North Korea accuses U.S. of declaring war

Dumbastheycome · September 27, 2017

20 hours ago, Publicus said:

The Maoist Xi Jinping is only recently catching up with the fact he's the last guy standing in Beijing who does care what happens to the Kim Dynasty and its lieges in Pyongyang. The statements you quote about Beijing defending NK are from the Party media and not from Xi himself. Unless and until Xi says something about military action there isn't any official position by Beijing in this chaos. Washington knows this of course. So does South Korea and Japan etc.

All accounts and intelligence say Xi is the holdout on cutting off the crude oil exports to NK. Xi is in fact doing much of what Trump is doing in threatening war and talking war. Xi is however doing it in the Chinese way, i.e., rather than Xi standing up and declaring, he is using the Party media. The particular Party media for Xi is the PLA controlled Global Times which is making the statements of a supposed war doctrine. PLA is of course always happy to talk war but PLA knows it is an arm of the Party and that it needs to toe the Party line. And the Party line on Kim and NK has shifted to negative under the feet of the reluctant Xi. PLA and Air Force have in fact begun antimissile drills on their shores of the Yellow Sea given Kim can fire off missiles toward Japan or toward China depending on his mood on a given day. PLA has done live fire shooting down of its own missile targets to make the preventive point to Kim.

Kim and Xi hate each other's guts. The two have never met and it's very hard to imagine 'em ever meeting for any reason. Further, the Chinese people disrespect immensely the Kim Dynasty for long ago rejecting completely the economic reforms of Deng Xiaoping. Chinese people see prosperous SK and a successful democracy allied to the U.S. while knowing NK is a disaster that hides behind China and sucks on China's huge teat in every respect.

The Party underneath Xi no longer views NK as a buffer state either given modern missiles and their technologies that reach thousands of miles over NK -- nobody is going to invade China by land besides. Xi is stuck now between the Party that has shifted under him to get tougher with NK and Trump twisting Xi's arm to put the serious squeeze on Kim & Co. We'll see what Xi looks like and says in November which will be after the October Party Congress that chooses the leaders for the next five years and at which Xi needs to get his guyz into the five seats being vacated on the 7 member Politboro. Only Xi and the English fluent Prime Minister and peacenik Li Kejiang are expected to continue as holdover members. If the five new members happen to be among the Party's increased number of hawks then Xi is going to be isolated in coddlin..g Kim.

I concur with your interpretation of the machinations of the Chinese position up to a point. Despite Xi the Party has moved China a long way towards aspects global intergration.

As to NK being a buffer state I believe that has long been replaced with an attitude that NK has been a convenient thorn which now need be assessed according to advantage. Xi is compelled now to compromise for survival

I doubt there has been genuine coddling but instead a measure of manipulation of political standpoints which now is culminating in an unpredictable standoff.

What is most important is that the resolve of all parties eventually is dedicated to achieving a non disasterous outcome.

Economically NK has lower significance than it does politically.

It is that generic Ace card that is being waved in the wind.

Who can guess or predict which way the wind will blow ?

Or the potential nuclear breeze on any particular day?

Dumbastheycome · September 27, 2017

31 minutes ago, Publicus said:

Framing it in class terms seems to make it neat, i.e. the one percent for instance, which can be one way to do it. One could frame the elites by a primarily horizontal scheme or one could frame elites vertically. Or one could frame the elites by form of government for instance (and throw in efficacy). No matter how one likes to frame the elites however, elites have existed since time immemorial and elites will continue to exist and to thrive. So one might choose his poison to include condemning 'em all. Nihilists can be amused to play fun and games -- at least until the fun slams up against specifics. Bringing on specifics does consistently mark the point at which the dancing music stops however.

Chinese elites do for instance consider themselves as the elite of all elites -- of all places and times. And they are certain the NK elites are pretenders who need to be put back into their proper place. And that they the Chinese elites are the extension of the eternal elite while the USA elites are a rabble and a flash in the pan. Thus, referring simply to "the elite" can be meaningless out of context, place, time, circumstance. Unless of course all that matters is the fun and games of telling people they are suckers and pedestrian saps.

Are you a Poet ?

Dumbastheycome · September 27, 2017

11 hours ago, geriatrickid said:

What a pathetic and childish display of bigotry. President Obama was no appeaser of Islamic militants and was on their kill list. How much longer do you intend to blame everything on the US President who righted the US economy and who stopped US military expansionism and the conveyor belt of dead youth? I used to watch the Friday newscasts of PBS when it listed the week's military dead. Almost all were the best and brightest of America, often skilled or educated reservists or specialists. It was heartbreaking. Is this what you want to return to? Why don't you go and volunteer your life for a fight that is not needed and not demand that a decent 25 year old kid die to satisfy your primitive bloodlust?

Your use of the tired McCarthy era murderous phrase "lefty leaches" is the same type of cluelessness that brought us the Vietnam war and the decades of horrific war crimes and brutal military dictatorships in Latin America that turned generations of once pro- USA sentiment into hatred. It's also the same gutter politics that are now used to whip up hatred against Mexico and Canada as Trump plays dog whistle politics on NAFTA.

