🇰🇵 The North Korea Thread

[ludovica]

They...weren't, though. Obviously we've sanctioned the Kim family before, but nothing with quite this much teeth, and not in the face of an absolutely apocalyptic second option for them that's been made pretty clear.

And what? "What evil deeds"? You're kidding me. Yeah, Kim and his dad weren't "evil" or anything, with their world's-premier-slave-camps title, mass executions, killing his own uncle for kicks. Nah, tubby's just misunderstood.

Believe what you want, NK's plan works either way.

Nobody humane would dispute that the regime is a grave monstruosity but as I said, you just stereotype.
Kim Jong-Un inherited the mess left by his father, there will really not be any way to pass a moral judgement on him until we know more of the inner workings of NK, if we ever will.

As far as we know his half brother, if left alive, could have been put in Kim's place by rebel generals: what for we do not really know.
They could have been more "liberal", but also more hardliner.

No use to judge the politics of a feudal and militaristic totalitarian regime with the standards of liberal democracies.
You make peace with enemies, thank Goddess, Moon understands it.

 

[Aximili86]

Kim Jong-Un inherited the mess left by his father, there will really not be any way to pass a moral judgement on him until we know more of the inner workings of NK, if we ever will.

He's...literally continuing his father's & grandfather's gulags, what are you even talking about? Guy's been leader of the country since 2011, if he had some big plan to stop his father's oppression he's had 7 years to start it, and hasn't.

You act like he's being forced into continuing the status quo or something. Kim's long consolidated the power his father had - it was rocky at first when the generals didn't know if he was up to it, but the guy's long established by now and wields ultimate rule just like daddy did.

 

[ludovica]

He's...literally continuing his father's & grandfather's gulags, what are you even talking about? Guy's been leader of the country since 2011, if he had some big plan to stop his father's oppression he's had 7 years to start it, and hasn't.

You act like he's being forced into continuing the status quo or something. Kim's long consolidated the power his father had - it was rocky at first when the generals didn't know if he was up to it, but the guy's long established by now and wields ultimate rule just like daddy did.

Having his half brother killed out of fear of being deposed paints another picture.

And I'll repost what you left out of my quote:
No use to judge the politics of a feudal and militaristic totalitarian regime with the standards of liberal democracies.

In no way I'm defending or condoning anything, but he's been quite forced into continuing the status quo: the alternative is the implosion of the regime, but human egoism and self preservation and all that, you know?

You're closing in on strawman arguments, by the way.
My whole point was that Trump had zero merit.

 

[Aximili86]

And that last line is just plain false. Trump's not by any means the whole picture here, but pretending he's not remotely a factor in them coming to the table is pretty willfully ignorant.

 

[MaceB]

In a way, It doesn't really matter what or who caused this remarkable shift... because Trump will certainly take credit for it regardless and he'll get a begrudging acknowledgement from Dems and full throated praise from Republicans. This is amazing amazing amazing for President Trump... the best thing that could have happened for him. There's really no point fighting it.

Now I hear that NK is going to change their time zone 30 minutes back so it'll be the same as SK? We are witnessing history ladies and gentlemen.... Kim is not his father, nor his grandfather... and this could actually lead to denuclearization. That is pretty incredible. I really wonder what people inside North Korea think about all of this.

 

[Sithborg]

Frankly, the Peace Prize talks are immature. One, I doubt anyone will get nominated for threatening thermonuclear war. Two, Bolton seems to have his eyes on Iran now, as they seem to just be going along with Bibi at the moment.

 

[ludovica]

And that last line is just plain false. Trump's not by any means the whole picture here, but pretending he's not remotely a factor in them coming to the table is pretty willfully ignorant.

You keeping repeating this, does not make it true...
We're going in circle, let's bury this.

In a way, It doesn't really matter what or who caused this remarkable shift... because Trump will certainly take credit for it regardless and he'll get a begrudging acknowledgement from Dems and full throated praise from Republicans. This is amazing amazing amazing for President Trump... the best thing that could have happened for him. There's really no point fighting it.

Now I hear that NK is going to change their time zone 30 minutes back so it'll be the same as SK? We are witnessing history ladies and gentlemen.... Kim is not his father, nor his grandfather... and this could actually lead to denuclearization. That is pretty incredible. I really wonder what people inside North Korea think about all of this.

Agreed on everything.
Bolded part may be the key to moving forward.

 

[Sithborg]

What's going to be interesting is to see which wins out. Trump's utter need for adoration or his and Bolton's need to sabotage the meeting before hand due their various issues.

