Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

General North Korea discussion

180 replies to this topic
make total destroy
  • make total destroy

    love or a garbage disposal unit

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2013
  • None
  • Not Very Punk 2016
    Most Desperate Campaign Poster 2015
    April Fools Winner 2015
    Bloody Ungrateful 2016

#61

Posted 18 January 2016 - 01:59 PM Edited by make total destroy, 18 January 2016 - 01:59 PM.

If the Khmer Rogue was 'communist', then I guess the DPRK must be a democratic republic.

  • Melchior likes this

GTA_stu
  • GTA_stu

    DILF in waiting

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Unfunniest Member 2013
    Unfunniest Member 2012

#62

Posted 18 January 2016 - 01:59 PM

Isn't it more plausible that Communism was just the excuse for the genocide? And that the real motivations were something else entirely? It wouldn't be the first time a trick like that had been used.

 

It wasn't just perpetrated against ethnic minorities though, but against class enemies, which was pretty much anyone that wasn't a farmer. Communism wasn't the only motivation, but it was a significant one. The genocide was intended to purify the population among racial lines, but class lines also. I really don't think communism was just an excuse, mass killings were carried out not to just simply suppress opponents (if that's what you're partly alluding to) but as a means to achieve the desired society.


make total destroy
  • make total destroy

    love or a garbage disposal unit

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2013
  • None
  • Not Very Punk 2016
    Most Desperate Campaign Poster 2015
    April Fools Winner 2015
    Bloody Ungrateful 2016

#63

Posted 18 January 2016 - 02:01 PM

The 'desired society' wasn't a communist one, and the Khmer Rogue were motivated more by ethnic nationalism than any sort of communist tendency.

  • Melchior and Fonz like this

GTA_stu
  • GTA_stu

    DILF in waiting

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Unfunniest Member 2013
    Unfunniest Member 2012

#64

Posted 18 January 2016 - 02:23 PM

The 'desired society' wasn't a communist one, and the Khmer Rogue were motivated more by ethnic nationalism than any sort of communist tendency.

 

It was motivated in large parts by both. Ethnic nationalism didn't have anything to do with exterminating the (seen as) capitalist urban population, the intellectuals, teachers, doctors, pretty much anyone that was educated. That wasn't motivated by ethnic nationalism, but by communism. The desired society was radically communist, it was to be primitive, purely agrarian, classless, simple, have common ownership and be communal. How is that not communist?


sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Tämän Maailman Ruhtinaan Hovi

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • European-Union
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011

#65

Posted 18 January 2016 - 02:26 PM

It's an approach that's pretty par for the course for most extremist regimes. Annihilating the educated removes any coherent, enlightened challenge to the authority of the regime in question and allows them to rewrite history to suit their narrative. It wasn't motivated by any particular political ideology save for the desire to sustain complete power over Democratic Kampuchea. The same can be said for the numerous other instances in history where the same policy has been enacted by both far left and far right aspiring regimes.
  • Melchior and Fonz like this

Fonz
  • Fonz

    Passarim quis pousar, não deu, voou

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2014
  • None

#66

Posted 18 January 2016 - 02:46 PM

Also, the KR never wanted a communal agrarian society, and that isn't "communism" either. They wanted to reestablish the glory of the ancient Khmer civilization, which built majestic things like Angkor Wat. To do this, he set up slave labor, not common ownership or anything of the sort. If you want to know what agrarian socialism looks like, check out the EZLN.

The KR leadership explicitly declared they weren't communists (I'll edit the quote in once I get home), none of their policies even remotely resembled communism. They were overthrown by communists and backed by the US and the UK, which at the time were also busy backing the slaughter of East Timorese socialists. They weren't communists, period.
  • Melchior and make total destroy like this

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Tämän Maailman Ruhtinaan Hovi

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • European-Union
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011

#67

Posted 18 January 2016 - 03:06 PM

Did the West actually back the KR? Only a couple of academics I can think of have asserted that and even then on what seems like fairly shaky grounds. I'd be interested to hear the evidence supporting that assertion.
  • Failure likes this

GTA_stu
  • GTA_stu

    DILF in waiting

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Unfunniest Member 2013
    Unfunniest Member 2012

#68

Posted 18 January 2016 - 03:17 PM

It's an approach that's pretty par for the course for most extremist regimes. Annihilating the educated removes any coherent, enlightened challenge to the authority of the regime in question and allows them to rewrite history to suit their narrative. It wasn't motivated by any particular political ideology save for the desire to sustain complete power over Democratic Kampuchea. The same can be said for the numerous other instances in history where the same policy has been enacted by both far left and far right aspiring regimes.

