North Korea - Why aren't we focused on helping them?

Great Debates
81

Who wants North Korea? A country “taking over” NK would have to build an infrastructure. There isn’t much electricity outside of the capitol. Ever seen any of the photographs of Kim Jong Un touring hospitals, research laboratories, or even the mission control center for their rocket launches? There’s one thing that’s very common that I always notice. Young Kim is always wearing a very nice and warm looking woolen overcoat. Compare that to photos and videos from the mission control center for the Martian Curiosity mission. They’re all wearing short sleeved blue polo shirts.

What does this mean?

It means in their most advanced technological centers, the NK can’t manage to HEAT the buildings to a comfortable level.

Oh, and as a practical standpoint, it’s hard to free a people by armed conflict who don’t believe they need to be freed.

82

Why would that work? They’d certainly have less power and influence afterward in the new regime.

Besides, the generals high enough to be in such a position are in such positions because they’re already being paid off quite well by the ruling regime. Offering a piddly one time payment is nothing compared to the decades of graft they’ve already gotten and can reasonably expect to continue receiving. They’re in such positions because they’re smart enough to know the numbers run better the other way.

Once again, China doesn’t want to deal with North Korea. They want it to be there and stable. Taking it over is unprofitable for them. And not just in monetary terms - the costs to pay China to deal with the situation would be horrendous. Easily in the hundreds of billions of dollars, and quite possibly in the trillions of dollars. I’d love to know where you propose we get that money.

And even with monetary compensation, it’s an administrative and humanitarian nightmare waiting to happen. One example, why would North Koreans stay in North Korea if China has control? They’d want to stream across the border to the more prosperous Chinese area - exactly the situation China wants to avoid.

That actually kind of works. Not the laptop part but cellphones and South Korean soap operas on VHS and DVD. A good portion of the population don’t buy the party line but they’re still in no position to do anything about it. But it’s still an improvement over completely brainwashed zombies.

Dropping weapons and food is pretty much no-go. The military would confiscate them quickly and then punish everybody in the area. They also confiscate electronics when they find them and punish the people involved, but it’s much less a priority.

This is the real world, not a Hollywood movie. “Arranging” such accidents is the realm of James Bond, not real operations.

The minute that happens, artillery shells start dropping on Seoul and tens of millions of people are suddenly quite discomfited with at least tens of thousands dead in the South alone. You’d have your war but it would be everybody recognized was started by Western powers.

If you want China to suddenly go belligerent and relations with South Korea to go absolutely frozen cold to the point they start playing nicer with China instead of the US, I can think of no better way.

83

Free at last! Thank God Almighty, free at last!

84

I have no idea what the point of the “accident” is supposed to be, and every single step in this plan would be incredibly difficult and expensive.

“Next time?” You’re aware they didn’t elect their current leaders, right?

85

I fear that he, along with the OP, just might not realize that North Korea is a different country, a completely different place, than South Korea.

That leads me to something else that really bears pointing out. If there’s a full-on shooting war, then there will obviously be a lot of North Koreans killed. The number of South Koreans with relatives in the North isn’t miniscule.

86

I wonder if OP is aware of the many recent wars, especially in Africa, where there has been much death and suffering. If the U.S. wished to use its military might to reduce suffering, there have been (and still are) better targets than North Korea. The Rwandan Genocide is just one of the more obvious examples where the U.S. and Western nations looked on. Many of these situations would have been much more tractable than a conflict with North Korea.

Consider the Battle of Mogadishu (1993). This U.S. action was part of a humanitarian effort in Somalia, where on-going conflict cost hundreds of thousands of lives. Yet when 18 U.S. soldiers were killed in the “Blackhawk Down” affair, that became the focus for Americans, and U.S. withdrew altogether. Even assuming North Korean and South Korean lives count for nothing, do you think we could subdue North Korea with less than 18 Americans lost?

Replacing Saddam Hussein should have been much much more tractable than taking North Korea down. Yet the U.S. adventures there have led to much death and suffering – I think millions of Iraqis would be happy if they could somehow “rewind” the past and still live under Saddam.

If the North Koreans were armed only with clubs, intervention would still be horrific. Instead they have the largest artillery force in the world and a few nuclear weapons. I find OP’s suggestion unrealistic beyond words. There is (probably foolish) talk of preventative attack for U.S. self-defense. To consider this humanitarian would be absurd if one tries to estimate North Korean deaths in such a scenario.

87

Could you save North Korea after you’ve destroyed it?

88

Honest to god, I thought this was satire for a while until I read who wrote it and what else he wrote in this thread. Poe strikes again…

89

mr. jp,

While you don’t think people care about NK, 34,000 Americans died in the Korean war to keep SK free, not to mention those of other allied counties. I think you do a disservice to them by call them uncaring.

90

How could you possibly read this from my posts? Overall, you present one of the worst cases of reading miscomprehension I have ever seen. In the OP itself, I call NK “basically a slave state”. That qualifies it as a different place than South Korea, I think you could figure out.

You mention several times that you think I should read more. I will offer the following advice to you: Instead of just reading a lot, try and make an effort to actually understand what you read. It will give a better payoff in the end.

91

Oh, I understand what I read, friend. And I can readily see pure and utter bullshit when I see it. There’s a cow farm about ten blocks from my apartment. Lately, thanks to you, I don’t have to go that far to see the stuff. What you’ve posted in regards to North Korea is basically bullshit. Don’t like having it called that? Fine. Quit posting bullshit.

92

I understand your point. But I don’t really understand why you would think about like this. Why would you assume that I’m not aware of recent wars in Africa? I mean, most people are probably aware of these. I mentioned the Rwandan genocide in a previous post. Why don’t you just state your point (which is a good one) instead of silly wonderings about what I am aware of or not?

But yes, I would ask the same questions regarding these matters. And I personally think it’s an atrocity that further / faster action was not taken during the Rwandan genocide, for instance.

93

We understand that you can see that NK is a slave state, What you don’t seem to understand is that the people living there do not think the same way you would think if you suddenly found yourself living in a slave state.

94

Right. He says he understands that North Koea is a slave state but his suggestions about how to change it look like suggestions on how to change a society like South Korea. In other words, his words don’t mesh.

95

First, the claim this was an argument against, was that “I might not realize that North Korea is a different country than South Korea”.

Second, I don’t see why you would make this second assumption either.

What does this even mean? I would suggest changing South Korea by paying China to invade it?

96

Good grief.

97

Every year, there’s a new ranking of failed states by an independent NGO. Currnntly, North Korea is ranked as the 23rd worst failed state. Somalia is #1, followed by the DR Congo, Sudan, and South Sudan.

Do you advocate invasions of each those countries?

98

I would like to debate this really good point. But I am thrown off by the quote you took from me to lead up to it. What is the relation of this quoted question to the content of your post?

99

I’m just amazed at the arrogance in this thread.
Why would you assume you have a right to interfere in the lives of other countries?
Besides that, do you realy still think the US is any good at Nation building??
You guys fuck-up everything you touch. Most recent examples of your incompetence, you should be aware of, Afghanistan and Iraq. Then there’s Iran before that Vietnam and oh, the whole of South America.

Yet you still think it is all done to HELP the poor ‘locals’, right? You may be lapping up your country’s propaganda and think the North Korean people need your help,
they fucking well know that your ‘help’ is just a thinly disguised overthrow of their sovereignty.

They.do.not.want.your.help!

Why don’t you keep your fucking paws to yourself for a change.
At the very least stop pretending you’re ‘helping’. The words liberate and freedom have already totally been worn out.

100

I’m sorry if I sounded a bit angry there…