatened," and it was just defending itself from the USA, eh? So why did they fire on South Korea and not the US Navy? A "nutso" position is one where you blame the US for NK firing on SK.


You stupid little ****. The USA would love that to happen. They wouldn't have to concoct another lie. Wait a second, maybe they wouldn't. Lying comes so naturally that I guess it'd be a tossup.

You're such a drama queen. The US is actively trying to de-escalate the situation not break down the seize fire. Meanwhile in South Korea, their Secretary of Defense stepped down for not having a more firm response. In your narrative, the USA wants war. In reality, the USA is trying to calm things down (along with China) and it is the South Korean's that want war. Such a dram queen.

JTT wrote:

Quote:
You're clueless. As I predicted, China is stepping in as peace maker.

Speaking of clueless, look at your last comment.

Yeah, that was some brilliant prediction, Art. Your talents are being wasted by the DoD. With your smarts, you ought be headed straight to the Pentagon.

Ah shucks.

JTT wrote:

Quote:
When are you going to admit that this wasn't about North Korea standing up to the USA, but the reality that it's the DPRK theater as usual? Next act: NK demands a show of good faith in the form of supplies.


Gee, that country that I mentioned, you know, the one being terrorized by the USA and its cronies, the one that is having its supplies cut off, might want to get goods anyway that it can. That's a real shocker, isn't it?

Not a shocker at all. Of course they want and need supplies. That's why they continue to get them... oh and the threat of nuclear fire from the sky if the world doesn't.

Last time they took down the Pyongyang reactor and enrichment center for supplies, and then without anyone else violating their terms, they put up another one.

Rinse. Repeat.

JTT wrote:

This is exactly what the USA did to Japan before WWII and look where that went. Get the **** out of Korea. Y'all have butchered way more Koreans than you should have. Let the Koreans work things out.

You realize it was Japan who was occupying Korea at that time right? You think that the embargo was unfair to Imperial Japan? I never thought I hear you defend so many totalitarian states!

If we let the Koreans "work things out" it means war for them. I thought you were against that kind of thing? Or is it only the wars where the USA is involved? It seems like otherwise, you just don't give a damn about the people.

JTT wrote:

You did the same bloody thing in Vietnam, in the process butchering 3 or so million people and they have worked things out just fine. In fact, the ole USA is actually trading with COMMUNIST Vietnam, after years of punishing them with a brutal illegal embargo.

The embargo came off in a grand hypocritical move only when other countries wouldn't put up with the US's bullshit any longer and all of a sudden the US's principled stand fell to your normal insatiable greed.

I'm not advocating an embargo. I'm just telling you facts.

Facts like: North Korea attacked a South Korean island not the USA.

A
R
T
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 08:22 pm
@failures art,
Quote:
There is nothing to be avoided. This is your vacant rambling. No amount of US terrorizing of NK would justify firing rockets on SOUTH KOREA.


It's really odd how you can be such a hypocritical little ****.

Funny, that's not the position of the US. Theirs is that any country that they even dream is doing something untoward is a target. Has it happened? Hell yes, many times.

If I'm not mistaken, you even work for the very entity that has shelled, shocked and awed, murdered a million or so innocents and you have the temerity to whine about this episode.

What would happen if Cuba lobbed shells towards the USA into international waters?

Quote:
OP posed the question of what to do (read: what happens next), so it's not me deflecting attention away from the issue, it's you.


And I responded. Get the **** out of Korea! The USA's record is only one of harm. Three million dead Koreans is enough.

Quote:
As you said before, it was not only NK, but all of Korea. Why isn't SK lashing out at us? For that matter, China, Russia, and Japan as well.


Please tell me that you're not really that dumb. If that were at all possible, there would be hundreds of US citizens in prison for war crimes. We know that hasn't happened because the world's top criminal country is simply too powerful. That doesn't make it right, it's simply the facts.

Quote:
Not a shocker at all. Of course they want and need supplies. That's why they continue to get them... oh and the threat of nuclear fire from the sky if the world doesn't.

Last time they took down the Pyongyang reactor and enrichment center for supplies, and then without anyone else violating their terms, they put up another one.

Rinse. Repeat.


Again, with the hypocrisy. Tell me which country it is that consistently warns the world that "the threat of nuclear fire from the sky" is always on the table. Rinse. Repeat.

Tell me which country it is that supplies Israel with the financial support and the means to develop nuclear weapons and other WMDs.

Rinse. Repeat.

Quote:
You realize it was Japan who was occupying Korea at that time right? You think that the embargo was unfair to Imperial Japan? I never thought I hear you defend so many totalitarian states!


You really are a naive little guy aren't you, Art? You realize that it was the USA that was occupying the Philippines at that time, had been since about 1899.

You realize that the USA had been invading numerous other Latin American countries for years.

Rinse. Repeat.

It merely provided an example for Japan, that you could take over any small little country and pillage its resources.

