• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
L. Spiro

War with North Korea

75 posts in this topic

Citation Needed

The link at the top of the original post.

The south threatened their survival while the US flew B-52 bombers from Guam to Korea and back in a nuclear bombing drill!

What do you expect? If (we go back a few decades where this is possible, and) Russia did such a thing to the US, the US would certainly make similar threats back towards Russia.

 

From the article:
The threat from the North’s Korean People’s Army Supreme Command came only hours after President Park Geun-hye of South Korea warned that the North Korean leadership could ensure its survival only when...

“They should be mindful that everything will be reduced to ashes and flames the moment the first attack [from the south] is unleashed,” the North Korean command said...

 

So, "you will not survive unless you bend to our will", followed by "if you attack us then everything will burn".

That's not what we report in our headlines though, is it? We just report that the north has made threats, and do our best to imply there's no reason for them.

We certainly don't mention that we were threatening them to abandon their nuclear programme, while flying nuclear bombers overhead!

 

Note that the article didn't include an earlier paragraph from the north, reinforcing that the north was threatening a counter attack, not initial aggression:

We will demonstrate with the practical military action the firm will of the army and people of the DPRK to take counteraction to defend the sovereignty and dignity of the supreme leadership of the country.

 

So using this press release as evidence that the North is going to start a war is a bit silly. They were threatened with nuclear destruction, and they issued counter-threats.

Now, go question why our press is making it look like the reverse happened... Maybe the US wants there to be a war?

 

[edit] To be fair again, "bend to our will" included "stop provoking us" as well as "lay down your arms". So both sides are using earlier provocations by the other in order to justify their current provocations.

Edited by Hodgman
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This all the fault of Homefront in proving to NK that America was in reality a soft target and that the south koreans would be easily absorbed into their culture. Kaos should have stuck with China instead and damn the trade treaties.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The U.S. military has strongly suggested that they have the means to defend against a nuclear attack from NK.

 

As for what KJU is thinking? Well, he's insane. It's hard to say. Given the environment he's grown up in and his obvious lack of political savvy he seems to just be doing random crap to see what happens. NK has kind of turned into the fulcrum point that everyone has a finger on. It's not really about what KJU is thinking, but who he's listening to at the moment. It's really sticky because obviously someone should just go in there and clean house before people get hurt, but everyone else would get upset so nobody can really do anything.

 

I hear reports all the time that the people of NK are totally sold out communists and really hyped up to conquer the world. I have a hard time believing that a whole nation could be that delusional, but stranger things have happened.

 

Of course there's always the possibility that KJU is just crazy like a fox and NK is actually a giant theme park surrounded by jungle and funded by some genetically engineered tree that fruits gold nuggets. It would certainly explain why Dennis Rodman was so impressed.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically, war can’t be avoided.  Backing down is obviously not possible.
He’s already stated he will make a pre-emptive strike, and frankly he has no choice.  So war will happen.

 

There won't be a war because nobody, besides North Korea, wants one.  I surely don't want one.

Nobody wants the economy to fall and gas prices to rise, and then the government starts using it
as an excuse to pass unconstitional laws to spy on their own citizens.  Oh wait, that's already happening.

 

Aren't you glad you live in Japan?  The only things you need to worry about is earthquakes, tsunamis,
and radioactive water.

 

Of course there's always the possibility that KJU is just crazy like a fox and NK is actually a giant theme park surrounded by jungle and funded by some genetically engineered tree that fruits gold nuggets. It would certainly explain why Dennis Rodman was so impressed.

 

Dennis Rodman visiting North Korea is the start of the new Austin Powers movie.
He's a double-agent spy who has a taste for 7-course meals and chubby Korean women.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Citation Needed

The link at the top of the original post.

The south threatened their survival while the US flew B-52 bombers from Guam to Korea and back in a nuclear bombing drill!

What do you expect? If (we go back a few decades where this is possible, and) Russia did such a thing to the US, the US would certainly make similar threats back towards Russia.

 

From the article:
The threat from the North’s Korean People’s Army Supreme Command came only hours after President Park Geun-hye of South Korea warned that the North Korean leadership could ensure its survival only when...

“They should be mindful that everything will be reduced to ashes and flames the moment the first attack [from the south] is unleashed,” the North Korean command said...

 

So, "you will not survive unless you bend to our will", followed by "if you attack us then everything will burn".

That's not what we report in our headlines though, is it? We just report that the north has made threats, and do our best to imply there's no reason for them.

We certainly don't mention that we were threatening them to abandon their nuclear programme, while flying nuclear bombers overhead!

 

Note that the article didn't include an earlier paragraph from the north, reinforcing that the north was threatening a counter attack, not initial aggression:

We will demonstrate with the practical military action the firm will of the army and people of the DPRK to take counteraction to defend the sovereignty and dignity of the supreme leadership of the country.

 

So using this press release as evidence that the North is going to start a war is a bit silly. They were threatened with nuclear destruction, and they issued counter-threats.

Now, go question why our press is making it look like the reverse happened... Maybe the US wants there to be a war?

 

[edit] To be fair again, "bend to our will" included "stop provoking us" as well as "lay down your arms". So both sides are using earlier provocations by the other in order to justify their current provocations.

 

Its funny really, its pretty much the same way with the massacres during the korea war (SK murdered 100-200.000 civilians("communist sympathizers", including children) with the US silent approval during the war), even though NK was far worse it is quite hypocritical to pretend that the west are the good guys. (Sure, we're not as bad as NK, but we're not as good as our governments try to tell us we are)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is quite hypocritical to pretend that the west are the good guys. (Sure, we're not as bad as NK, but we're not as good as our governments try to tell us we are)

Indeed, that's what always amuses me about threads like this; terms like 'insane', 'dillusional' and propergander are thrown around as if the view point we are presented with is clearly pure, sane and Right in some absolute sense.

