ForumGarden

"They bang the spoon on the table and then suddenly they get food aid. Or they get other concessions. And then they come back to the table and negotiate a little bit, and then if they get bored they start- provocative actions again. We've broken that pattern. Now, what we need to see is whether they're willing to come in a serious way to negotiate these issues."

This is what President Obama said on ABC's 'Good Morning America' on the 13th. North Korea should take some confidence building measures to break the cycle of confrontation, which would prompt the US and other players in the frozen six-party talks to respond. They could start by ending nuclear testing. They could start by ending some of this missile testing. There is a whole battery of confidence-building measures that they could engage in. One thing the US must do is to make sure that North Korea is not being rewarded for bad behavior.

(Channelnewsasia.com - Page Not Found)

They could start by ending nuclear testing. They could start by ending some of this missile testing


First off there is no reason to end the nuclear testing. In fact there is more reason to continue it as it may save countless innocent lives. America does not attack countries capable of defending themselves. Secondly with China backing N Korea, they will do as they please.

'N. Korea useful idiot for US to increase Pacific region presence' - YouTube

I disagree. North Korea is a totalitarian military dictatorship. As such, it is as inherently unstable as Nazi Germany. Would anyone think it was a good idea to arm Hitler with nuclear weapons?

Times change, but people don't... as Shakespeare well knew.

Saint_;1422817 wrote: I disagree. North Korea is a totalitarian military dictatorship. As such, it is as inherently unstable as Nazi Germany. Would anyone think it was a good idea to arm Hitler with nuclear weapons?

Times change, but people don't... as Shakespeare well knew.


Just a thought.

Nazi Germany was and North Korea is stable. I submit though that the leaders of both were/are irrational, delusional, whatever.

At least Hitler laid out his delusions and plans for all the world to see.

Nobody outside Pyongyang knows what their aims are. I suspect NK government is nothing but a criminal organization whose sole purpose is for self gratification.

Would anyone think it was a good idea to arm Hitler with nuclear weapons?


Since when are nuclear weapons a good idea at all? America made and used them first. They haunt us 'til this day do they not? I submit that the makers and producers of nuclear weapons are no better than Adolf Hitler and his bunch. I agree with what Carl Sagan once said. "The people of governments which would so much as think of the total destruction of this world as a viable option in order to defend their respective ideologies think no more highly than lizards".

You point a finger at N Korea, yet you conveniently fail to include America and S Korea's Operation Foal Eagle which is happening as we speak. America has no interest in a peace in the region, don't tell me we do.

I suspect NK government is nothing but a criminal organization whose sole purpose is for self gratification.


You mean they're a bunch of politicians?

tude dog;1422865 wrote: Nobody outside Pyongyang knows what their aims are. I suspect NK government is nothing but a criminal organization whose sole purpose is for self gratification.If you ran that as a questionnaire alongside "I suspect US government is nothing but a criminal organization whose sole purpose is for self gratification" worldwide, I bet you'd get a lot more ticks in the US box.

Scrat;1422887 wrote: Since when are nuclear weapons a good idea at all? America made and used them first. They haunt us 'til this day do they not?


The U.S. used atomic bombs to end a war. I would argue that the use of those weapons not only ended that war sooner, but in the long run saved lives.

Scrat;1422887 wrote: I submit that the makers and producers of nuclear weapons are no better than Adolf Hitler and his bunch.


:-2You're entitled.

Scrat;1422887 wrote: You point a finger at N Korea, yet you conveniently fail to include America and S Korea's Operation Foal Eagle which is happening as we speak. America has no interest in a peace in the region, don't tell me we do.


Military operations are the norm. Foal Eagle is nothing new.

Meanwhile, 'North Korean torpedo' sank South's navy ship, a real true act of war.

First you say, Scrat: "First off there is no reason to end the nuclear testing. In fact there is more reason to continue it as it may save countless innocent lives. America does not attack countries capable of defending themselves. Secondly with China backing N Korea, they will do as they please."

Then you say: "Since when are nuclear weapons a good idea at all? America made and used them first. They haunt us 'til this day do they not? I submit that the makers and producers of nuclear weapons are no better than Adolf Hitler and his bunch."

You said to me: "Anne what you said is stupid & childish. It would make some think you're a rabid idiot."

For your first remark quoted here I say to you: "Scrat what you said is stupid & childish. It would make some think you're a rabid idiot."

We need less, not more, maniacs with nuclear weapons. Innocent N. Koreans? There are innocent Americans too. Innocent Europeans. Or are only 3rd worlders Innocent in your eyes? By any means necessary, I want future nuclear weapons halted.

