Just getting your attention. I read your last post and thought of this question.
So, once again, if North Korea ranks 23rd on the failed states index, do you propose attacking countries 1-22 first?
I don’t think that this particular list is equivalent to a list of how bad it is for the population in the countries. Also, some of these countries will get better in time by themselves, without requiring a coup or military intervention. Some, like Kenya, already have democratic elections, and are experiencing high growth rates. North Korea is seemingly stuck and enslaved, and I doubt the country will improve in any significant way by itself in the near future.
That said, I think we could do more to help many of the top countries on this list also. Probably before we help North Korea, given the cost / benefit of the situation.
Degree of failedness is just one factor.
North Korea has a relatively high payout if we can do the job, compared to say, Sudan.
Well then they need to stop shaking nukes in our faces.
Threatening nuclear strikes puts you in the big leagues.
And would you be wanting to “help” them the same way you want to “help” North Korea?
Cite? How in the world would North Korea pay back the cost of “rehabilitation”? A cost conservatively estimated to be in the trillions (not even counting the human cost in lives lost).
And the real reason shows itself. What payout are you referring to, aNewLeaf?
I didn’t really make this thread in order to discuss what I personally would do about helping other critical places in the world, if I had more resources to do the job. I would not go about it in the same way I would go about trying to change North Korea, if that’s your question. Every place is different, and requires their own solutions, not least North Korea. One thing I do think is that it is possible to do a lot of help with the right intentions and enough resources. I would recommend The Dictator’s Handbook by Bruce Bueno De Mesquita for some discussion about this question.
I think you’re reading, but not understanding, the criteria of a failed state.
According to the ratings, Somalia and DR Congo score worse on human rights than the DPRK. In fact, Somalia scores worse than the DPRK in 11 out of 12 criteria. Plus Somalia has been at the top – or just one or two spaces off the top – of the failed states list for as long as it has been around.
Plus, Somalia doesn’t have nuclear weapons and a war probably won’t cause hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths in countries that are our close allies, like South Korea and Japan.
Why don’t you care about what is going on in Somalia? What’s with this obsession with North Korea? Do you not care about Somalia because it isn’t on the front page of the newspaper every few weeks? Why aren’t you suggesting we invade Somalia and make it better? Clearly it isn’t getting better on its own.
Ah, so you did have a point in quoting that specific post of mine. You assume that I read, but don’t understand things. If you start with that assumption, I wonder why you are even interested in engaging in a debate with me.
If some person talks about that he thinks we should do something about the high robbery rate, I don’t from that assume that he is not aware of or has no interest in preventing domestic abuse. Likewise, it seems like an absurd assumption to make that I am not aware of or interested in conflicts in such places as Somalia. (Only the “interested in” applies to you. The “aware of” applies to other people in this thread.)
I personally think it is pretty evident that it is worse for the people living in North Korea than it is for the people living in Kenya (which I have visited), and other places in this list. But I will leave that up to other people in this thread to debate that with you if they wish.
Have you personally visited North Korea? If not, then how can you use the fact that you visited Kenya to show that it is not worse off?
Total and utter bullshit.
No. If you are doubtful about that it is worse to live in North Korea than in Kenya, I do not think this would convince you otherwise, nor did I intend it to. The visit was definitely convincing to me, if I hadn’t been convinced already. Kenya has its conflicts and its developing nation-problems, but there is a lot of freedom and progress.
I can almost hear Cheney in the distance saying “don’t worry, the war will pay for itself.”
Well, it worked so well last time, may as well give it another go.
The appropriateness of the “read but not understand” bit became apparent when you started coming up with poor reasons why North Korea is worse than other countries on the list, particularly when Somalia is such a basket case. I’m really not as clever as you think I am: I used the quote to get your attention, I did not predict what you were going to say and then in a “Minority Report”-like act of precognition, quote you to have something to throw in your face when you responded how I knew you would respond in the future.
I mean, get real.
Plus, you didn’t respond to the substance of my comment at all. Why start (or risk) a war with North Korea when (a) Somalia is worse off, and (b) Somalia has no means to nuke huge cities like Seoul, Tokyo, or maybe even Los Angeles? If we care about human suffering, and believe that war is the way to remedy it, it seems like Somalia is the logical first stop on the American Greater Global Co-Prosperity Sphere. So why are you suggesting North Korea is more important?
ETA: I’ve been to Keyna, too. Plus about 5 other countries on the top 50 failed states. Big whoop.
I don’t necessarily suggest that. In fact I implied the opposite when I answered your question above:
Are we all having the same conversation?
I’m talking about turning North Korea into South Korea II.
Stop spending money on military and start making a profit there.
(As opposed to, say, Sudan, where we could do neither).
(And have them stop rattling nukes at us.)
What are you guys talking about?
Helping out our fellow human beings.
What money? You realize, I hope, that comparatively little of the US or South Korea’s money goes to dealing with North Korea.
As for North Korea itself, it doesn’t have money. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be sporting literally decades old Cold War castoffs for their military. Their military might is about efficiency (cheaply attacking South Korea causing disproportionate amounts of damage for the cost), not about huge numbers.
Just tossing out ideas that make for good soundbites doesn’t actually make them actually good or realistic, practical, or non-fantastic. The real world doesn’t work like spy novels and conspiracy theories.
Look at what was East Germany. It was comparatively closer to West Germany than North Korea is to South Korea. While that disparity has shrunk, it’s still there.
At best, what you are suggesting is not helping North Koreans but turning North Korea into a pool of cheap labor for South Korea. Otherwise, modernizing the country is the work of trillions of dollars, which won’t be recouped for decades, if at all (again, see East Germany).
Alright. Many other people in this thread make baseless presumptions about what I read and what I know. (How could one assume that I am not aware that there are wars in Africa? Where would you have lived in order to not know about that? Why would one assume that I think that North Korea is “not different from South Korea”, or that living under a totalitarian propaganda-filled regime for your whole life wouldn’t affect your psyche? I’m baffled.) I suppose I put you in that crowd prematurely, and I apologize.
I wasn’t really supposed to be a big whoop. 
Just a comment on why I focused on this arbitrary country from the list.
As Homer Simpson once said to Lisa, "Implied…? Or implode??!
I think debates function better when either side doesn’t have to infer conclusions from vague statements. Do you support some kind of US attack and Marshall Plan-like reconstruction for Somalia before we tackle North Korea?