I'm not saying that we are as bad as places like NK but, as Million Dead once sang, A little more suspicion in our fairy tales please.

(and if you haven't heard of Million Dead then you make me sad sad.png)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

L. Spiro out of curiosity what is the news like in Japan about the North Korean threat?

I don’t know. The only time I even catch a glimpse of TV is at lunch, and what they are watching is definitely not news.


In a poll in 2012 it was found that all age groups of South Koreans felt war was more likely than not.

Most of the criticism I am getting is related to the idea that he has no choice but to keep escalating things in an effort to prove his worthiness to his people at such a young age.
Ironically, yesterday, after I started this topic, a new news release was released.
Analysis: What's Kim Jong Un up to?
It basically says exactly what I said about him trying to prove his worth to his country.
 

>"I think there's a big element of domestic North Korean politics, if one can understand that concept, where clearly Kim Jong Un is not being well received," Hill told CNN.
"I think they are trying to kind of boost his status to some sort of wartime leader."

 

"Not only must the new 'supreme leader' see off challengers from within North Korea's perhaps skeptical military; he must also prove to his brutalized, often starving, people that threats from 'foreign imperialists' must take precedence over, say, early promises of improved living conditions.

 
I don’t really see how anyone can have faith that war will not happen.

Christopher Hill, a career U.S. diplomat, said the "prolonged, rather intense" flurry of tough talk out of Pyongyang shouldn't be ignored…

 
 

Kim Jong Il and Kim Il Sung "would make a threat, and wait for the enemy (the United States, South Korea, the U.N., or some combination of the above) to offer a bribe in exchange for their forbearance. They would take the bribe -- and they'd forbear," Kaplan writes.
"But this new Kim took the promise of a bribe -- then went ahead and carried out the threat anyway, even before the payment, in this case desperately needed food, came through. What the hell?"

 

 
I think what people aren’t realizing is just how delusional the citizens of North Korea are.  Kim Fat has unrestricted Internet access and knowledge of the outside world.  He does have a bit of perspective.
 
But the citizens know virtually nothing of the outside world.  I know.  I dated a North Korean.  That North Korean at least had knowledge of the outside world from living in Japan, but was still a bit lost when presenting me photos of an Apple II and proclaiming, “See?  We do have technology.”
 
The people of North Korea have almost no Internet, and restricted access at best, and have no idea what lies outside their borders.  All they know is what the government feeds them, which is basically hatred towards America and the west.
And if their government tells them they have the power to take down America, that is what they believe.
 
Firstly, it is already wrong to suggest that their citizens don’t want war  for fear of being wiped out, because they really don’t know they would be wiped out.
But not only that, even if they did know that and had a good understanding of the outside world, they would want war anyway.  They don’t like Kim Fat, they are starving, they are impoverished, etc.  War would be the best possible thing for them.  Kim Fat is killed off, they are set free, they suddenly have Internet and food (the 2 essentials for life, plus maybe water and air), etc.
 
It is really simple.  Those who don’t know any better want war out of hatred for America.  Those who do want war as a means of being set free.
So it doesn’t hold up to say the citizens wouldn’t back him in a war.
 
Kim Fat on the other hand knows in the back of his head that he would get crushed and probably does want to avoid war, but:
#1: There is so much propaganda that even he is a bit delusional.
#2: He doesn’t see backing down as an option.  Which is fairly clear since he threatened nuclear tests, the UN gave him food not to do it, he agreed, and then he did it anyway while the food was en-route.
 
 
 
Yes, it makes sense to a normal person that he should avoid war at all costs to avoid being crushed.
But how is that related to Kim Fat?  I don’t see the connection.
 
 
L. Spiro

 

 

 

L. Spiro out of curiosity what is the news like in Japan about the North Korean threat?

I don’t know. The only time I even catch a glimpse of TV is at lunch, and what they are watching is definitely not news.


In a poll in 2012 it was found that all age groups of South Koreans felt war was more likely than not.

Most of the criticism I am getting is related to the idea that he has no choice but to keep escalating things in an effort to prove his worthiness to his people at such a young age.
Ironically, yesterday, after I started this topic, a new news release was released.
Analysis: What's Kim Jong Un up to?
It basically says exactly what I said about him trying to prove his worth to his country.
 

>"I think there's a big element of domestic North Korean politics, if one can understand that concept, where clearly Kim Jong Un is not being well received," Hill told CNN.
"I think they are trying to kind of boost his status to some sort of wartime leader."

 

"Not only must the new 'supreme leader' see off challengers from within North Korea's perhaps skeptical military; he must also prove to his brutalized, often starving, people that threats from 'foreign imperialists' must take precedence over, say, early promises of improved living conditions.

 
I don’t really see how anyone can have faith that war will not happen.

Christopher Hill, a career U.S. diplomat, said the "prolonged, rather intense" flurry of tough talk out of Pyongyang shouldn't be ignored…

 
 

Kim Jong Il and Kim Il Sung "would make a threat, and wait for the enemy (the United States, South Korea, the U.N., or some combination of the above) to offer a bribe in exchange for their forbearance. They would take the bribe -- and they'd forbear," Kaplan writes.
"But this new Kim took the promise of a bribe -- then went ahead and carried out the threat anyway, even before the payment, in this case desperately needed food, came through. What the hell?"