 

[Aximili86]

Frankly, the Peace Prize talks are immature. One, I doubt anyone will get nominated for threatening thermonuclear war. Two, Bolton seems to have his eyes on Iran now, as they seem to just be going along with Bibi at the moment.

None of what Bibi said in that presentation was false though, they presented the documented proof. What he takes too far is them breaking the terms of the agreement, which is debatable either way - you wouldn't take Bibi as an authority there. But in terms of them continuing nuclear infrastructure in the face of denying they have it, that evidence was there and the couple of CNN guys interviewed were putting forth they're pretty sure the IAEA will corroborate it.

Sounds like the deal's at the least going to be altered and made more stringent in the wake of this.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Nothing Bibi presented was really not known to the relevant groups involved. That Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons as late as 2009 was not a surprise to anyone but this information was again, known.

This was a publicity stunt whose naked purpose is to rally the GOP and it's credulous base that will not hear anything but "Iran seaks nukes".

Nothing he presented materially showed a break of the agreement.

 

[Aximili86]

This was a publicity stunt whose naked purpose is to rally the GOP and it's credulous base that will not hear anything but "Iran seaks nukes".

Which they...do.

That doesn't mean you scrap the agreement, but a reminder that you should be wary of trusting these bastards is never a bad thing. Verify verify verify, all along the way, keep the deal but independently check for yourself on every damn thing they tell you, because it's friggin' Iran.

 

[Sithborg]

I am just going to assume that you were too young to remember 2003.

 

[Aximili86]

'Cause any dissenting take on something equates to absenteeism, right?

 

[MaceB]

We can't really break up the Iran deal though.. it's a multinational agreement. We can't end the deal... we can drop out.. and deal with the consequences of dropping out of an international agreement without proof of abuse. There will be consequences to that kind of action, most definitely.

And what would the Iranians take away from it? That they can negotiate with the United States? That they should not get a nuclear weapon now? Obviously not. No... dropping out of the deal does very little to help the situation... unless you count the gratification that the GOP will get out of destroying another Obama landmark... that seems to be the only real value that they care about.

 

[MaceB]

Which they...do.

That doesn't mean you scrap the agreement, but a reminder that you should be wary of trusting these bastards is never a bad thing. Verify verify verify, all along the way, keep the deal but independently check for yourself on every damn thing they tell you, because it's friggin' Iran.

That's why this deal is so good though. It has verification including surveillance cameras, seals attached to nuclear equipment, IAEA verification inspectors. Imagine us allowing another country into our home, and allowing them to set up security cameras, to put seals on our equipment, and to have over 3,000 days of inspections looking through our material. This deal was not dependent on a lot of faith, and it's the best one we're going to get.
The idea that we can exit a binding international agreement without proof of misdeeds, and then renegotiate lickity split is just not realistic... and if we lose the deal, then Iran becomes a black box again with NO inspectors. What upside do we get by reneging on our obligations?

 

[Sithborg]

The most likely result, will be our European allies saying "screw you", and keep up the deal. Which is likely to lead to a whole other set of problems.

 

[Aximili86]

That's why this deal is so good though.

Assuming they're not breaching it. I'm not entirely sure what Netanyahu's putting out there rises to that level of them having broken their specific commitments - if they have, you'd want to hear it from someone other than Bibi. But sounds like the IAEA's still assessing the evidence the Israeli spy got their hands on - if it does turn out to be all above-board and Iran has been flaunting the deal, then pretty clearly the "it was never a good deal" types are at least onto something.

 

[Sithborg]

Given Israel's and Saudi Arabia's desire, I would take any evidence they have with a metric ton of salt.

As I said, I remember 2003.

 

[ludovica]

Which they...do.

That doesn't mean you scrap the agreement, but a reminder that you should be wary of trusting these bastards is never a bad thing. Verify verify verify, all along the way, keep the deal but independently check for yourself on every damn thing they tell you, because it's friggin' Iran.

And that's the same problem you showed towards NK.
Always assuming the worst must be true and somehow thinking there are good guys and bad guys in these situations: especially regarding nuclear weapons, seeing that the West tolerated and keeps tolerating Israel having them.

"We" liberal democracies act (or should act) considering the actual standings, as do (and they do) our adversaries, at least as long as both sides do not ditch this dangerous dichotomy.
There are no heroes and villains, we can only hope decent and reasonable people prevail.

This is not a matter of how free or just we are inside our borders, no doubt we are far ahead there...

