North Korea and the United States: Will the Real Aggressor Please Stand Down?

  • metta

    Posts: 39167

    Apr 05, 2013 10:22 PM GMT
    North Korea and the United States: Will the Real Aggressor Please Stand Down?


    http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/14813-north-korea-and-the-united-states-will-the-real-aggressor-please-stand-down

    note: Just because I am posting this does not mean that I support what the author is saying. I just thought that it would make an interesting discussion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2013 11:58 PM GMT
    Brutal communist dictators just want to live in their own little commune, but the big, bad old US keeps interfering. Yeah, sure. The same tired leftist flatulence about appeasing evil dictators, and they'll suddenly behave themselves.
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2942

    Apr 06, 2013 12:37 AM GMT
    Same old "rightist" flatulence...???

    Hmm, I wonder if all "leftists" really do think exactly alike? Painting with how broad a brush?

    Wouldn't it be great if we could just disagree without name-calling? Seems like a better way to have a useful discussion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2013 1:44 AM GMT
    The DPRK definitely needs to retain and develop more nuclear weapons in order to remain a sovereign nation.

    I am neither a socialist nor a free-market capitalist, and am not supportive of either side in this conflict.

    Where are the Korean nationalists?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2013 1:51 AM GMT
    Fortis saidThe DPRK definitely needs to retain and develop more nuclear weapons in order to remain a sovereign nation.

    I am neither a socialist nor a free-market capitalist, and am not supportive of either side in this conflict.

    Where are the Korean nationalists?


    Seriously? Do you know anything about North Korea?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2013 3:28 AM GMT
    ^ I know this: if the DPRK denuclearised, they would be kissing goodbye to their national sovereignty.

    Nationalists are conspicuously absent from South Korean politics, which suggests the political oppression of such, and the communist party sympathetic to the North has been banned, its founders executed.

    Yes, South Korea is under occupation and there is a US puppet regime in place, all so that the US can have its capitalist foot in the door.

    (Note that I am not sympathetic to either side)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2013 3:34 AM GMT
    Fortis saidNationalists are conspicuously absent from South Korean politics, which suggests the political oppression of such, and the communist party sympathetic to the North has been banned, its founders executed.

    Yes, South Korea is under occupation and there is a US puppet regime in place.

    (Not that I am sympathetic to either side)


    I'm sure you believe that, fortunately that does not make it so. Too bad evidence isn't required in your world of large and extraordinary claims.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2013 3:44 AM GMT
    Why is there a US presence on the peninsula?

    What is so axis-of-evilly about not subscribing to the international capitalist system?

    South Korean politics must be absolutely riddled with agents of the security services. There is no nationalist party, and communism has been banned.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2013 3:48 AM GMT
    Fortis saidWhy is there a US presence on the peninsula?

    What is so axis-of-evilly about not subscribing to the international capitalist system?


    Why is a US presence required on the peninsula? Do please read up on the history of the peninsula. And while you're at it, do please also read the plethora of interviews of those who have escaped from the North and do please keep trying to make the claim that these are all isolated incidents.

    There's nothing wrong with not subscribing to the international capitalist systems - the one problem is that the people who get harmed the most are the countries that try to pursue magical thinking of socialism. It's not a random event that countries like China sought to liberalize their economies - it wasn't much of a choice but more of necessity given that you can only tell people that everyone outside your borders are corrupt while your own people starve because of your own failed command and control economy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2013 4:02 AM GMT
    The US presence on the peninsula, is for the benefit of the US establishment.

    Hopefully, the DPRK will institute whichever economic reforms are best for its own people.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2013 2:20 PM GMT
    Fortis saidThe US presence on the peninsula, is for the benefit of the US establishment.

    Hopefully, the DPRK will institute whichever economic reforms are best for its own people.


    Yes because that has happened so consistently in the past. Further, I don't disagree with the claim that the US presence on the peninsula is for the benefit of the US establishment - this does not however make your other claim that "South Korea is under occupation and there is a US puppet regime in place" true.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2013 2:40 PM GMT
    This article is wildly biased. I'm hardly a supporter of US imperialism, but the North Korean regime is awful. They:

    * imprison and torture political dissidents in gulags.
    * systematically violate fundamental rights: they don't permit freedom of speech, freedom of association, right to protest etc.
    * have launched a series of small scale but unprovoked attacks at South Korean people over the last few years, resulting in deaths.
    * squander their wealth on armaments and the ruling class, while failing to feed their people. (The country relies heavily on food aid).
    * squandered multiple opportunities for peace, de-escalation, etc. during previous South Korean administrations, particularly during the "sunshine policy" when the chances for a deal should have been excellent.