 

 
I think what people aren’t realizing is just how delusional the citizens of North Korea are.  Kim Fat has unrestricted Internet access and knowledge of the outside world.  He does have a bit of perspective.
 
But the citizens know virtually nothing of the outside world.  I know.  I dated a North Korean.  That North Korean at least had knowledge of the outside world from living in Japan, but was still a bit lost when presenting me photos of an Apple II and proclaiming, “See?  We do have technology.”
 
The people of North Korea have almost no Internet, and restricted access at best, and have no idea what lies outside their borders.  All they know is what the government feeds them, which is basically hatred towards America and the west.
And if their government tells them they have the power to take down America, that is what they believe.
 
Firstly, it is already wrong to suggest that their citizens don’t want war  for fear of being wiped out, because they really don’t know they would be wiped out.
But not only that, even if they did know that and had a good understanding of the outside world, they would want war anyway.  They don’t like Kim Fat, they are starving, they are impoverished, etc.  War would be the best possible thing for them.  Kim Fat is killed off, they are set free, they suddenly have Internet and food (the 2 essentials for life, plus maybe water and air), etc.
 
It is really simple.  Those who don’t know any better want war out of hatred for America.  Those who do want war as a means of being set free.
So it doesn’t hold up to say the citizens wouldn’t back him in a war.
 
Kim Fat on the other hand knows in the back of his head that he would get crushed and probably does want to avoid war, but:
#1: There is so much propaganda that even he is a bit delusional.
#2: He doesn’t see backing down as an option.  Which is fairly clear since he threatened nuclear tests, the UN gave him food not to do it, he agreed, and then he did it anyway while the food was en-route.
 
 
 
Yes, it makes sense to a normal person that he should avoid war at all costs to avoid being crushed.
But how is that related to Kim Fat?  I don’t see the connection.
 
 
L. Spiro

 

 

I believe you are stating that North Korea is in a situation similar to that of Argentina before the Falklands War. The military junta launched a war in order to divert the attention of the people from the unpopular government to something that Argentines believed was rightfully theirs, the Falklands Islands. The junta had believed that they would be able to occupy the islands and that the UK would do nothing but go to the negotiations table. However, what ended up happening was that Margaret Thatcher found a way to get reelected by fighting for the islands. There are some key differences here.

 

The first and most obvious difference here is that there really isn't anything that North Korea can occupy without any retaliation from somebody. Moreover, Argentina could have won the Falklands War, had they planned on holding the islands. It would have been long and tough, but it was not beyond the realm of possibility. Here, North Korea has no hope of winning anything, other than a free one way ticket to annihilation (autographed by SK president, Japanese PM, and Barack Obama). I really doubt that Un is stupid enough to believe that he can win, but if he has deluded himself enough, then he may try something. The other difference is that we don't really know if his people are about to overthrow him. It is possible, but we cannot say that with certainty. Un may actually be desperate, or he's just rattling around so that he can get attention, like any other neglected child.

 

In any case, historically when dictators get desperate/delusional, they try random things. If Un really is desperate enough, or deluded enough, he may try to attack South Korea, as this is where he can maximize his damage and also begin his "world conquest". The thing is, in his delusion/desperation/stupidity, he probably will end up losing pretty damn quickly. I don't see this being a six hour war, it probably will be drawn out over a week or two. Un will try to go nuclear, but no one will retaliate with nukes, mainly because its going to probably end up hurting more than it will help.

 

The likelihood of war is all dependent on Un. We don't have any historical precedents for Un. We cannot make any predictions so I would say it's a toss up. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Citation Needed

The link at the top of the original post.

The south threatened their survival while the US flew B-52 bombers from Guam to Korea and back in a nuclear bombing drill!

What do you expect? If (we go back a few decades where this is possible, and) Russia did such a thing to the US, the US would certainly make similar threats back towards Russia.

*cough*   Pig bay, followed by Cuban Missle Crisis?

 

Of course Kennedy was liquidated by the CIA shortly after, so he had no second chance to start World War III. But who will liquidate Kim in time?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Kim Jong Un is delusional - he wasn't entirely raised in isolation and told he was a god, as far as we know, and we do know that he was educated in western colleges. The western colleges and his college peers certainly didn't worship him. ([b]Edit:[/b] Whoops, European colleges. Switzerland, to be precise. Thought it was in London)

He might be underestimating how much of a response he'd get from pretending to almost go to war, but my guess is that this is a "We're going to go to war!" -> Bill Clinton heroically rides in as an ambassador to save the day -> North Korea agrees to slow down nuclear development, and scale back military buildup (which the North Korean civilians never hear about), United States sends aid and reduces trade embargoes (which North Korea tells its civilians are plunder or tribute or gifts because the world recognizes Kim Jong Un's greatness), and Kim Jong Un is made out to be a hero of peace and a amazing diplomat and someone the US is scared to fight in North Korea's media.

Edited by Servant of the Lord
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you seen this ?

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/28/world/asia/north-korea-shuts-last-remaining-hotline-to-south.html?_r=0

 

 

Correction: March 27, 2013

 

The headline with an earlier version of this article overstated the extent of North Korea’s actions. North and South Korea continue to maintain hot lines between their civil aviation authorities; the North did not shut down the last hot line between the two.

 

Just in case no one bothers to read the article or scroll to the bottom. Not sure if Bubsy was just supplying information or giving an argument for expecting war.

Edited by kseh
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just supplying info, As I read the article I was suprised that the situation was that bad, so I decided to share.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second Korean War

 

So North Korea has officially declared war.