 

[Aximili86]

Yeah, the guy running the largest slave industry on the planet and throwing entire families into camps over a little dissent is the bad guy.

Guess I'm old-fashioned that way. Your Kim sympathy is hilarious.

 

[ludovica]

Yeah, the guy running the largest slave industry on the planet and throwing entire families into camps over a little dissent is the bad guy.

Guess I'm old-fashioned that way. Your Kim sympathy is hilarious.

Dude, I had direct relatives in soviet gulags. Rest assured I do not underestimate the gravity of the situation up North.

But that was not the point. Totally not the point.
Your "sympathy" accusation is a ridiculous, and insulting, strawman and disqualifies you entirely.

Either you are trolling or you are so self-righteous you just do not read what's written to you and just want to "win".

Maybe take a minute to consider there are innocent people in North Korea and Iran, because at the moment you do not sound old-fashioned at all.

 

[Aximili86]

Not at all. You seem to be asserting that Kim can be trusted, reasoned with - without our own independent verification, taking a microscrope right up his ass. And dismissing the "evil" descriptor as valid for someone who enslaves more living breathing human beings than any other scumbag on the planet.

That doesn't mean we don't try to resolve this thing peacefully, of course we do. But you do that with a strong hand and a cutting off of any alternatives for him, rather than giving appeasements and concessions of anything other than a feeding-his-people variety.

And who says there aren't innocent people in NK and Iran? Of course there are. Our conflict here is with their governments they don't have a say in, not them. Nobody's going to nuke NK or Iran, unless they nuke someone else first. If it gets to that, it's not on the west, it's on said Supreme Leader of either country. But it won't get to that.

 

[ludovica]

Not at all. You seem to be asserting that Kim can be trusted, reasoned with - without our own independent verification, taking a microscrope right up his ass. And dismissing the "evil" descriptor as valid for someone who enslaves more living breathing human beings than any other scumbag on the planet.

That doesn't mean we don't try to resolve this thing peacefully, of course we do. But you do that with a strong hand and a cutting off of any alternatives for him, rather than giving appeasements and concessions of anything other than a feeding-his-people variety.

And who says there aren't innocent people in NK and Iran? Of course there are. Our conflict here is with their governments they don't have a say in, not them. Nobody's going to nuke NK or Iran, unless they nuke someone else first. If it gets to that, it's not on the west, it's on said Supreme Leader of either country. But it won't get to that.

Again, nowhere do I seem to assert any of that whatsoever.
Evil is an useless category here though. Calling anyone evil or bastard is root for escalation.
Especially in the case of Iran's nuclear program: their right to deterrence was quite justified...
All considered not even NK is wrong there.

The rules at the moment are made by those who already posses nuclear weapons, who also pretend to assess them as fair and balanced.
Guess what, NK's brickmanship worked.

Of course I'd wish no more research in nuclear weapons, or any other kind, would happen anywhere. But it's not just gonna happen shortly.

I can assure you that all your disdain for those regimes, absolutely not wrongfully shared by many in the West, is specular and opposite to the majority view in those specific countries: that's why propagating a culture of antagonism leads only nearer the brink.
If we are so much better, shall we not try to be the change ourselves?

South Korea is trying for the second time in history this more open and welcoming approach. If nothing else, it's taking back its own prerogatives.
Time will tell if its being naive or forward thinking.

 

[Doug_Moore]

Dennis Rodman helped prevent World War III after giving Kim a copy of the Art of The Deal. I'll take it!

 

[MaceB]

Assuming they're not breaching it. I'm not entirely sure what Netanyahu's putting out there rises to that level of them having broken their specific commitments - if they have, you'd want to hear it from someone other than Bibi. But sounds like the IAEA's still assessing the evidence the Israeli spy got their hands on - if it does turn out to be all above-board and Iran has been flaunting the deal, then pretty clearly the "it was never a good deal" types are at least onto something.

It's the best we've gotten in decades, and if we drop out of the deal, we get nothing. The deal grants inspectors and surveillance; that's freaking huge! Our enemies are letting us into their country to inspect their weapons facilities!! That's incredible! Again, this isn't a deal that's based on trust. It's a deal that's based on verification. If they are breaching the agreement, then present the evidence to the other 5 countries involved... and we can go from there... but don't just drop out.
This is literally the most impactful international agreement in 2 decades, because it gives us so much. It'd be against our own interests to unilaterally drop out of the agreement without smoking gun evidence that they're actively making weapons.