You conveniently forget that more islamic terrorists were identified and neutralized under the Obama administration than under previous administrations. And most importantly of all, you ignore the fact that North Korea was relatively docile when rational presidents occupied the White House. Obama, Bush, Clinton and the elder Bush were able to contain North Korea. They did so with common sense and real politik. They were smart enough to appreciate that provoking a deranged madman only exacerbates the situation. Obviously when a mentally unstable Nixon clone is president different rules apply. There will be no winners in the event of a new Korean peninsula war. South Korea and Japan are at risk of being destroyed. Do you not understand that if nuclear devices are detonated anywhere near the US west coast, North America is at risk of radioactive contamination? Fish stocks could be poisoned for centuries and there is a significant risk that an errant missile falling over Russia or China could spark an international nuclear war. You are not safe in Thailand because radioactive fallout doesn't play favourites. In international relations, picking the right time to act is crucial and ensuring that there are no safe havens is even more vital. Until China and Russia are on board, there can be no progress.

Yes ! This is a global issue that goes well beyond the instituted assumptions of safety in apathetic sense of superiority by anyone !

Publicus · September 27, 2017

2 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

But it was not said out of context place or time, the context being the US fight against socialism, worldwide, for the past 60 odd years, the elite I referred to that they are protecting are their own elite.

Elites are not thriving everywhere, Scandinavian social democracy has done a very good job of levelling things there, no one is Europe is blinkered into thinking that there is nothing that can be done about the issue, most countries have had revolutions that removed the elite and levelled the ground not so long ago, doing nothing and allowing the greedy elite to impoverish half the nation is just part of the American dream, not anyone else's.

The Eurocentric and Western perspective might be superfluous to a thread focused on northeast Asia and the caveman elites of NK in particular. (Post WW III Cavemen of course.)

My own post btw never said all elites everywhere are currently thriving. I plainly said elites continue to exist and to thrive. So while numerous European elites can find themselves longing for the good ole dayze, the former LOS Thailand is certainly a prime instance of one certain elite among others that remains deeply rooted in the past and where the old time elite seeks to steal one more century from history.

One takes note more so however of the blurred focus against the United States and its elites that is specific to your each post to this thread. So I'd note for your attention that wealth distribution in the USA is being rehabilitated significantly by Obamacare. Indeed, Republicans on either end of Pennsylvania Avenue are only banging their heads against Trump's Wall of Incompetence as they fail repeatedly in attempting to do what used to be routine for 'em when they came to Washington, i.e., passing 19th century tax laws to further ensconce the rich while wrecking socioeconomic programs. The reports are in fact cheering given the Republicans standard one-two easy punch has gone tappy on 'em.

The cavernous wealth gap in the CCP-PRC meanwhile continues to move several meters per year, if not kilometers. The calculations of CCP corruption document to us that $5 Trillion has been swindled into the pockets of the Chinese elites since year 2000. Kim and Co. can only dream.

Kieran00001 · September 27, 2017

17 minutes ago, Publicus said:

The Eurocentric and Western perspective might be superfluous to a thread focused on northeast Asia and the caveman elites of NK in particular. (Post WW III Cavemen of course.)

My own post btw never said all elites everywhere are currently thriving. I plainly said elites continue to exist and to thrive. So while numerous European elites can find themselves longing for the good ole dayze, the former LOS Thailand is certainly a prime instance of one certain elite among others that remains deeply rooted in the past and where the old time elite seeks to steal one more century from history.

One takes note more so however of the blurred focus against the United States and its elites that is specific to your each post to this thread. So I'd note for your attention that wealth distribution in the USA is being rehabilitated significantly by Obamacare. Indeed, Republicans on either end of Pennsylvania Avenue are only banging their heads against Trump's Wall of Incompetence as they fail repeatedly in attempting to do what used to be routine for 'em when they came to Washington, i.e., passing 19th century tax laws to further ensconce the rich while wrecking socioeconomic programs. The reports are in fact cheering given the Republicans standard one-two easy punch has gone tappy on 'em.

The cavernous wealth gap in the CCP-PRC meanwhile continues to move several meters per year, if not kilometers. The calculations of CCP corruption document to us that $5 Trillion has been swindled into the pockets of the Chinese elites since year 2000. Kim and Co. can only dream.

I was at least attempting to stay on topic, which was NK and the reasons for this current issue, which I blame in part on US anti communism which I believe has always been fuelled by the American elite, that is why I keep speaking about America and their elite as that was what I was talking about, it was you who wanted to go off on a tangent based loosely on my topic, but if you really need to compare your country to China then carry on, obviously there is no first world country that is comparable. I am not an advocate of communism, we are yet to see a regime that truly is anyway and all that we have seen so far have been corrupt self serving regimes in the name of communism so your comments really are moot regarding China's wealth disparity. My point was really just to make clear that there is a lot of bad in attempting to starve regimes into submission, history has shown us just what it means for the subjects, nothing good, the North Koreans have been punished enough, I would really hate to see them have to now go to war as well.