 

What do you mean by extremist regime though? Because if you're talking about simply authoritarian regimes, like the typical African dictatorship, then you have a point that it is often simply about holding power for these people. They are repressive but not necessarily ideologically extreme, or even really motivated by a political position at all. It is simply about holding power. But there are also regimes which are ideologically extreme, where the leader clearly has more than just their own interests as the motivation behind staying in power. Hitler for example wasn't a narcissist who took and maintained power just for power itself, he was mostly motivated by his dream and vision of the German Reich. He was driven by ideology. 

 

As for Pol Pot, I really don't buy that he just wanted power and was hiding behind Communism as a way to get what he wanted. He was a man dedicated to Communism as an ideology and it was what drove him. He never developed a personality cult and was publically reclusive for a leader. It was his belief in his ideology which drove him to do what he did, not a desire for personal wealth or acclaim or power. People don't take extreme actions to reorganise a country like he did without having a substantial reason for doing so. Megalomania and narcissism just don't make you do that. He was a Communist who did what he did in order to achieve his vision of a Communist society. He was quite clearly driven by a specific ideology.


GTA_stu
  • GTA_stu

    DILF in waiting

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Unfunniest Member 2013
    Unfunniest Member 2012

#69

Posted 18 January 2016 - 04:07 PM

Also, the KR never wanted a communal agrarian society, and that isn't "communism" either. They wanted to reestablish the glory of the ancient Khmer civilization, which built majestic things like Angkor Wat. To do this, he set up slave labor, not common ownership or anything of the sort. If you want to know what agrarian socialism looks like, check out the EZLN.

The KR leadership explicitly declared they weren't communists (I'll edit the quote in once I get home), none of their policies even remotely resembled communism. They were overthrown by communists and backed by the US and the UK, which at the time were also busy backing the slaughter of East Timorese socialists. They weren't communists, period.

http://worldwithoutg...bodian-genocide

 

http://www.ppu.org.u...g_cambodia.html

 

http://hmd.org.uk/ge...-rouge-ideology

 

https://en.m.wikiped...iki/Khmer_Rouge

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk...d-asia-15776705

 

These are a few sources backing up what I'm claiming. I've read lots of different accounts, news articles and sources on the Khmer Rouge and the Cambodian genocide over the years, and never once have I come across a single one that said, a) The Khmer Rouge didn't believe in an agrarian communal society, or that b) "They wanted to re-establish the glory of the ancient Khmer civilization". The sources I've given and that I'm basing my arguments on are mainstream ones which represent the mainstream historical view. I'm interested to see what you're basing yours on.

 

As for their policies. The government seized pretty much all private property and collectivised it, they abolished money, they were attempeting to eradicate classes and create a classless society, there was common ownership of everything with no private property. The slave labour you mention was performed by class enemies and those seen as capitalists, the so called "new people". The "old people" worked on the communal farms. It was very much attempting to apply communism and obviously it wasn't yet a perfect communist society because that doesn't just appear out of nowhere, but it was trying it's hardest to get there and had certain characteristics of communism.


make total destroy
  • make total destroy

    love or a garbage disposal unit

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2013
  • None
  • Not Very Punk 2016
    Most Desperate Campaign Poster 2015
    April Fools Winner 2015
    Bloody Ungrateful 2016

#70

Posted 18 January 2016 - 04:23 PM

Communism is built through working-class movements, not genocidal peasant armies torturing people and forcing them into slavery. The Khmer Rogue were nominally communist, likely due to the regional popularity of 'communism'. It doesn't matter what they claimed to be, or claimed to be working towards, they weren't communist, and they did not establish a classless society. Pol-Pot was basically Mao on acid.

  • Melchior and Fonz like this

Fonz
  • Fonz

    Passarim quis pousar, não deu, voou

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2014
  • None

#71

Posted 18 January 2016 - 04:30 PM Edited by Black_MiD, 18 January 2016 - 04:38 PM.