The Monroe Doctrine established the USA's right to pillage the whole western hemisphere and it certainly didn't show much in the way of restraint. Was the embargo unfair? Probably not, but it sure as hell was hypocritical.



failures art
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 09:20 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
There is nothing to be avoided. This is your vacant rambling. No amount of US terrorizing of NK would justify firing rockets on SOUTH KOREA.


It's really odd how you can be such a hypocritical little ****.

You're so touchy. Hit a nerve?

JTT wrote:

Funny, that's not the position of the US. Theirs is that any country that they even dream is doing something untoward is a target. Has it happened? Hell yes, many times.

You're still making excuses for NK. What the US does to NK doesn't green light NK to attack SK. You're out of touch.

JTT wrote:

If I'm not mistaken, you even work for the very entity that has shelled, shocked and awed, murdered a million or so innocents and you have the temerity to whine about this episode.

You don't know the "entity" I work for. Temerity is the false air of knowing that you parade around to assuage your own guilt on global matters.

JTT wrote:

What would happen if Cuba lobbed shells towards the USA into international waters?

Obviously, we'd fire rockets at Cuba and then blame Germany. I'm sure you'd be defending the USA for killing Cubans too. You'd be telling the Germans how this was their fault. Rolling Eyes

JTT wrote:

Quote:
OP posed the question of what to do (read: what happens next), so it's not me deflecting attention away from the issue, it's you.


And I responded. Get the **** out of Korea! The USA's record is only one of harm. Three million dead Koreans is enough.

So if we weren't in the Yellow Sea and South Korea had carried out their military exercise without us, NK would not have attacked?

You don't have a clue what you're talking about. You only make excuses. As long as the end of the story is that the USA is the problem, you can ignore everything else. You don't give a damn about Korea.

JTT wrote:

Quote:
As you said before, it was not only NK, but all of Korea. Why isn't SK lashing out at us? For that matter, China, Russia, and Japan as well.


Please tell me that you're not really that dumb. If that were at all possible, there would be hundreds of US citizens in prison for war crimes. We know that hasn't happened because the world's top criminal country is simply too powerful. That doesn't make it right, it's simply the facts.

You misunderstood. Why doesn't Korea attack China, Russia, and Japan? All these countries have been fighting over the Korean Peninsula. All have invaded and occupied it.

What about South Korea? What about what they want? You demand the US leave Korea, but what does South Korea want? Or do you even give a damn? I don't think you do.

JTT wrote:

Quote:
Not a shocker at all. Of course they want and need supplies. That's why they continue to get them... oh and the threat of nuclear fire from the sky if the world doesn't.

Last time they took down the Pyongyang reactor and enrichment center for supplies, and then without anyone else violating their terms, they put up another one.

Rinse. Repeat.


Again, with the hypocrisy. Tell me which country it is that consistently warns the world that "the threat of nuclear fire from the sky" is always on the table.

When was the last time the US made a public threat to use nuclear weapons?

JTT wrote:

Tell me which country it is that supplies Israel with the financial support and the means to develop nuclear weapons and other WMDs.

The USA. So now NK attacked South Korea because the USA sells weapons to Israel?

JTT wrote:

Quote:
You realize it was Japan who was occupying Korea at that time right? You think that the embargo was unfair to Imperial Japan? I never thought I hear you defend so many totalitarian states!


You really are a naive little guy aren't you, Art? You realize that it was the USA that was occupying the Philippines at that time, had been since about 1899.

You're adding in the Philippines now! Wow. Who else is showing up to the party in this thread about North Korea attacking South Korea?

Formosa? Perhaps, the Chinese should be attacking the island of Taiwan because of some fill in the blank excuse you've prepared. Fire away China! JTT says it's cool as long as you can find a way to blame the USA! Sorry, Taiwan, JTT say the USA should get the **** out, and he knows everything.

JTT wrote:

You realize that the USA had been invading numerous other Latin American countries for years.

So North Korea is the hero of Latin America? Fascinating.

JTT wrote:

It merely provided an example for Japan, that you could take over any small little country and pillage its resources.

Except it wasn't the USA that invaded the Korean peninsula. It was Kim Sung Il, KJI's father, with help from Maoist China and the USSR. At this point the Japanese empire was shrinking back to the islands (with an noted loss of Sakhalin Island and the Okhotsk island chain). Korea has a long history of invaders, including the northern communists. The Koreans have their pick of who to resent, you insist that it should be the USA.

JTT wrote:

The Monroe Doctrine established the USA's right to pillage the whole western hemisphere and it certainly didn't show much in the way of restraint. Was the embargo unfair? Probably not, but it sure as hell was hypocritical.

The Monroe Document is a religious monstrosity. That said, it is irrelevant to NK attacking SK. You're just being selfish and insensitive to the Koreans again.