Publicus · September 27, 2017

1 hour ago, Kieran00001 said:

I was at least attempting to stay on topic, which was NK and the reasons for this current issue, which I blame in part on US anti communism which I believe has always been fuelled by the American elite, that is why I keep speaking about America and their elite as that was what I was talking about, it was you who wanted to go off on a tangent based loosely on my topic, but if you really need to compare your country to China then carry on, obviously there is no first world country that is comparable. I am not an advocate of communism, we are yet to see a regime that truly is anyway and all that we have seen so far have been corrupt self serving regimes in the name of communism so your comments really are moot regarding China's wealth disparity. My point was really just to make clear that there is a lot of bad in attempting to starve regimes into submission, history has shown us just what it means for the subjects, nothing good, the North Koreans have been punished enough, I would really hate to see them have to now go to war as well.

I am pleased to advise you I am hoping to forward your post to Kim Jong Un.

As to the one matter on your plate that I can speak to, which is American opposition to communism since 1849, I blame communism on communists. Just about everyone else does too btw. Fact is the Wave of the Future never got a fluid ounce above sea level.

The USA success in terminating the Cold War was realized against many challenges. The best managed challenge was the the nuclear one. It was managed successfully in the only it way possible, i.e., jointly by the elites of USA and the then USSR. We saw the notion again in the P5+1 successful negotiations with the ayatollahs in Iran. The Six-Party "talks" about NK nuclear weapons and missiles failed (years ago) for two reasons primarily: Communism in NK and North Koreans being in charge of North Korea.

Post Cold War the U.S. has brought home deployed nuclear weapons while proliferating none (Cold War Israel is debatable). Post Cold War the Russian KGB and GRU offspring of USSR and who currently thrive in the Kremlin have built in India, Pakistan, Iraq and Iran. China acquired a nuclear arsenal and has contributed in Pakistan and in North Korea. While Trump himself talks a big game everyone knows he's a tosser. (U.S. military commanders would never execute an order from Trump to initiate a first use against NK.)

Since 1849 and in fact well before then, the peoples of the democratic societies have prospered and we have won the big wars. The prosperity has manifested whether the governments have been Great Depression capitalist, FDR reformist, European Christian democratic or social democratic. A number of countries of Europe have thrived despite numerous instances and time periods when communists have participated in their governments, to include Nato member states.

NK was created by Stalin period. In the closing dayze of WW II his troops swarmed down the Korean peninsula which had been occupied by Japan since 1910. Had the U.S. not urgently placed a thin line of speedbump troops in the area of the 38th parallel we would indeed have a Kim Dynasty nuclearizing a peninsula long since ruled over by the Kims in its entirety. And nuclearized long ago no doubt. Y'know, the Wave of the Future.

Edited September 27, 2017 by Publicus
The kimchi challenge.

Publicus · September 27, 2017

5 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Are you a Poet ?

Not an Upper Case one, No.

Lower case is definitely up there above my reach too.

Methinks I should say thanks anyway but something inside of me tells me to hold off on it.

Indefinitely.

Publicus · September 27, 2017

On 9/26/2017 at 1:40 PM, Kieran00001 said:

Youre really not doing very well, I did not say their crime IS choosing communism, I said their only crime WAS choosing communism, and then the sanctions came that led them to chose spending beyond their ability on arms which left the country in ruins, plenty of atrocities have followed but their crime that got them sanctioned in the first place was just being communist, the same as Cuba.

And Cuba is socialist but not communist, you are confusing politics and economics.

There is no confusion on this side of the argument while there is a considerable confusion over there where you are. Let's take a quick look at the what and the why.

Cuba is a single party state and so is NK. So is the CCP-PRC a one party state and China has been, in a sense, a single party state for every moment of its existence over thousands of years. Chinese are certain in the absolute the one party state is the truth and the light. Likewise for NK, which has always been a one party state to include its time of the three kingdoms.

Cuba is in the New World as it were so to Cubans the one party state is less rooted in its experience. The factor is a vital qualifier that could make a transition to a multiparty system in Cuba less of a challenge to facilitate than it would be in China or in NK. The common thread of authoritarian governments is the single party state. The particular system of the economics is a matter of some divergence but it is not necessarily material, i.e., the U.S. is not pleased by an extra constitutional force seizing governing power. A swift seizure is almost always done by the institution on the right.

It is true that the person who sees the world through the single prism of anti-Americanism runs the risk to himself of being susceptible to support the single party state were he given the decisive choice between the two. Further, Russian "democracy" is the falsehood, not American democracy. I myself always think of the Mother Russia party as being Russia the Mother whatever.

Your carryings on about communism is the case of watching the shadows on the wall of the cave. That is, you'd need to instead get closer to the fire because the fire illuminates the single party state you'd been either ignoring or overlooking as the source of our objections. It is the fire that singes not the shadows.

craigt3365 · September 28, 2017

8 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

My point was really just to make clear that there is a lot of bad in attempting to starve regimes into submission, history has shown us just what it means for the subjects, nothing good, the North Koreans have been punished enough, I would really hate to see them have to now go to war as well.