    I don't think there's any purpose in complaining about the US as the "aggressor" here. It's certainly true that the US has done many terrible things over the course of its history, but the present situation in Korea is almost entirely of the North Korean's fault.

    I also think that it's important to criticize human rights abuses wherever they occur. I criticize them whether its the US, N Korea, the UK, Israel, China, Palestine.... etc perpetrating them. This is, I think, the only intellectually consistent way to approach the subject.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2013 3:00 AM GMT
    North Korea is actually quite limited in terms of what conventional military actions it can take. Since it was set up as a puppet state, the number one priority of the regime has been its own self-preservation. If North Korea were to invade the South they would lose and lose badly. South Korea would suffer heavy casualties, but they would prevail. Here’s how I would see it playing out:

    North Korea can’t simply invade across the 38th parallel. It’s too heavily fortified. Their only option would be to launch artillery shells at outer islands, or attempt an amphibious landing on the mainland of South Korea. The only problem is that they have very limited capabilities on the water and in the air.

    Naval power can be described by three different categories: Blue water Navy, Green water Navy and Brown water Navy. A blue water navy is able to operate thousands of miles from home, deploy for long periods of time, and usually has carrier groups, submarines, missile, amphibious landing, and air strike capabilities. The United States is the most obvious example, with Japan, France and the UK being the others. A green water navy is able to operate within its sphere of influence, but is unable to extend more than 2,000 miles from home for long periods of time. Examples of this would be South Korea, Germany, China, Turkey, India, Australia, and Russia. A brown water navy has the capability to patrol its own territorial waters, but not much beyond that. This is where North Korea falls in. The North Korean navy is divided into two fleets, east and west. However, they are unable to train alongside one another because neither one can go the distance around the Korean peninsula.

    Next is North Korea’s air force. On paper they have 800 jets, but I doubt that even ½ are operational. All of their equipment is outdated back to the 60’s (70’s at best). Of their total air fleet, how many have been cannibalized for spare parts? Then there’s the issue of pilot training. In South Korea, Japan, the US, and most of our European allies; fighter pilots receive about 200 hours of flight time per year. In North Korea, their pilots are lucky to get twelve. Fuel would also be an issue. If North Korean pilots are limited to twelve hours per year due to fuel shortages, they can’t possibly be prepared for protracted air combat.

    That leaves the land force, which is the most dangerous. North Korean equipment may be outdated, its soldiers poorly trained and malnourished, but they still have thousands of artillery shells that could reach Seoul within a matter of minutes. This is the only card they have to play, and they can only play it once. After that, it’s game over. Almost simultaneously, the US and South Korea would launch a massive counterattack. The first wave would be primarily with cruise missiles, taking out the artillery, anti-aircraft defenses, and air fields to establish air supremacy. Next we would use fighter jets and medium range bombers to take out the roads and rail lines leading to the DMZ, and lines of communication and transportation leading to the capital. This would leave North Korea’s army sitting ducks on their side of the DMZ.

    This would not take very long. It would probably be over with in less than five days, but there would be heavy casualties on both sides. There is still the possibility that North Korea has sleeper agents in the South. That will cause problems, but South Korea is probably prepared for that. It’s unlikely that China would back North Korea if they were to launch an attack. China’s not the same country it was in 1950, and Chinese investments & trade with South Korea is greater than the entire North Korean economy, not to mention China’s level of trade with the US. As much as China dreads the notion of an influx of North Korean refugees that would come about as the result of a war; the greatest fear of the Chinese leadership is an insurrection within their own country (back to governments and self-preservation) and the quickest way to bring that about would be a major economic upheaval, which is what would happen if China’s economic relationship with South Korea, Japan and the US were in jeopardy.