No surprise there with the way Kim Fat’s threats have been escalating.

 

Now the question is who else takes it seriously?  The South does not.

So will it become a physical war?  What do you think?

 

 

My view: This all started because Kim Fat is trying to garner respect from within his own country but also in the eyes of the world.  He escalates because no one takes him seriously outside of North Korea.

Right now the world is still just laughing.  Do you think he will just quietly back down?  Obviously not.

But he can’t just keep things where they are.  The whole world has put North Korea on /ignore and he isn’t getting anywhere even now when the threats are at the highest they have ever been.

 

When he sees that even declaring war won’t get him his way and that the world is still just laughing, he will start a physical war, left with no other options for escalation.

 

 

L. Spiro

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So will it become a physical war?  What do you think?

It unfortunately seems to be heading in that direction. Edited by slicer4ever
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second Korean War
 
So North Korea has officially declared war.

What wikipedia article is backed up from a citation from the BBC, who've quoted KNCA as saying:

The long-standing situation of the Korean peninsula being neither at peace nor at war is finally over.

What the KNCA actually said though was:

The Key Resolve and Foal Eagle joint military drills staged by the U.S. and the south Korean puppet forces were the actual nuclear war rehearsals that activated nuclear strike means including B-52 capable of carrying nuclear warheads and nuclear-armed submarine.
This is a brazen-faced violation and encroachment on AA and all the north-south agreements and an unpardonable provocation and infringement on the DPRK's sovereignty and supreme interests.
The unprecedentedly acute and serious state of political and military emergency prevailing on the Korean Peninsula urged the DPRK to terminate at an early date the geopolitical disaster, neither a war nor peace, which has lasted century after century on this land, and take a bold decision to guarantee the national sovereignty and regional stability.

They then go on to explain that the armistice agreement -- which is the agreement between the North and the US that there will be no hostilities -- has been repeatedly violated by the US, and that they're taking this nuclear bombing rehearsal as a hostile act, and therefore they must also start to disregard the agreement for defensive reasons. Again, they only talk about the possibility of them carrying out counter attacks to defend themselves.
The only offensive threat that they make is saying that they of course reserve the infamous American idea of a defensive pre-emptive precision strike... and by American logic, such an act is of course valid rolleyes.gif 

 

There's a bunch of other quotes in the BBC story that I can't find an original source for at all, and they sure as hell don't provide references like Wikipedia does wink.png 


So from the looks of what the North said, this is just a continuation of the situation that you linked at the beginning of this thread.
The US rehearsed the nuclear bombing of the North, while the South threatened the survival of the North. In response, the North is making all sorts of counter threats and promising to defend themselves...
The idea that they're being the aggressor here is totally down to how you spin the story.

Edited by Hodgman
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it ironic that you defend them so, considering that all of their excuses for being in a position of self-defense are entirely without merit.

 

Firstly, let me say that I hate America.  I couldn’t stand the idea of living there which is why I moved away as soon as I was able.  I have never even dated an American person, despite having grown up there.  Not that I dislike America people themselves, just the overall culture.  I also hate the North Korean culture of impoverishment, yet I have dated a North Korean.  So each individual person is fine no matter his or her origin, but I refuse to live in America and that is final.

 

(A keen observer will recognize the irony that I have dated a North Korean but never a Westerner, not even an American.)

 

Firstly, Hodgman, your way of thinking was correct for the previous leader.  Not the current one.

For a few reasons.

#1: America may have a spotty history of invading countries without reason, but that was Bush and there was a selfish reason to invade.  We aren’t Bush anymore and there is nothing in North Korea America wants.  No invasion could possibly be justified.  Invasion requires justification to the rest of the world, and the ironic thing is that while Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction whereas North Korean actually does, those weapons of mass destruction that actually exist would merit to the world an invasion by America to get rid of them, yet America has never made any suggestion that it would do so because there is nothing in North Korea that America wants except a strategic outpost.  That is not oil.  Not even close.  Nowhere near what America needs to actually pursue war.

Which means Kim Fat is an idiot.  His excuse is that America is planning to invade him.

And yet if America ever did, the only reasons would be that he himself caused it to happen.  Either by starting a war with South Korea as has happened or by making nuclear weapons.

#2: You claim he is all in defense and cite the American/South Korean military practice as a reason for that defensive stance.

Those military practices have taken place every year for the last 60 years, none of which have lead to an invasion of his country.

Seriously?

First-off, he has to be an idiot for thinking that this year is somehow different.  Oh, unless he considers his own role in making escalating threats.  Guess what.  This year America did put a little bit more umph in its military practice.  Because of his increasing threats in the months prior.

And you cite that as a reason for him to be defending his country?

You hate America I take it.

America should not go through with a yearly practice because of him?  That would be the definition of giving in to him.  America did the same thing it does with all of its allies on a yearly basis.  That is not America’s fault.

Every year North Korea plays the same act, claiming that military drills with South Korea are part of some big plan to invade North Korea.

 

And for 60 years it has been wrong.

The risk of an invasion on North Korea is exactly equal to the world view of North Korea as a threat, which is exactly with Kim Fat has been betraying since he took leadership.

 

Calling out America in this case as the bad-guy who prompted them into this situation generations ago is just bullshit.

By that logic Japan would be even more fierce towards America, and why not South Korea too since they felt the same heat from America as North Korea did?  They were the same country back then.

 

Down to how you spin the story?

What has America done except reply to threats towards North Korea?

America was the aggressor in a military exercise that they hold annually?  Just because it pissed off North Korea does not mean America actually did anything aggressive or provocative.  North Korea is looking for excuses, so that much is obvious.  You can’t even omit hands or heads from photos of their statues of leaders without pissing them off.