You are right. They have been punished enough. Time for new leadership. Few other nationalities have the troubles they have. Time for their leadership to treat the people better.

Place the blame properly.

boomerangutang · September 28, 2017

11 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Are you a Poet ?

Chairman Mao used to joke that he was a poet who dabbled in politics.

Commentary on this thread: it's getting hard to read, because the posts are so long and drawn out. Please condense. Thanks.

Kieran00001 · September 28, 2017

19 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

You are right. They have been punished enough. Time for new leadership. Few other nationalities have the troubles they have. Time for their leadership to treat the people better.

Place the blame properly.

There is no way to change their regime without causing them far greater suffering.

craigt3365 · September 28, 2017

8 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

There is no way to change their regime without causing them far greater suffering.

And how would you know that? Countries get new leadership all the time. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. But things are really bad there now, so hard for it to get worse! LOL

Kieran00001 · September 28, 2017

7 hours ago, Publicus said:

I am pleased to advise you I am hoping to forward your post to Kim Jong Un.

As to the one matter on your plate that I can speak to, which is American opposition to communism since 1849, I blame communism on communists. Just about everyone else does too btw. Fact is the Wave of the Future never got a fluid ounce above sea level.

The USA success in terminating the Cold War was realized against many challenges. The best managed challenge was the the nuclear one. It was managed successfully in the only it way possible, i.e., jointly by the elites of USA and the then USSR. We saw the notion again in the P5+1 successful negotiations with the ayatollahs in Iran. The Six-Party "talks" about NK nuclear weapons and missiles failed (years ago) for two reasons primarily: Communism in NK and North Koreans being in charge of North Korea.

Post Cold War the U.S. has brought home deployed nuclear weapons while proliferating none (Cold War Israel is debatable). Post Cold War the Russian KGB and GRU offspring of USSR and who currently thrive in the Kremlin have built in India, Pakistan, Iraq and Iran. China acquired a nuclear arsenal and has contributed in Pakistan and in North Korea. While Trump himself talks a big game everyone knows he's a tosser. (U.S. military commanders would never execute an order from Trump to initiate a first use against NK.)

Since 1849 and in fact well before then, the peoples of the democratic societies have prospered and we have won the big wars. The prosperity has manifested whether the governments have been Great Depression capitalist, FDR reformist, European Christian democratic or social democratic. A number of countries of Europe have thrived despite numerous instances and time periods when communists have participated in their governments, to include Nato member states.

NK was created by Stalin period. In the closing dayze of WW II his troops swarmed down the Korean peninsula which had been occupied by Japan since 1910. Had the U.S. not urgently placed a thin line of speedbump troops in the area of the 38th parallel we would indeed have a Kim Dynasty nuclearizing a peninsula long since ruled over by the Kims in its entirety. And nuclearized long ago no doubt. Y'know, the Wave of the Future.

Not sure what you mean by the wave of the future never got an ounce over sea level. The Soviet Union ultimately failed, as did most everywhere in that global financial crisis, but the successes were clear, they were streets ahead of the Western Capitalist nations at one point, they achieved 100% literacy before any other, something the US has yet to do and instead has changed the goal posts to allow an elementary level to count for their stats, they had a truly universal health care system and an advanced one, the first in the world to offer organ transplants and the first in the world to offer a painless childbirth, the US is only just trialing the concept of a universal health care system 60 years later, they doubled their life expectancy and reduced infant mortality by 90%. And just face it, without feeling the need to compete with the Soviets there would have been no free higher education, free healthcare, paid holidays, full pensions or maternity leave, all arrived in the West as promises to offer competitive standards of life to the Soviets.

As for the nuclear issue, that is just ridiculous, without the US bombings there would have been no issue.

craigt3365 · September 28, 2017

10 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

Not sure what you mean by the wave of the future never got an ounce over sea level. The Soviet Union ultimately failed, as did most everywhere in that global financial crisis, but the successes were clear, they were streets ahead of the Western Capitalist nations at one point, they achieved 100% literacy before any other, something the US has yet to do and instead has changed the goal posts to allow an elementary level to count for their stats, they had a truly universal health care system and an advanced one, the first in the world to offer organ transplants and the first in the world to offer a painless childbirth, the US is only just trialing the concept of a universal health care system 60 years later, they doubled their life expectancy and reduced infant mortality by 90%. And just face it, without feeling the need to compete with the Soviets there would have been no free higher education, free healthcare, paid holidays, full pensions or maternity leave, all arrived in the West as promises to offer competitive standards of life to the Soviets.

As for the nuclear issue, that is just ridiculous, without the US bombings there would have been no issue.

Not every where failed when the USSR went under.

What US bombings? LOL

Kieran00001 · September 28, 2017

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

Not every where failed when the USSR went under.

What US bombings? LOL

The US dropped a couple of nukes, they caused the entire issue with that move, they caused every country that could to feel that they must have a nuclear program.