A
R
T
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Nov, 2010 09:49 pm
@JTT,
Quote:
the biggest PRINCIPLE involved in this.
Here we have the biggest problem.......you think you are the only one with principles but they are so lop-sided as to be useless even if it were true. Lots of psychotics think they are saving the world with their special knowledge.

What state run propaganda department do you work for ? Do you live in Gaza ?
0 Replies
 
Eudaimon
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Nov, 2010 04:23 am
@JTT,
So, your suggestion is that U.S. military must just get away from the region, allowing the two Koreas to solve this problem on their own? Perhaps that's not a bad idea, but the post of all of you seem to deviate strongly from the issue this thread is dedicated to.
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Nov, 2010 04:48 am
@Eudaimon,
I dont think the north should be given any aid. If China needs an ally that much, let them have them. Let them feed them too. It is only overcompensating by the Chinese that makes them want Tibet and Korea like in the good old Emperor days.
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Nov, 2010 07:03 am
Local update on what a SK thinktank says: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2010/11/116_77172.html

(This is not the ultra-conservative paper. It's a moderate/liberal one.)

'NK likely to continue attacks on South Korea'
By Lee Tae-hoon

Pyongyang carefully prepared last week’s artillery attack on Yeonpyeong Island to achieve a strategic goal and it will likely continue military operations against South Korea, a parliamentary think tank reported Monday.

The National Assembly Research Service (NARS) analyzed that North Korea bombarded the island to build up momentum for its ongoing father-to-son succession, add pressure to Seoul and Washington to resume the six-party talks and secure a permanent security guarantee from the United States.

The most important of the three is the North’s push to create an environment that ensures a smooth and fast transition of power from Kim Jong-il to his youngest son Jong-un, NARS said.

“The recent attack on Yeonpyeong Island appears to be aimed at strengthening unity among North Korean citizens by heightening inter-Korean tension, which would in turn help build an ideal environment for Kim Jong-un to take over the regime,” the think tank added.

It argued that the North’s attack was designed to solidify Jong-un’s position as a military leader and inspire loyalty by portraying him as a general who has successfully spearheaded a military operation.

In late September, Jong-un, who is believed to be only 27 years old, was named vice-chairman of the Central Military Commission of the Workers’ Party and was elevated to the rank of four-star general.

NARS said it believes the North’s deadly attack, which took the lives of two South Korean civilians and two marines, is also closely related to the reclusive regime’s desire to make Washington and Seoul return to the stalled six-way talks.

The six-party talks have been stalled since April 2009 after the North walked away from the negotiating table in protest against international condemnation of its test-firing of a rocket.

NARS argued that the North took extreme measures as it was desperate to draw the attention of Washington and Seoul, which have reacted indifferently to a series of friendly gestures, such as the proposal for family reunions and request for humanitarian aid, since September.

Early this month, Pyongyang revealed to Stanford University professor Siegfried Hecker a covert uranium enrichment plant equipped with more than 1,000 centrifuges, but Washington played down the facility, saying, “It was nothing new.”

“Along with the revelation of a uranium-enrichment facility, the provocation can be viewed as a strategic move to bring the United States to the negotiation table by heightening tensions on the Korean Peninsula,” it said.

NARS also pointed out that the North’s provocation was intended to add pressure on the South and U.S. to replace the Korean armistice with a peace treaty. Korea is still technically at war as the 1950-53 Korean War ended in a truce.

It noted that Seoul and Washington paid little interest in the North’s willingness to dismantle its nuclear facilities, which it expressed in a U.S.-North Korean joint communique issued in October 2000 and in talks with Charles Jack Prichard, a former U.S. top negotiation with Pyongyang, in November 2009.

It said the repeated provocations by the North in the West Sea can be viewed as a strategic move to overthrow the existing truce agreement by turning it into a disputed area and an attempt to make the U.S. sign a permanent security guarantee in return for stopping the attacks.

[email protected]



failures art
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Nov, 2010 07:39 am
@FBM,
FBM wrote:

It said the repeated provocations by the North in the West Sea can be viewed as a strategic move to overthrow the existing truce agreement by turning it into a disputed area and an attempt to make the U.S. sign a permanent security guarantee in return for stopping the attacks.

Interesting analysis. I don't think the US or SK will do this, but perhaps they know this already.

A
R
T
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Nov, 2010 08:12 am
@failures art,
Yeah, that's not gonna happen. TBH, the Northern Limit Line - which is what they would want to have classified as disputed - was drawn up unilaterally (not that there was much choice at the time) and it sure as hell isn't in NK's favor, but with Incheon sitting so close, it would be suicide to redraw it the way NK wants it.

Anyway, I'm thinking the next significant attack, if it comes, will be just the excuse the South and US need to open up their can o' whoop-ass.
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Nov, 2010 09:56 am
@FBM,
As I understand it, the NLL has been drawn this way since 1978? I agree that it isn't going to move.

I agree more attacks will happen, but NK is going to keep skirmishes small IMO.

A
R
T
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/16/2021 at 02:40:52