 

Were you aware of that?  How much do you really know North Korean culture?

 

America may have done things generations ago that you would want to use as an excuse to support North Korea’s side, but if that were valid then we could look back more and find that North Korea started the fight.  Or maybe it was America further beyond that still, or another country before that still.

If all we did was hold grudges, no one would be alive right now.

 

And I personally am not going to take slack for ancestors of mine who I know to have been dimwitted and less responsible.

If America is not allowed to learn from its mistakes, neither is North Korea.

For the last 60 years America would be happy enough to just let North Korea be.  North Korea is obviously the provocateur here.

America has never talked about or thought about North Korea during that whole time except when they suddenly come up with threats towards America and when they claim that daily life—yearly military drills in South Korea—are an exercise to invate North Korea, which has proved false for 60 years.

 

Growing up ion America, we learned about Iraq and Iran.  The middle east.  One of my classmates didn’t even know Korea was a country.

North Korea isn’t on the map unless it is shouting threats.  That is how Americans feel.  So when trouble starts, they brought it on themselves.

 

 

L. Spiro

Edited by L. Spiro
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its funny really, its pretty much the same way with the massacres during the korea war (SK murdered 100-200.000 civilians("communist sympathizers", including children) with the US silent approval during the war), even though NK was far worse it is quite hypocritical to pretend that the west are the good guys. (Sure, we're not as bad as NK, but we're not as good as our governments try to tell us we are)

Propaganda works both ways. We're accusing NK of being too high on their propaganda without even thinking we're being fed up propaganda ourselves. I'd beth North Koreans think the same of the rest of the world.

 

 

 

(A keen observer will recognize the irony that I have dated a North Korean but never a Westerner, not even an American.)

 

 

I don't think a keen observer would find very interesting what you choose to put your dck on. Unless your opinions are defined by your dck like you seem to hint every now and then, bringing up the same anecdotes.

 

If your profile pic is really you and not a drawing of someone else like you have been saying, then I'd have to replace some genitals here and there I think... Or just put a [insert here your genitals], that would be more reusable :D Reusable post is best post.

Edited by TheChubu
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it ironic that you defend them so, considering that all of their excuses for being in a position of self-defense are entirely without merit.

You hate America I take it.

I'm not defending anybody. I like to look at things from every point of view. It's sad to live in an age where looking into the facts, or putting yourself in someone elses shoes makes you an "enemy sympathiser". I'm probably on a fucking American watch list for daring to read the source press releases from KCNA instead of the filtered western versions...

 

If you read the western papers, we try not to mention anything we've done to piss off the North, and we always try to throw in some personal attacks against their leader's personality.

If you read their (dictatorial government) paper, they of course have the opposite spin. You also have to keep in mind that from their point of view, they're still half way through a war that's been paused. That's a very different view from what many outsiders would have, where we consider South Korea to basically be at peace (apart from having mandatory military training, and a neighbour that shoots them from time to time, and the most heavily armed border on the planet...).

 

As for hating America:

America is corrupt and double-faced in all it's policies, domestic and foreign, which is plain for anyone to see thanks to the Internet and leakers... As are many countries.

America is the perfect example of why unfettered capitalism, fear of socialism, bigotry, inequality and fear of the working class are dangerous ideals to embrace.

They're so big and successful while harbouring these dark undercurrents, that they're a brilliant example of what not to emulate. For that, they're useful.

 

The main hate that I have is when I see my own nation going down a similar dark path -- the same small handful of umbrella corporations owning almost every major company here (often owning both sides in a harmful duopoly), Murdoch owning 70% of the newspapers and in turn having enough power to crush any politician looking to enact reforms to constrain his power over democracy, increased litigiousness across the board, democratic elections giving way more and more to corpocracy every year, governmental discussion becoming more hysterical, informed political debate giving way to uneducated slogan slinging, class inequality growing exponentially, more governments hand-outs going to the top 10% than the other 90% combined, the selling off of public assets to corporate monopolies, the dismantling of the free education system and the building of a two-tier education system, the dismantling of free public health care and the invasion of inefficient corporate insurance bureaucracies leaching healthcare funding, the mandatory detention of refugees in inhumane concentration camps, the power for corporations to appropriate and exploit private farming land and leave the essential water basins as toxic wastelands without accountability, the destruction of a natural wonder of the world for short term profit, enacting or martial law in communities that just need basic services, creation of fake sex scandals to swing the political balance of power, being caught out in international diplomatic lies showing a preference for political power games over honesty and integrity (e.g. we knew about the Assange case before it happened, and knew Iraq had no weapons before the war, but we said we knew nothing - this is on the public record now)... the list is endless, but we're following the success of greed, and all the darkness it brings. That, I hate. I hate the fact that we've got America as a warning beacon, but we're too blinded by it's light to realize the real message.

 

America may have a spotty history of invading countries without reason, but that was Bush and there was a selfish reason to invade.  We aren’t Bush anymore and there is nothing in North Korea America wants.  No invasion could possibly be justified.  Invasion requires justification to the rest of the world

The evidence against Saddam was fabricated, but the US also justified their entry into Vietnam/Cambodia/South east Asia by having the NSA fabricate an attack on their ships. That wasn't Bush.

The majority of American wars have been based around shoddy justifications, even WW1/2 with deliberately sending the Lusitania to the Germans to sink (against their warnings), so it could be called aggression, and doing everything in their power to provoke an act of war from Japan. These weren't Bush.