Kieran00001 · September 28, 2017

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

And how would you know that? Countries get new leadership all the time. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. But things are really bad there now, so hard for it to get worse! LOL

I don't actually 'know' that, but that is what the intelligence tells us and we can be quite sure that if changing their regime was going to be easy and not result in large loss of life they would have done it a long time ago and would not be hesitating now.

craigt3365 · September 28, 2017

6 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

The US dropped a couple of nukes, they caused the entire issue with that move, they caused every country that could to feel that they must have a nuclear program.

Dropped or not, many countries would have pursued nuclear weapons anyway. Especially the USSR. Can't blame the US for everything bad that happens around the world. Though many try.

digger70 · September 28, 2017

On 9/26/2017 at 11:48 AM, craigt3365 said:

You're missing the bigger picture. It's call non-proliferation. NK is not concerned about that and would gladly sell technology to any country with cash.

Nukes are hardly toys.

Other countries don't need nukes otherwise they would already have them,There are enough spies that can give them the info and get the parts and yellow cake 90 % U-235.There is an bigger problem from Islam Invading Every country in the world and breeding like Rabbits They are in the process to take over the world ,It won't happen overnight But it Will Happen Think about that for a minute.

Publicus · September 28, 2017

5 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

Not sure what you mean by the wave of the future never got an ounce over sea level. The Soviet Union ultimately failed, as did most everywhere in that global financial crisis, but the successes were clear, they were streets ahead of the Western Capitalist nations at one point, they achieved 100% literacy before any other, something the US has yet to do and instead has changed the goal posts to allow an elementary level to count for their stats, they had a truly universal health care system and an advanced one, the first in the world to offer organ transplants and the first in the world to offer a painless childbirth, the US is only just trialing the concept of a universal health care system 60 years later, they doubled their life expectancy and reduced infant mortality by 90%. And just face it, without feeling the need to compete with the Soviets there would have been no free higher education, free healthcare, paid holidays, full pensions or maternity leave, all arrived in the West as promises to offer competitive standards of life to the Soviets.

As for the nuclear issue, that is just ridiculous, without the US bombings there would have been no issue.

Let's step back for a moment to take a quick look at the record of your posts to the thread. Posts are after all fair game ne c'est pas.

The one party state is what you are running up the flag about. You tout any accomplishment of the one party state -- and you have a long list of 'em. Your posts present the one party state as making progress while the posts present the USA and its people as little more than cavemen who think we have a democracy going.

The posts see the multiparty states as menacing and corrupting the single party states and their economies. You do in fact see the multiparty states as negative influences against the single party states by our very existence as diverse political systems of democratic government, society, culture, civilization.

Your posts focus on a great emotional connection to the people of North Korea which in itself is commendable. It is what your posts do not say that is revealing and that is in fact the self-expose'. That is, your posts say nothing about the people of South Korea or of Japan or of Guam or Hawaii, or of the continental USA. Your posts ignore that the Stalinist North invaded the South to unify the peninsula under single party rule. You ignore that this remains the ultimate objective goal of the Kim Dynasty and its lieges in Pyongyang. Indeed, your every post advocates leaving the caveman elites in Pyongyang in charge of the people they abuse grotesquely and regard as their servant slaves. It is bizarre all the more that you cite their welfare and their supposed well being in advocating the continuation of the Kim Dynasty.

It is awful and grotesque to attempt to shield tyrants and their tyranny while accusing the United States of being the major factor in enabling tyranny in North Korea. Moreover, now that the tyranny in Pyongyang has gone seriously nuclear it is a gross error to try to focus the blame for it on the United States.

Kieran00001 · September 28, 2017

43 minutes ago, Publicus said:

Let's step back for a moment to take a quick look at the record of your posts to the thread. Posts are after all fair game ne c'est pas.

The one party state is what you are running up the flag about. You tout any accomplishment of the one party state -- and you have a long list of 'em. Your posts present the one party state as making progress while the posts present the USA and its people as little more than cavemen who think we have a democracy going.

The posts see the multiparty states as menacing and corrupting the single party states and their economies. You do in fact see the multiparty states as negative influences against the single party states by our very existence as diverse political systems of democratic government, society, culture, civilization.

Your posts focus on a great emotional connection to the people of North Korea which in itself is commendable. It is what your posts do not say that is revealing and that is in fact the self-expose'. That is, your posts say nothing about the people of South Korea or of Japan or of Guam or Hawaii, or of the continental USA. Your posts ignore that the Stalinist North invaded the South to unify the peninsula under single party rule. You ignore that this remains the ultimate objective goal of the Kim Dynasty and its lieges in Pyongyang. Indeed, your every post advocates leaving the caveman elites in Pyongyang in charge of the people they abuse grotesquely and regard as their servant slaves. It is bizarre all the more that you cite their welfare and their supposed well being in advocating the continuation of the Kim Dynasty.

It is awful and grotesque to attempt to shield tyrants and their tyranny while accusing the United States of being the major factor in enabling tyranny in North Korea. Moreover, now that the tyranny in Pyongyang has gone seriously nuclear it is a gross error to try to focus the blame for it on the United States.