Hitler for example wasn't a narcissist who took and maintained power just for power itself, he was mostly motivated by his dream and vision of the German Reich

And Pol Pot was obsessed with the ancient Khmer. It was not political, he was simply a reactionary (in the purest sense of the word) who wanted to reverse history for ethnic nationalist pride.
 

He never developed a personality cult

He called himself Brother Number One. As for his fanatic ethnic nationalism,

The creation of what amounted to a slave class suggests continuity between the Cambodian revolution and the country's ancient history. Like the Khmer Rouge leadership, the god-kings of Angkor had commanded armies of slaves. Pol Pot boasted in 1977 that "if our people can make Angkor, they can make anything."


Using a mainstream American source, by the way.
 

He was a Communist who did what he did in order to achieve his vision of a Communist society. He was quite clearly driven by a specific ideology.

"we are not Communists ... we are revolutionaries" and "do not belong to the commonly accepted grouping of Communist Indochina"—Ieng Sary (PP's right-hand man and co-leader of the KR), quoted in Michael Vickery's "Cambodia 1975-1982", p.308, Silkworm Books edition (1984). Michael Vickery being the leading historian on Cambodia in the 1970s-1980s.
 
He was not a communist, the KR weren't communists and never set up anything even remotely like communism. They set up slave labor camps and enslaved the peasants as a whole. No matter how many liberals try to argue otherwise, they were not communists. Agrarian socialism is something like the EZLN do. Why is it so important to pretend that they were communists anyway? No, the "communal" farms weren't commonly owned, they were overseen by regional commanders and KR cadres. Linking me to their Wikipedia page to prove they were communists is a bit like someone trying to argue that North Korea is a democracy seeing as they call themselves a Democratic People's Republic. The KR government also called its state "Democratic Kampuchea". Were they democrats then?

 

Did the West actually back the KR? Only a couple of academics I can think of have asserted that and even then on what seems like fairly shaky grounds. I'd be interested to hear the evidence supporting that assertion.

Well, the UK and US refused to recognize the People's Republic of Kampuchea established by the Vietnamese after ousting the KR and the KR/Coalition Government was seen as the legitimate government, even occupying the UN seats. There's also this piece by John Pilger, as well as some diplomatic correspondence. n 1981, Carter's security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, said: "I encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot." This other piece by Jack Colhoun The UN also placed an embargo on Cambodia, supposedly on the Khmer Rouge, even though they had been ousted in 1978. William Blum, a former State Department employee, wrote about it here. Not sure if you can find that online, though, I had to order mine. If you mean 'academics' like Grover Furr or something, then yeah, just disregard those as the guy is a complete lunatic and Stalin apologist.

  • Melchior and make total destroy like this

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Tämän Maailman Ruhtinaan Hovi

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • European-Union
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011

#72

Posted 18 January 2016 - 04:31 PM

Stu, my point was more that the wholesale murder of intellectuals by repressive regime is hardly a phenomenon unique to leftist authorities. It's a mainstay of political movements which come to power through violent conflict and which perpetuate that power through continuous warfare against their own people.

See also-
Bangladeshi Islamists during the war of independence
Franco's white terror
The Argentinian junta of 1966
The Soviet Union at various stages
The Cultural Revolution
  • make total destroy and Fonz like this

CBH
  • CBH

    Snitch

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2015
  • North-Korea

#73

Posted 18 January 2016 - 04:49 PM Edited by CBH, 18 January 2016 - 04:51 PM.

Wow, a guy in here is actually trying to label the KR communist... That's amazing. The KR weren't even interested in the forward progression of history; their goal was to regress to a pre-medieval society. They were primitivists.
 

Stu, my point was more that the wholesale murder of intellectuals by repressive regime is hardly a phenomenon unique to leftist authorities. It's a mainstay of political movements which come to power through violent conflict and which perpetuate that power through continuous warfare against their own people.