Since Iraq, the US has overthrown Libya and Syria (ongoing), though through much more subtle means. The instigation and subsequent justification was simple. The propaganda was clean cut. That wasn't Bush.

Anyway, Bush wasn't the architect of Iraq/Afghanistan, he was just the figurehead and chief that happened to be there at the time to guide them.

There's many incidents where the North has done crazy things to attack the South, but there's also been attacks on the South that the North denies, but nontheless caused a huge amount of tension. All an external instigator would need to do is fire a single torpedo or missile at a South Korean destroyer to potentially start a war... That's all the justification that's required. It's not at all impossible.

Making up a motive for war is worthy of a James Bond story or conspiracy website. I don't have one. But it's possible that someone outside of NK has a motive.

NK themselves don't really have a motive, because we all know, and they know that the destruction would be massive. Their game is to live in a state of war without real war -- the 1984 playbook to a tee.

 

 

You claim he is all in defense and cite the American/South Korean military practice as a reason for that defensive stance.

No, I quoted their statements that are being used by the BBC and wikipedia, and pointed out that the original statements claim that these new threats are being made in self defence, while the BBC/Wikipedia forgot to mention this part of the original statement.

 

I never made a personal judgement about whether their statements are heartfelt or righteous. Personally, I believe that none of the parties involved are righteous.

 


The BBC made out that the latest statement from KCNA was a threat of aggression. If you go and read the KCNA statement for yourself, you'll see it's actually a threat of retaliation -- "if you attack us, we'll attack you". That's not me defending NK, that's me paraphrasing them and the BBC's words. What's interesting is that this twisting of the KCNA statement has been syndicated across almost every major western newspaper, thanks to a few key organizations providing cheap syndicated content to the world. The same story, the same (mis)interpretation of the original statement in every newspaper I pick up.
 
It's very hard to lambast the KCNA for being a government mouthpiece for propaganda when we so obviously twist their words to fit our own world-view and agenda, in turn pushing our own propaganda... which is A-OK because we do it through a decentralized system instead of a communist-dictatorship, of course. 

 

What has America done except reply to threats towards North Korea?
America was the aggressor in a military exercise that they hold annually?  Just because it pissed off North Korea does not mean America actually did anything aggressive or provocative.

The US violated the cease fire agreement, the one that NK is now in trouble for ripping up, decades ago by bringing nuclear weapons into South Korea. The US doesn't agree that they violated the agreement, because they edited their copy unilaterally just prior to changing this clause, so that importing nukes isn't really an escalation... They started the nuclear arms race, so it's obvious for NK to try and catch up by matching them. You can't at all seriously be reprimanding the North for pursuing nukes, when they've been under the threat of them for decades, and all that time tolerantly (or not so tolerantly) hanging on to the invalidated cease fire agreement.

Every time these military exercises are carried out with imported US weapons, the South and the US are violating the original terms of the cease fire... so why wouldn't the North want to rip it up? It's a bit of a double standard to violate it and then reprimand someone for not wanting to agree to it any more. It's obviously irrelevant if it's being broken annually.

 

Anyway, they've made this exact same announcement 5 times in the past already... so business as usual.

Either they forget they said it after some more discussions, or eventually a new cease-fire will be written up, or someone will attack someone, and the retaliations will lead to war (betting based on history gives this outcome pretty poor odds though), or (most unlikely) a proper cessation of hostilities and a real end to war will happen.

 

In the end it boils down to both sides saying, "if you attack us, we'll destroy you", and both sides justifying their statement by pointing at the other's statements.

That's the whole situation in a nutshell.

 

Looking at it purely objectively, as to the history of the conflict, I don't like either side and I want them to just get along and agree to the current border. The original division into north and south probably shouldn't have happened in the first place, but we can't change that. We've got two countries now, and they should just deal with what they have.

However, bringing my feelings into the debate, I love e-sports and broadband Internet, and I hate personality-cults and starvation, so I wish for SK's safety and the peaceful dismantling of NK...

Edited by Hodgman
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, they've made this exact same announcement 5 times in the past already... so business as usual.

This. North Korea has a long, long history of this rhetoric. There is nothing new here at all.

 

The American media is just bored with wailing about the deficit since Obama has cut it in half, so they need a new shiny object to panic over. Now it's North Korea's turn.

 

Just as America has nothing to gain from conquering North Korea, North Korea has nothing to gain from invading the South. It is a war they cannot hope to win. It is a war which at absolute best ends in their defeat and withdrawal; at worst, ends their entire regime or results in the annihilation of their country. They stand to gain nothing from this.

 

Let us even entertain the idea that Kim Jung Un is in fact unstable(though I see no evidence to suggest this). North Korea is not like many other dictatorships. One man does not truly run the country. The military is not controlled by Un in any real sense. I would liken Kim Jung Un to someone like Hitler or Mubarak versus someone like Mugabe or Saddam Hussien. Hitler was the leader of Germany, but only with the support of his commanding officers. If Hitler had strayed too far from what the German high command thought, he would have been removed. Mubarak was tossed overboard simply when he became inconvenient. So if Un really wanted to carry out some crazy plan that would get everyone killed, his military command would just kill him. I nearly guarantee it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, they've made this exact same announcement 5 times in the past already... so business as usual.

This. North Korea has a long, long history of this rhetoric. There is nothing new here at all.

 

 

Sure, I guess closing down the borders, declaring nuclear war on the US, and moving their missiles to the east coast is nothing new to you?
Or the US flying stealth bombers from Missouri to South Korea, and setting up missile defences in Guam is nothing new to you either?