You fantasised almost everything you wrote. My fear of attempting regime change in NK is that the people will suffer more and that there will be great loss of life inside and out of NK, in attempting something such as this we must weigh up the ends against the means, and it is my fear that the benefit of the end will not outweigh the loss of the means. That was one point I was making.

The other was just a reply in response to a comment that NK is solely to blame for their situation, I do not feel it is, I feel that without the US pressure that they would have spent less on arms, that their people would have suffered less and that we would not be seeing this nuclear program happening today.

How these two points equate to what you seem to think they do is beyond me, as I said, you are fantasising. I am appalled by their regime, I fear for their neighbors today and am also appalled at what the South suffered in the past, but that does not equate to the right to take huge amounts of lives in the North, in my opinion. It would be another situation like Iraq, a vicious dictator who the Iraqis deserved better than, who was responsible for the murder of tens of thousands of, but in removing him it took the lives of over 1 million and the destruction of their country, the end result of removing Saddam was far outweighed by the means it took to achieve it and we should learn from this mistake.

Edited September 28, 2017 by Kieran00001

Morch · September 28, 2017

8 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

You fantasised almost everything you wrote. My fear of attempting regime change in NK is that the people will suffer more and that there will be great loss of life inside and out of NK, in attempting something such as this we must way up the ends against the means, and it is my fear that the benefit of the end will not outweigh the loss of the means. That was one point I was making.

The other was just a reply in response to a comment that NK is solely to blame for their situation, I do not feel it is, I feel that without the US pressure that they would have spent less on arms, that their people would have suffered less and that we would not be seeing this nuclear program happening today.

How these two points equate to what you seem to think they do is beyond me, as I said, you are fantasising. I am appalled by their regime, I fear for their neighbors today and am also appalled at what the South suffered in the past, but that does not equate to the right to take huge amounts of lives in the North, in my opinion. It would be another situation like Iraq, a vicious dictator who the Iraqis deserved better than, who was responsible for the murder of tens of thousands of, but in removing him it took the lives of over 1 million and the destruction of their country, the end result of removing Saddam was far outweighed by the means it took to achieve it and we should learn from this mistake.

North Korea is not Iraq. You can't just import a different situation and apply it as fits. As some posted on previous topics, perhaps Germany would be a better (or at least, more optimistic) example?

Also when posters talk about North Korea's responsibility to how things are, that's mostly to do with leadership, not the people and not even the country. When referencing regime change, that's not necessarily something connected with an all out war.

Kieran00001 · September 28, 2017

16 minutes ago, Morch said:

North Korea is not Iraq. You can't just import a different situation and apply it as fits. As some posted on previous topics, perhaps Germany would be a better (or at least, more optimistic) example?

Also when posters talk about North Korea's responsibility to how things are, that's mostly to do with leadership, not the people and not even the country. When referencing regime change, that's not necessarily something connected with an all out war.

It was just an example of how the means to achieve something can massively outweigh the gains from the end result and how we should learn from the example by weighing up the odds before making a drastic move. All intelligence points to a very large loss of life in attempting regime change in NK, it is not a new idea, they have studied the likely outcomes and they have reached the conclusion that it is not worth the loss, they would have done it long ago otherwise. It is not a simple case of removing Kim, he would just be replaced by another Kim, it would take a total regime change and that, if done by an outside force such as the US, would mean an all out war, the very best they could hope for would be to start a civil war and leave them to it, at least that would minimise loss of life outside of NK.

How is Germany a more optimistic example? 60 million people died in that war.

Of course it is NK leaders who have made the decisions that have made the NK people's fate, my point was that there is a reason they made those decisions and they are based in part on other countries treatment of them, largely the US, it is hardly a complicated point and you would have to be very biased as to not see that the sanctions have had a negative effect for the people of NK and also a negative effect for global security.

TKDfella · September 28, 2017

18 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

I was at least attempting to stay on topic, which was NK and the reasons for this current issue, which I blame in part on US anti communism which I believe has always been fuelled by the American elite, that is why I keep speaking about America and their elite as that was what I was talking about, it was you who wanted to go off on a tangent based loosely on my topic, but if you really need to compare your country to China then carry on, obviously there is no first world country that is comparable. I am not an advocate of communism, we are yet to see a regime that truly is anyway and all that we have seen so far have been corrupt self serving regimes in the name of communism so your comments really are moot regarding China's wealth disparity. My point was really just to make clear that there is a lot of bad in attempting to starve regimes into submission, history has shown us just what it means for the subjects, nothing good, the North Koreans have been punished enough, I would really hate to see them have to now go to war as well.