See also-
The Soviet Union at various stages
The Cultural Revolution


Capitalists ain't "our people".
  • Melchior, make total destroy and Fonz like this

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Tämän Maailman Ruhtinaan Hovi

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • European-Union
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011

#74

Posted 18 January 2016 - 05:10 PM

I don't recall most of the intellectuals, strategist and writers killed during the purges actually being Capitalist. And the anti-intellectual elements of the Cultural Revolution were aimed primarily at removing criticism of Mao's failed economic and social policies, not addressing the non-existent capitalist insurrection which, as suggested, wasn't actually there.
  • Tchuck, Failure, Melchior and 2 others like this

make total destroy
  • make total destroy

    love or a garbage disposal unit

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2013
  • None
  • Not Very Punk 2016
    Most Desperate Campaign Poster 2015
    April Fools Winner 2015
    Bloody Ungrateful 2016

#75

Posted 18 January 2016 - 05:21 PM

inb4 inevitable krondstadt argument


CBH
  • CBH

    Snitch

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2015
  • North-Korea

#76

Posted 18 January 2016 - 05:34 PM

I don't recall most of the intellectuals, strategist and writers killed during the purges actually being Capitalist. And the anti-intellectual elements of the Cultural Revolution were aimed primarily at removing criticism of Mao's failed economic and social policies, not addressing the non-existent capitalist insurrection which, as suggested, wasn't actually there.


https://en.wikipedia...i/Deng_Xiaoping

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Tämän Maailman Ruhtinaan Hovi

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • European-Union
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011

#77

Posted 18 January 2016 - 06:07 PM

Are you arguing Xiaoping was a capitalist? The fact Mao labelled him as one isn't really in dispute, but Mao accused lots of people of being Capitalists who weren't, primarily as a power play to deflect public attention from the failure of the Great Leap Forward. Or, in other words, do you actually believe that the cultural revolution was a campaign to remove right-wing capitalists from Chinese society rather than an attempt to crush the reformist elements in China who were critical of Mao's handling of what, by all statistical evidence, was probably the largest socioeconomic failure in human history by death toll?

CBH
  • CBH

    Snitch

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2015
  • North-Korea

#78

Posted 19 January 2016 - 10:15 PM

Are you arguing Xiaoping was a capitalist? The fact Mao labelled him as one isn't really in dispute, but Mao accused lots of people of being Capitalists who weren't, primarily as a power play to deflect public attention from the failure of the Great Leap Forward.


Do you not know what Deng and his supporters did when they became the CPC leadership? If you did you wouldn't ask this question.

Or, in other words, do you actually believe that the cultural revolution was a campaign to remove right-wing capitalists from Chinese society rather than an attempt to crush the reformist elements in China who were critical of Mao's handling of what, by all statistical evidence, was probably the largest socioeconomic failure in human history by death toll?


The best statistics you got is a birth rate drop in the early 60s.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Tämän Maailman Ruhtinaan Hovi

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • European-Union
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011

#79

Posted 20 January 2016 - 08:25 AM

Are you arguing Xiaoping was a capitalist? The fact Mao labelled him as one isn't really in dispute, but Mao accused lots of people of being Capitalists who weren't, primarily as a power play to deflect public attention from the failure of the Great Leap Forward.

Do you not know what Deng and his supporters did when they became the CPC leadership? If you did you wouldn't ask this question.
You mean the Socialist Market Economy? I would argue that it was a pretty rational response to the failures of the great leap forward and the oppression of the Cultural Revolution. We can't all ignore the unnecessary deaths of between 20 and 46 million people like you. I'm not entirely convinced that implementing market reform is synonymous with capitalism given almost every self-proclaimed socialist state aside from a handful has eventually done so.

Or, in other words, do you actually believe that the cultural revolution was a campaign to remove right-wing capitalists from Chinese society rather than an attempt to crush the reformist elements in China who were critical of Mao's handling of what, by all statistical evidence, was probably the largest socioeconomic failure in human history by death toll?

The best statistics you got is a birth rate drop in the early 60s.
So, are we outright pretending that the Great Chinese Famine never actually happened, or just that it wasn't caused by the Great Leap Forward? The Chinese government have conceded 15 million excess deaths, and most scholars put the actual figure as between 20 and 30 million. Oh, plus the three or so million murdered by the Chinese state over the same period.
  • Failure likes this

universetwisters
  • universetwisters

    THAT'S NOT THE PROBLEM, WILLY!

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Feb 2011
  • United-States
  • Best Conversion 2016 [GTA: Underground] [Contribution]
    Best Workshop 2014
    Most Improved 2014
    Funniest Member 2014
    April Fools Winner 2015

#80

Posted 07 February 2016 - 04:52 PM

NK launched a satellite into orbit *wink wink* and the US, Japan, and South Korea are talking about it.