Paraphrased from some movie with George Clooney and Nicole Kidman:

I'm not worried about the guy who wants ten nuclear weapons. I'm worried about he guy who only wants one.

One is all you need.

Would South Korea even be interested in consolidating the two countries? They're wealthy and heavily Westernized. It'd be like trying to merge California and Alabama.

SnoozeAgain;1422932 wrote: Would South Korea even be interested in consolidating the two countries? They're wealthy and heavily Westernized. It'd be like trying to merge California and Alabama.


Or West & East Germany.

AnneBoleyn;1422936 wrote: Or West & East Germany.


Really? I wouldn't think that's a very good comparison at all.

SnoozeAgain;1422941 wrote: Really? I wouldn't think that's a very good comparison at all.In 1989, one was a wealthy and heavily Westernized country and the other was a pauperized police state justifiably held down at the insistence of the Soviet Union. The comparison is pretty good really, given that they then reunified despite their utter incompatibility. What they had driving them was the knowledge on both sides of the border that they were a single people, it's a powerful magnet.

SnoozeAgain;1422941 wrote: Really? I wouldn't think that's a very good comparison at all.
Pretty close to identical to me, except that only our side is still occupied and Hitler's son wasn't in control of East Germany.

Accountable;1422944 wrote: Pretty close to identical to me, except that only our side is still occupied and Hitler's son wasn't in control of East Germany.


Oh, you're right! That is pretty close to identical. *eye roll*

They are offering tours to North Korea now.....I'd go ....I'd love to see the people and hte country ...albeit you'd have a tour guide of course.

Comparing North Korea to East Germany | East Asia Forum

SnoozeAgain;1422972 wrote: Comparing North Korea to East Germany | East Asia Forum


You don't perhaps think you're digging out a slightly partisan one-sided point of view there to support your case? I mean, we are discussing the ongoing civil war in Korea here, and the author of the piece is "an Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science and Diplomacy at Pusan National University, South Korea". From what I remember, it's actually against South Korean law to argue there in public in favor of North Korea's stance and people have been prosecuted for it. Perhaps the Assistant Professor feels constrained from advancing an entirely objective picture.

If you follow the link to the fuller essay that's well worth reading but I still thing Professor Kelly has presented his case from a biased perspective. But then, don't we all.

The world's big enough for different political systems governing nation states, what it needs for it to work is the international criminalization of interfering in the internal affairs of other sovereign nations[1]. Korea's civil war will come to an end quite quickly if the Koreans are left to their own devices. So would Syria's, which would never have even stared without external interference. So would that Libyan debacle. It's all "Bay of Pigs" territory.





[1] eta: I'd say "genocide excluded" there except that's never ever been prevented by foreign interference in the past, it's just been used as a rhetorical excuse for invasion where no genocide existed before the interference triggered ethnic expulsions as a reaction.

Wow. Snooze REALLY didn't like my answer!! :yh_rotfl

AnneBoleyn;1422992 wrote: Wow. Snooze REALLY didn't like my answer!! :yh_rotfl


What Snooze is ignoring is that some incredibly foolish bugger actually did merge California and Alabama into the same nation.

Accountable;1422926 wrote: Paraphrased from some movie with George Clooney and Nicole Kidman:

I'm not worried about the guy who wants ten nuclear weapons. I'm worried about he guy who only wants one.


Two. You can't threaten convincingly in public unless you've deployed the first.

I really don't care what anyone's opinion of this is, I just wonder how a highly westernized nation that's heavily into a capitalized economy could possibly accept a poor Communist country back into the fold. Black/white. South Korea loves us... check out their plastic surgery. How well do you think that will go over with the NK?

Týr;1423011 wrote: What Snooze is ignoring is that some incredibly foolish bugger actually did merge California and Alabama into the same nation.


Oh for god's sake. You really did miss my meaning didn't you.

Blah.

AnneBoleyn;1422992 wrote: Wow. Snooze REALLY didn't like my answer!! :yh_rotfl


You give yourself way WAY too much credit.

SnoozeAgain;1423018 wrote: I really don't care what anyone's opinion of this is, I just wonder how a highly westernized nation that's heavily into a capitalized economy could possibly accept a poor Communist country back into the fold.
Then - for the second time - look at West Germany reunifying with East Germany, which is exactly word for word what you just described. Is it that you think German reunification failed?

SnoozeAgain;1423018 wrote: I really don't care what anyone's opinion of this is, I just wonder how a highly westernized nation that's heavily into a capitalized economy could possibly accept a poor Communist country back into the fold. Black/white. South Korea loves us... check out their plastic surgery. How well do you think that will go over with the NK?


That's *exactly* where you have to look at the reunification of Germany for an example.