Do you know some or any Korean Peninsula history? It has gone through quite a few dividing of two and three Kingdoms leading finally to Kim il Sung in 1950 who launched a war to unify the peninsula under communist rule and as we all know, led to a cease fire in 1953/54. Technically, war doesn't need to be declared only a continuation by someone breaking the cease fire. In capitalistic terms SK has prospered far ahead of NK while NK has remained a dictatorship under the Kim dynasty and relies heavily on foreign aid. By its own declaration, NK in 2013; ' "[NK]....is not restrained by the North-South declaration on non-aggression...". It also appears that NK declared war on SK at that time too by saying that exactly and also that the cease fire was over. By these details alone NK has already declared that it as war but little attention has been given to this by either the west or Russian/Chinese powers, suggesting that diplomacy should be given a chance. The bottom line is this; NK wants reunification of the peninsula and all under communist/dictator rule and the present regime will not budge from that.

One can only hope that hostilities will be postponed until, in the future, a more flexible NK regime will emerge. Unfortunately, at present that seems highly unlikely.

Kieran00001 · September 28, 2017

3 minutes ago, TKDfella said:

Do you know some or any Korean Peninsula history? It has gone through quite a few dividing of two and three Kingdoms leading finally to Kim il Sung in 1950 who launched a war to unify the peninsula under communist rule and as we all know, led to a cease fire in 1953/54. Technically, war doesn't need to be declared only a continuation by someone breaking the cease fire. In capitalistic terms SK has prospered far ahead of NK while NK has remained a dictatorship under the Kim dynasty and relies heavily on foreign aid. By its own declaration, NK in 2013; ' "[NK]....is not restrained by the North-South declaration on non-aggression...". It also appears that NK declared war on SK at that time too by saying that exactly and also that the cease fire was over. By these details alone NK has already declared that it as war but little attention has been given to this by either the west or Russian/Chinese powers, suggesting that diplomacy should be given a chance. The bottom line is this; NK wants reunification of the peninsula and all under communist/dictator rule and the present regime will not budge from that.

One can only hope that hostilities will be postponed until, in the future, a more flexible NK regime will emerge. Unfortunately, at present that seems highly unlikely.

And what do you see in that that provides any justification to take enormous amounts of lives? That is all I am saying, that we should not provoke them, we should not invade them or attempt regime change in any other way as that will lead to more suffering of a people who have suffered enough.

TKDfella · September 28, 2017

2 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

And what do you see in that that provides any justification to take enormous amounts of lives? That is all I am saying, that we should not provoke them, we should not invade them or attempt regime change in any other way as that will lead to more suffering of a people who have suffered enough.

You miss the point entirely;NK cannot be provoked! It considers itself already at war and thereby is willing to let its people suffer in its pursuit. Actual hostilities will just extend that suffering to other nations.

Publicus · September 28, 2017

58 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

You fantasised almost everything you wrote. My fear of attempting regime change in NK is that the people will suffer more and that there will be great loss of life inside and out of NK, in attempting something such as this we must weigh up the ends against the means, and it is my fear that the benefit of the end will not outweigh the loss of the means. That was one point I was making.

The other was just a reply in response to a comment that NK is solely to blame for their situation, I do not feel it is, I feel that without the US pressure that they would have spent less on arms, that their people would have suffered less and that we would not be seeing this nuclear program happening today.

How these two points equate to what you seem to think they do is beyond me, as I said, you are fantasising. I am appalled by their regime, I fear for their neighbors today and am also appalled at what the South suffered in the past, but that does not equate to the right to take huge amounts of lives in the North, in my opinion. It would be another situation like Iraq, a vicious dictator who the Iraqis deserved better than, who was responsible for the murder of tens of thousands of, but in removing him it took the lives of over 1 million and the destruction of their country, the end result of removing Saddam was far outweighed by the means it took to achieve it and we should learn from this mistake.

A thousand and one reasons to preserve and protect a one party state and to lionize each one party state is a fail. Getting hysterical about it goes nowhere fast besides.

Kim and Xi want the USA out of South Korea and out of Japan and they see the nuclear program in Pyongyang as their ticket to each event. The U.S. being evicted from northeast Asia does not need to occur today or tomorrow as far as Pyongyang and Beijing are concerned. The design eventuating over a bit more time would be just fine in Pyongyang and in Beijing -- each acting separately but with the same purpose and goal.

Xi sees this pursuit as realistic and attainable. The CCP Boyz in Beijing under him disagree. CCP Boyz at the top but under Xi fear the pursuit will eventuate in a military conflict at some level involving NK, SK, Japan, USA. The Boyz under Xi are right. They are dead on.

Youse over there need to know that no Potus would cave in to withdraw from northeast Asia forces, presence, influence or affects. Potus Obama made clear the U.S. would fight and Obama was the first Potus to actually face the prospect of a conflict in realistic terms. OB devised the supposed doctrine of "strategic patience" to in fact leave the problem to a ready and willing Hillary Clinton,. However, we got and have Donald Trump instead. (Putin himself is lamenting the Frankenstein he facilitated in Washington.)

Beijing's central strategy to assume dominance over East Asia and the South China Sea is to separate U.S. allies in the region from the USA. Isolate each of 'em then pick 'em off one by one. Beijing has been unsuccessful in this scheme however (CCP Boyz have always expected the already faded Duterte to fizzle if not flop outright). So Xi has grabbed onto the current chaos. Xi has for instance proposed the U.S. stop its military readiness exercises with SK and Japan and Kim stop exploding H-bombs and launching missiles. Kim and SecDef Mattis have each rejected this design. However, we see where Xi is headed, i.e., reduce the U.S. level of activity in the region.