 

Since North Korea is taking their sweet time, and telling everyone about it before they do it, I'm guessing they might actually do something.
But it will be such a failure, they will have to get their propaganda news department to edit clips from Red Dawn, Olympus Has Fallen, and
Independence Day, to make their citizens believe that they defeated the U.S in an epic battle.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, I guess closing down the borders, declaring nuclear war on the US, and moving their missiles to the east coast is nothing new to you?.

Indeed, it's not new. They have done/said the current actions/threats before.
Also, if you go read their statements instead of hysterical western propaganda, they have in no way "declared nuclear war on the US". They threatened counter attacks against any aggression from the South/US, including nuclear after the US carried out an exercise where they practiced dropping nukes on the North, and after threats were made against the North's survival.
Telling the whole story doesn't sell papers though, does it? Better to make up stories about boogeymen that are planning to nuke us for no reason at any time.

Nothing they've done indicates that the missiles they're moving around won't just be another exercise as usual.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So some nations have nuclear warheads and decide that others are not allowed to have them. Who are naive enough to believe that nations without nuclear warheads will accept this? By denying nations without nuclear weapon technology getting the technology nations with this tech keeps a certain strategic advantage and power compared to the nation without the nuclear weapon technology. This gives the nuclear nations a certain power during any peace negotiation or even just a negotiation about borders, treaties or business negotiations etc.

 

North Korea is aware of this, Iran is aware of this, in fact any official should be aware of this. Most nations who see themselves as big players in the international power play will try to get their hands on these nuclear weapons and use them to obtain a better position during any mutual negotiation nations between. It would be irrational not to do so as a nation who sees it self threaten by another alliance or force from abroad. 

 

Now in this case with North Korea we have a nation who meets sanctions on sanctions and therefore has problems getting the salt for the egg for its population. This means some North Korean people think that the world is punishing them and not the gov of North Korea.  The gov of North Korea sees their existence as legitimated according to their own world view and other nations sees it as a dictatorship. The have nuclear weapons and use them to show their power. Besides North Korea is not among the five permanent security members in UN and therefor not object to any decisions and thereby put them on halt. Here lies the issue, we have a system where certain nations can behave like they feel like and others not.

 

None the less a new nation has power to destroy cities with a single missile and feel it should be granted the same rights as other nations with this technology.

 

The situation is then this:

 

Should the world accept the situation and let go of sanctions, let the goods flow into North Korea so they can see the same growth as China, Vietnam and Russia?

Should the world say no and start a war?

Should the world keep on sanctioning North Korea and hope that the threats are empty?

What is they really think it is unfair to be met with sanctions and decides to start a war on it? 

 

Never forget how letting German pay for first world war back fired and second world war started, never forget that every single hard direct act or saying will create a counter reaction.

 

I say let down the muscles, let go of the sanctions, win by using soft power such as movies and music, cash and gifts. Use one generation to expose the North Koreans to economic growth and  prosper and then war thinking will no longer be an issue. The alternative is not productive or useful at all.

 

Besides all nations believe they need nuclear technology in order to protect themselves. It is a common thought among all military forces in all nations if they feel insecure about their neighbors intentions.  

 

Think about it...

 

Perhaps L. Spiro should take a vacation for a few weeks away from Asia and relax a little smile.png

 

Edit: for good orders sake, I do not agree with North Korea, I simply give an objective view on the reason to this situation and what could be done to do in order to solve the tense situation. My thinking is built upon the political philosophy called soft power which is in contrast to hard power.

Edited by Dwarf King
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The situation is then this:
 
Should the world accept the situation and let go of sanctions, let the goods flow into North Korea so they can see the same growth as China, Vietnam and Russia?
Should the world say no and start a war?
Should the world keep on sanctioning North Korea and hope that the threats are empty?
What is they really think it is unfair to be met with sanctions and decides to start a war on it? 
 
Never forget how letting German pay for first world war back fired and second world war started, never forget that every single hard direct act or saying will create a counter reaction.
 
I say let down the muscles, let go of the sanctions, win by using soft power such as movies and music, cash and gifts. Use one generation to expose the North Koreans to economic growth and  prosper and then war thinking will no longer be an issue. The alternative is not productive or useful at all.

 

I think that you're being awfully optimistic about Western culture flooding into NK as soon as the sanctions are lifted, and that this would not occur for exactly the reasons that you think it would help. The country is more or less hermetically sealed, and the degree of sealing does not change with the degree of sanctions they're under. The regime is in power through relentless propaganda and constant demagoguery of the US and South Korea. Suddenly finding out that the wider world is vastly less poor and famished than the average North Korean would probably destabilize the country even more. This is all the more dangerous now that there is are nuclear weapons in the mix.

 

I agree that the perspective of small-ish, non-nuclear states can produce an intense desire to have a nuclear weapon of their own. However, NK already has nuclear weapon capabilities (though their missile technology is still lacking). The issue is no longer one of non-proliferation (US politics from 200-2008 closed the door on that for NK), but rather that even with nuclear weapon capability NK behaves very unstably and tosses violent and unabalanced rhetoric around pretty casually. It's their aggressive posture and mild unpredictability that make them international pariahs today.

 

If they let up on the "sea of fire" talk, particularly now that they have more capacity to carry it out than ever, they could be on a path to ending sanctions. Not right away-- the current state is really built on violent threats and bribery, and the world isn't going to forget that very quickly.