Thoughts?


am30
  • am30

    surprisingly nice

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#81

Posted 07 February 2016 - 05:48 PM

 

Oh what a surprise(!)  The US UN starts crying when a secret state that doesn't care for or need the West does their own thing.  Certain other nations have far worse weapons (that we know actually exist - no one other than NK truly knows what NK launched) and one of them is away to elect a far right nut-case into Office.  NK ain't the nation I'm worried about.


universetwisters
  • universetwisters

    THAT'S NOT THE PROBLEM, WILLY!

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Feb 2011
  • United-States
  • Best Conversion 2016 [GTA: Underground] [Contribution]
    Best Workshop 2014
    Most Improved 2014
    Funniest Member 2014
    April Fools Winner 2015

#82

Posted 07 February 2016 - 06:12 PM

NK launched a satellite into orbit *wink wink* and the US, Japan, and South Korea are talking about it.

Thoughts?

 
Oh what a surprise(!)  The US UN starts crying when a secret state that doesn't care for or need the West does their own thing.  Certain other nations have far worse weapons (that we know actually exist - no one other than NK truly knows what NK launched) and one of them is away to elect a far right nut-case into Office.  NK ain't the nation I'm worried about.


I'd be pretty worried if I lived in South Korea or Japan or another country North Korea hates that's within spitting distance of them. Objectively speaking, why should they have nuclear weapons?
  • Failure likes this

GTA_stu
  • GTA_stu

    DILF in waiting

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Unfunniest Member 2013
    Unfunniest Member 2012

#83

Posted 07 February 2016 - 09:06 PM

 

 

Oh what a surprise(!)  The US UN starts crying when a secret state that doesn't care for or need the West does their own thing.  Certain other nations have far worse weapons (that we know actually exist - no one other than NK truly knows what NK launched) and one of them is away to elect a far right nut-case into Office.  NK ain't the nation I'm worried about.

 

 

The UN is "crying" because nuclear proliferation isn't something that is beneficial for global peace, prosperity, and stability, because North Korea are the most totalitarian and repressive country in the world, because they are sponsors of terrorism, because they constantly make threats to attack other countries, and because they're trying to expand their nuclear capabilities which pose a threat to the region and potentially countries further afield, because through numerous actions they've proven themselves to be erratic, untrustworthy and hostile. Oh yeah and they're completely batsh*t insane. Are the UN supposed to just look the other way? 

  • Failure and universetwisters like this

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Tämän Maailman Ruhtinaan Hovi

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • European-Union
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011

#84

Posted 07 February 2016 - 09:33 PM

Yeah, it's pretty much confirmed that the DPRK have at least unboosted fission weapons St this point though their ICBMs don't have the payload space to actually carry them. I'd say a degree of concern is pretty legitimate given that they keep attacking their neighbours for absolutely no f*cking reason.
  • Failure likes this

Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#85

Posted 08 February 2016 - 01:26 AM

Nothing like watching TV here in Japan, and suddenly see one of the NHK news pip pop up saying that North Korea has launched a missile. 

 

I do believe it's all just a display of their own force. Don't think they're actually going to try and launch an offensive on any of its neighbours, as that would be pretty suicidal of them. As long as China wants to keep trading with Japan/South Korea/USA that is.


Uncle Sikee Atric
  • Uncle Sikee Atric

    Everyone's favorite Uncle, but not Grandpa.

  • Paleto Bay Mayor's Office
  • Joined: 20 Oct 2014
  • United-Kingdom

#86

Posted 08 February 2016 - 11:42 AM

Nothing like watching TV here in Japan, and suddenly see one of the NHK news pip pop up saying that North Korea has launched a missile. 
 
I do believe it's all just a display of their own force. Don't think they're actually going to try and launch an offensive on any of its neighbours, as that would be pretty suicidal of them. As long as China wants to keep trading with Japan/South Korea/USA that is.


I think if the DPRK carries on much further than it is with the current situation, China may well wash it's hands of the entire situation and walk away.

Right now they are trying to 'talk down' the situation and basically warn the DPRK to stop progression while appealing to the rest of the world for calm. The Chinese are caught in a catch 22 right now and they are in danger of a sophicated US missile defence system being based in South Korea, well within range of China's own airspace. They really do not want that, but it will happen if the DPRK keep going.