Since the Maoist Xi assumed full power in 2013 Washington has increasingly made two things clear: One, the U.S. will not leave the region quietly and, Two, the United States isn't going anywhere period. When Xi says no one will win a war in NE Asia the CCP Boyz under him fully well know war itself is a huge loser among the Chinese people. War would in fact be catastrophic to CCP rule over its PRC. The Boyz know they are witnessing the fact Xi is the wrong guy in Beijing to try to deal with Potus Trump. Same same concerning Kim III.

The longtime China expert Perry Link at UC has said, far too politely, that Xi Jinping "is a man of modest intellectual gifts." Fact is Xi Jinping is a numbnuts from the word go.

Publicus · September 28, 2017

16 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

And what do you see in that that provides any justification to take enormous amounts of lives? That is all I am saying, that we should not provoke them, we should not invade them or attempt regime change in any other way as that will lead to more suffering of a people who have suffered enough.

Only the CCP Boyz in Beijing could carry out a regime change in Pyongyang without provoking a war or causing severe or catastrophic consequences.

Beijing would be hailed universally for it.

CCP Boyz in Beijing would install their own people in Pyongyang to rule absolutely and without provocation of any neighbor state or any other nation. CCP Boyz ruling in Pyongyang would indeed assure the NK people they are protected under the CCP nuclear umbrella. Pyongyang's nuclear program and arsenal would get shipped across the border to the CCP-PRC.

CCP Boyz have not attempted this for several reasons. One reason is that Kim III put his pro-Beijing uncle out front of an antiaircraft gun and told him to dance. Fact is Kim III is the most protected tyrant dictator since Stalin. Another is that Kim didn't have an H-Bomb nor did he demonstrate he had a viable ICBM ready to go. Yet another is that CCP knows it does not have the special operations capability to execute a decapitation of the Kim Dynasty and its Loyal Lieges.

The U.S. and SK could do it in a joint special op however. CCP Boyz would do little more than denounce it then privately toast the occasion. Xi Jinping would be beside himself but he would sit alone crying into his imported beer. Oh and yeah, Xi would have one guy from here sitting beside him holding his hand.

Kieran00001 · September 28, 2017

12 minutes ago, Publicus said:

Only the CCP Boyz in Beijing could carry out a regime change in Pyongyang without provoking a war or causing severe or catastrophic consequences.

Beijing would be hailed universally for it.

CCP Boyz in Beijing would install their own people in Pyongyang to rule absolutely and without provocation of any neighbor state or any other nation. CCP Boyz ruling in Pyongyang would indeed assure the NK people they are protected under the CCP nuclear umbrella. Pyongyang's nuclear program and arsenal would get shipped across the border to the CCP-PRC.

CCP Boyz have not attempted this for several reasons. One reason is that Kim III put his pro-Beijing uncle out front of an antiaircraft gun and told him to dance. Fact is Kim III is the most protected tyrant dictator since Stalin. Another is that Kim didn't have an H-Bomb nor did he demonstrate he had a viable ICBM ready to go. Yet another is that CCP knows it does not have the special operations capability to execute a decapitation of the Kim Dynasty and its Loyal Lieges.

The U.S. and SK could do it in a joint special op however. CCP Boyz would do little more than denounce it then privately toast the occasion. Xi Jinping would be beside himself but he would sit alone crying into his imported beer. Oh and yeah, Xi would have one guy from here sitting beside him holding his hand.

Perhaps China could do it, US special Ops could not though, taking out the leader and his cronies does not ensure regime change, it would take a huge number of boots on the ground and for a long time to do that, the people are not just going to turn around and feel that they have been liberated the next day, they will fight for their country against the invading tyrants they have been taught are their worst enemy.

tomwct · September 28, 2017

Rocket Man will know when USA goes to war against them!. He'll have 3 hours to total destruction!

midas · September 28, 2017

36 minutes ago, tomwct said:

Rocket Man will know when USA goes to war against them!. He'll have 3 hours to total destruction!

be careful what you wish for.............................................

Quote

But the potential fallout from such an event is monstrous. In 2001, Congress enacted the since-disbanded Commission to Assess the Threat to the U.S. with regards to an EMP event, with commissioners testifying that up to 90 percent of Americans could die within a year of such an attack. All the functions communities rely upon — hospitals, water, waste, transport, telecommunications, air control, medical care — could potentially be decimated for not days or weeks, but months or years.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/09/25/as-north-korea-threatens-emp-attack-questions-over-lapses-in-us-grid-security-rise.html

Edited September 28, 2017 by midas

Sign In

North Korea accuses U.S. of declaring war

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Recently Browsing 0 members

Announcements

Topics

Latest posts...

Popular in The Pub

ASEANNOW

MORE INFO

POPULAR AREAS

CONTACT US