 

I do agree with you, and other posters, that the idea of nuclear containment is not realistic. The technology is almost a century old, and every undergraduate chem student learns how nuclear reactions work. Finding someone who can build a nuclear weapon has never been easier, and while there are few manufacturers who can produce the equipment needed there is still decades' worth of it floating around. I don't think that anyone can prevent a state from developing nuclear weapons capabilities, they can only delay it. And if that's the only outcome I think that the cost of doing so very quickly becomes too expensive.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Rothkopf has a good article on this

 

North Korea is dangerously close to crossing a line. Not the line that leads to a missile attack on the United States, but the one that separates being a rogue state from being a parody of a rogue state. Pyongyang's bluster is as comical as its nuclear threats are implausible.

 

It is by no means assured that Kim Jong Un has fully consolidated his authority. By ramping up rhetoric, but exercising restraint with respect to actual military actions, the regime can count on the fact that the United States and South Korea are not going to take the first step either.

The result is that North Korea's exercises and threats of retaliation have been successful in deterring attack, even though none was coming.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So some nations have nuclear warheads and decide that others are not allowed to have them. Who are naive enough to believe that nations without nuclear warheads will accept this? By denying nations without nuclear weapon technology getting the technology nations with this tech keeps a certain strategic advantage and power compared to the nation without the nuclear weapon technology. This gives the nuclear nations a certain power during any peace negotiation or even just a negotiation about borders, treaties or business negotiations etc.

 

North Korea is aware of this, Iran is aware of this, in fact any official should be aware of this. Most nations who see themselves as big players in the international power play will try to get their hands on these nuclear weapons and use them to obtain a better position during any mutual negotiation nations between. It would be irrational not to do so as a nation who sees it self threaten by another alliance or force from abroad. 

 

Now in this case with North Korea we have a nation who meets sanctions on sanctions and therefore has problems getting the salt for the egg for its population. This means some North Korean people think that the world is punishing them and not the gov of North Korea.  The gov of North Korea sees their existence as legitimated according to their own world view and other nations sees it as a dictatorship. The have nuclear weapons and use them to show their power. Besides North Korea is not among the five permanent security members in UN and therefor not object to any decisions and thereby put them on halt. Here lies the issue, we have a system where certain nations can behave like they feel like and others not.

 

None the less a new nation has power to destroy cities with a single missile and feel it should be granted the same rights as other nations with this technology.

 

The situation is then this:

 

Should the world accept the situation and let go of sanctions, let the goods flow into North Korea so they can see the same growth as China, Vietnam and Russia?

Should the world say no and start a war?

Should the world keep on sanctioning North Korea and hope that the threats are empty?

What is they really think it is unfair to be met with sanctions and decides to start a war on it? 

 

Never forget how letting German pay for first world war back fired and second world war started, never forget that every single hard direct act or saying will create a counter reaction.

 

I say let down the muscles, let go of the sanctions, win by using soft power such as movies and music, cash and gifts. Use one generation to expose the North Koreans to economic growth and  prosper and then war thinking will no longer be an issue. The alternative is not productive or useful at all.

 

Besides all nations believe they need nuclear technology in order to protect themselves. It is a common thought among all military forces in all nations if they feel insecure about their neighbors intentions.  

 

Think about it...

 

Perhaps L. Spiro should take a vacation for a few weeks away from Asia and relax a little smile.png

 

Edit: for good orders sake, I do not agree with North Korea, I simply give an objective view on the reason to this situation and what could be done to do in order to solve the tense situation. My thinking is built upon the political philosophy called soft power which is in contrast to hard power.

 

I'm not really so sure if North Korea is a nation that can be won over that easily. It's not a question of letting go of sanctions. North Korea exists for the sole purpose of being opposed to the US and South Korea. If one can take away that opposition, then there is no real reason for North Korea to exist. It may as well be a part of South Korea to make one big Korea. No smart dictatorship will let go of that hatred, as the minute they let go of that hatred, they will lose power. While it is true that had there been no Korean War, there would be no North and South Korea, the fact is that it did happen, for whatever reason. If you have a nation that exists simply for the purpose of opposition to another (eg yours), then it's probably a bad idea to let them get nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are not as difficult to obtain today as before, and perhaps obtaining them grants a nation some leverage, but that doesn't mean that we should let people that have a deep hatred for others get them. In the long run, it is not realistic to pursue a nuclear containment policy, but there are certain governments that are too unstable to be trusted with nuclear weapons. Iran is definitely one of them, while North Korea is another. Certain governments have every intention of using nuclear weapons if they could obtain them.

 

 

 

As for the likelihood of war now, whatever the reason may be, the fact is that there are missiles on launchers that could be easily pointed and launched at South Korea, Japan, or Guam. Let's be honest, North Korea has not had long range delivery capabilities before. Now they do. This is new and it does change the situation. Moreover, North Korea has a new, untested leader. We do not know what he is likely to do. Suddenly all of those old reused threats and rhetoric might have meaning now, taken in this new context. Let's say that North Korea is trying to defend itself from aggression. What would aggression be? A South Korean ship looking the wrong way at a North Korean ship? An American aircraft coming to close to North Korean airspace? Or does it take more to be classified as aggression? Again, we do not know. This is not so much about North Korea making threats as it is about the rest of the world not knowing what these threats mean now. Before, we had a pretty good idea what those threats meant and how to avoid making them a reality. Now, we don't. I'm not saying that war is a certainty, rather I'm saying that there are many unknowns here that make prediction of events difficult. I am personally of the belief that Un will try a low intensity engagement, something along the lines of a small skirmish or something, but then he will suddenly back off. That's just my guess though. And I believe that's exactly what everyone is doing right now with regards to North Korea: they are guessing.

Edited by kryotech
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0