    In China, provincial governments have borrowed money from the Central Bank of China to the tune of $4 trillion in order to build skyscrapers, expressways, subways, high-speed rail, power plants, etc. The Central Bank of China purchases US Savings Bonds and Treasury Bills to build up foreign capital. If their economic ties to the US were at risk, they could easily be looking at a major economic crisis. The Chinese people will not stand for that, and the leadership in Beijing knows this. At this point they see North Korea as an embarrassment to their diplomatic efforts and to their credibility as a major player on the international stage. For that reason, I think the reaction by China is the one to watch at this point.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2013 3:28 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Fortis saidThe US presence on the peninsula, is for the benefit of the US establishment.

    Hopefully, the DPRK will institute whichever economic reforms are best for its own people.


    Yes because that has happened so consistently in the past. Further, I don't disagree with the claim that the US presence on the peninsula is for the benefit of the US establishment - this does not however make your other claim that "South Korea is under occupation and there is a US puppet regime in place" true.


    To claim South Korea is under occupation is to not tell the truth of the situation. South Korea is doing well because of economic reforms that happened in the under Park (the current president's father). Though he stifled democracy and had tons of human's rights abuses, his push on investment and infrastructure had a larger impact than US influence in South Korea.

    There is not a puppet regime in South Korea. Far from it. The FTA (fair trade agreement) is far from universally accepted in politics. There are massive plans for limiting the scope of the US military in South Korea.

    As far as North Korea is concerned, yes there have been consistent efforts. Kaesong is large industrial complex that features 110 factories ( South Korean) and employs roughly 50-60k North and South Koreans.

    Only recently, April, was it shut down.

    So yes, there have been consistent attempts at economic reforms that, while some would perceive as minor, actually are major developments given the context.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2013 3:36 AM GMT
    The regime in North Korea has no moral claim to sovereignty. As far as I'm concerned, South Korea has a moral right to invade North Korea, destroy its ruling dictatorship, and liberate the people of North Korea at any time they see fit to do so. Whether or not they should is not the issue, but they have the right if they choose.

    The dictator of North Korea is running what amounts to a slave pen: population 24 million. He has no more rights as a sovereign leader than the plantation owners of the Confederacy had to own slaves.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2013 4:02 AM GMT
    The_Iceman saidThe regime in North Korea has no moral claim to sovereignty. As far as I'm concerned, South Korea has a moral right to invade North Korea, destroy its ruling dictatorship, and liberate the people of North Korea at any time they see fit to do so. Whether or not they should is not the issue, but they have the right if they choose.

    The dictator of North Korea is running what amounts to a slave pen: population 24 million. He has no more rights as a sovereign leader than the plantation owners of the Confederacy had to own slaves.


    It does have a claim to sovereignty. Does that make it a good state, no. However, sovereignty should be respected.

    Overtly obtuse and hostile rhetoric will only serve to increase threats of provocation.
  • metta

    Posts: 39167

    Apr 10, 2013 3:17 PM GMT


    Kim Jong Un's less responsible, Disney-obsessed older brother

    http://news.yahoo.com/kim-jong-uns-less-responsible-disney-obsessed-older-074500526.html


  • metta

    Posts: 39167

    Apr 10, 2013 11:15 PM GMT
    1365620560754.gif


    535976_605294516166681_707068090_n.jpg


    58976_517471434965610_1550193347_n.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2013 12:29 AM GMT
    What happened to South Korea's fascists?

    Where did they go? This is what I find weird. There is no fascist party in South Korea.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2014 8:50 PM GMT
    OMG what will happen if China takes over America for not paying it's bills. The who would be the aggressor?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2014 12:16 PM GMT
    tru_blu_ozzie saidOMG what will happen if China takes over America for not paying it's bills. The who would be the aggressor?


    All of us in America will have to eat Chinese food and wear made in China clothing, use laptop, buy cell phones made in CHina and married a Chinese wife/husband? Oh wait, this is already happening !!! Next thing Mandarin Chinese will replace Spanish in Southern Cali as the big next Foreign language skill set. icon_biggrin.gif Oh and Ang Lee will be the head of DreamWorks instead of Speilberg. icon_lol.gif
  • PolitiMAC

    Posts: 728

    Jan 30, 2014 12:33 PM GMT
    I find it very odd that anyone would support any position of North Korea next to the US. It's been a fascination of the Left to hate and criticise they're own successful and egalitarian cultures to justify their own moral superiority.

    The US deserves support over any regime like North Korea. Those who throw the US under the bus over Communist dictatorships are unpatriotic fools who have no clue of the cruel and horrible existence of these places and use them for their own politicking against those they disagree with (often those of the Right).