The Chinese are not arming the DPRK directly. They only willingly supply food and basic materials, more to feed the very hungry people of North Korea. But they always supply the DPRK with the very clear threat that the supplies could stop at any time if China feels the DPRK is not listening to their advice. For the first time China may well carry out that threat for a short period and put it's foot down.

The next few months are crucial, while the US and South Korean talks progress. China will have representatives somewhere in the background all the time and they hold the final key for defusing the situation.

I do suspect the DPRK's intentions are defensive and a deterrent. Even their most hardcore warmonger general would admit they'd die in minutes if they launched offensively. But their erratic behaviour will always leave that nagging doubt.
  • Tchuck likes this

am30
  • am30

    surprisingly nice

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#87

Posted 08 February 2016 - 07:23 PM

Yeah, it's pretty much confirmed that the DPRK have at least unboosted fission weapons St this point though their ICBMs don't have the payload space to actually carry them. I'd say a degree of concern is pretty legitimate given that they keep attacking their neighbours for absolutely no f*cking reason.

 

Much like the US attacks various other nations for no f*cking reason.

 

Once it was Russia, then it was China, now it's North Korea.  Any guesses on which nation we'll be told to hate for no reason next?

 

Ultimately, NK is not the nation that worries me.


feckyerlife
  • feckyerlife

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2013
  • United-States

#88

Posted 08 February 2016 - 07:36 PM

 

Nothing like watching TV here in Japan, and suddenly see one of the NHK news pip pop up saying that North Korea has launched a missile. 
 
I do believe it's all just a display of their own force. Don't think they're actually going to try and launch an offensive on any of its neighbours, as that would be pretty suicidal of them. As long as China wants to keep trading with Japan/South Korea/USA that is.


I think if the DPRK carries on much further than it is with the current situation, China may well wash it's hands of the entire situation and walk away.

Right now they are trying to 'talk down' the situation and basically warn the DPRK to stop progression while appealing to the rest of the world for calm. The Chinese are caught in a catch 22 right now and they are in danger of a sophicated US missile defence system being based in South Korea, well within range of China's own airspace. They really do not want that, but it will happen if the DPRK keep going.

The Chinese are not arming the DPRK directly. They only willingly supply food and basic materials, more to feed the very hungry people of North Korea. But they always supply the DPRK with the very clear threat that the supplies could stop at any time if China feels the DPRK is not listening to their advice. For the first time China may well carry out that threat for a short period and put it's foot down.

The next few months are crucial, while the US and South Korean talks progress. China will have representatives somewhere in the background all the time and they hold the final key for defusing the situation.

I do suspect the DPRK's intentions are defensive and a deterrent. Even their most hardcore warmonger general would admit they'd die in minutes if they launched offensively. But their erratic behaviour will always leave that nagging doubt.

 

China will never walk away. I really dont think china even cares, everything they say is a repeat from the prior launch or test. China does not want those US Military bases along the DMZ moving closer to their border with Korea, they will continue to  look away from what the regime does like they have been for the last 60 yrs.


sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Tämän Maailman Ruhtinaan Hovi

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • European-Union
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011

#89

Posted 08 February 2016 - 08:14 PM

Much like the US attacks various other nations for no f*cking reason.

Never really got the logic of this kind of argument. I'm not drawing a comparison with the actions of other nations so it's totally and utterly irrelevant; nothing more than a simple statement of fact.
 

Once it was Russia, then it was China, now it's North Korea.

You say that like the rest of the world taking issue to the DPRK being provocative is a new thing. It's been nearly 70 years since the Korean War.
 

Ultimately, NK is not the nation that worries me.

Well no, because they're an ass-backwards state full of starving people run by a chubby cult-of-personality tosser with a sh*t haircut whose weapons can scarcely hit their neighbours with any accuracy. So people in the West don't really have much to worry about. The same cannot be said for the citizens of South Korea, Japan or any other regional neighbour who might have done anything to incite their wrath at some point.
  • Failure and universetwisters like this

Svip
  • Svip

    I eat babies

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None
  • Best Returning Member 2014
    Lifetime Achievement Award

#90

Posted 08 February 2016 - 10:38 PM

Why would he care about the South Koreans or Japanese?  That's not him!

  • Failure likes this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users