The North Korea Juche Songun Anti-Imperialist Megathread

[Alimprad]

America and the UN may not have noticed this yet, but this is a war between North korea and South korea no one else, why should we care, we could hope the side we want to win wins, but america and the UN should keep there noses out of everyone elses bussiness and maybe deal with their own

[United States of Peace]

America and the UN may not have noticed this yet, but this is a war between North korea and South korea no one else, why should we care, we could hope the side we want to win wins, but america and the UN should keep there noses out of everyone elses bussiness and maybe deal with their own

Check your history.

[The Romulan Republic]

America and the UN may not have noticed this yet, but this is a war between North korea and South korea no one else, why should we care, we could hope the side we want to win wins, but america and the UN should keep there noses out of everyone elses bussiness and maybe deal with their own

They're America's business if they threaten to use a nuclear weapon on America.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

Without credible threat.

[Great Nepal]

America and the UN may not have noticed this yet, but this is a war between North korea and South korea no one else, why should we care, we could hope the side we want to win wins, but america and the UN should keep there noses out of everyone elses bussiness and maybe deal with their own

Diplomacy 101: Attack on an ally can be interpreted as attack on nation and is said nation's business should nation being attacked requests it.

[Vietnam]

America and the UN may not have noticed this yet, but this is a war between North korea and South korea no one else, why should we care, we could hope the side we want to win wins, but america and the UN should keep there noses out of everyone elses bussiness and maybe deal with their own

Actually, I'm pretty sure that the US is still technically at war with North Korea, as there was no formal peace treaty which was signed. However, the entire point of the UN was to help deal with conflicts and crises, as well as to present a forum for international dialogue. You forget that the world of today is very much interconnected, and that the region of Northeast Asia is a highly prominent region of the world, with much of the world's wealth being concentrated in places like Japan, South Korea, and Manchuria. Problems which surface there could deal a great blow to the world's economy.

[Mkuki]

NK releases new propaganda video
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wor ... ere-it-is/

NK has probably not moved the mobile launchers
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northko ... 0320F.HTML

At least they haven't moved their launchers anymore. Maybe they have decided against launching anything, who knows what they will do though.

They won't do anything beyond chest beating and saber rattling.

[Regnum Dominae]

At least they haven't moved their launchers anymore. Maybe they have decided against launching anything, who knows what they will do though.

They won't do anything beyond chest beating and saber rattling.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Norks do something like Yeonpyeong again. But a large-scale conflict definitely isn't going to happen.

[Divair]

America and the UN may not have noticed this yet, but this is a war between North korea and South korea no one else, why should we care, we could hope the side we want to win wins, but america and the UN should keep there noses out of everyone elses bussiness and maybe deal with their own

Did you miss the part where the USA is an ally of SK and both SK and NK are in the UN?

[Mexico-Brazilian Empire]

They won't do anything beyond chest beating and saber rattling.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Norks do something like Yeonpyeong again. But a large-scale conflict definitely isn't going to happen.

Am I the only one that's kinda sad? Not because I'm some kind of masochist that enjoys watching countries going to war, but because if NK ever provoked the U.S. it would mean liberation and relief for the oppressed northerners?

[Divair]

Manila approves US usage of bases in the Philippines if war breaks out
http://tribune.com.pk/story/535080/mani ... rea-war-2/

[DogDoo 7]

Manila approves US usage of bases in the Philippines if war breaks out
http://tribune.com.pk/story/535080/mani ... rea-war-2/

We don't have bases there to begin with? Seems like something we should have extorted from them when granting them independence.

[Rio Cana]

America and the UN may not have noticed this yet, but this is a war between North korea and South korea no one else, why should we care, we could hope the side we want to win wins, but america and the UN should keep there noses out of everyone elses bussiness and maybe deal with their own

Diplomacy 101: Attack on an ally can be interpreted as attack on nation and is said nation's business should nation being attacked requests it.

So what happened in 1910 when the Empire of Japan annexed the Empire of Korea.

The US and Korea had signed the Treaty of Peace, Amity, Commerce and Navigation in 1882. Some Koreans considered that it called for the US to help Korea against any foreign aggression.

This is article one of that agreement

Article 1 provides:

“ There shall be perpetual peace and friendship between the President of the United States and the King of Chosen and the citizens and subjects of their respective Governments. If other powers deal unjustly or oppressively with either Government, the other will exert their good offices on being informed of the case to bring about an amicable arrangement, thus showing their friendly feelings

But the US did nothing. Should point out that in 1905 there was a so called non-official agreement but which carried weight between the US and Japan in which in return for the US looking the other way when it came to Korea that Japan would look the other way when it came to the US territory of the Philippines. It was called the Taft–Katsura Agreement. US and Japanese historical sources say nothing that was said during that particular meeting which lead to the so called the Taft–Katsura Agreement was binding. Korean historians say otherwise.

Korean nationalist point to all this has evidence that the treaty was violated by the US and they were left to fend for themselves.

Korean reaction

Some Korean historians (e.g., Ki-baik Lee, author of A New History of Korea, (Harvard U. Press, 1984) believe that the Taft–Katsura Agreement violated the "Korean–American Treaty of Amity and Commerce" signed at Incheon on May 22, 1882 because the Joseon Government considered that treaty constituted a de facto mutual defense treaty while the Americans did not. The Joseon Dynasty, however, ended in 1897. The Agreement has been cited by some in Korea as an example that the United States cannot be trusted with regards to Korean security and sovereignty issues

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft%E2%80 ... _Agreement

[Salandriagado]

Diplomacy 101: Attack on an ally can be interpreted as attack on nation and is said nation's business should nation being attacked requests it.

So what happened in 1910 when the Empire of Japan annexed the Empire of Korea.

The US and Korea had signed the Treaty of Peace, Amity, Commerce and Navigation in 1882. Some Koreans considered that it called for the US to help Korea against any foreign aggression.

This is article one of that agreement

Article 1 provides:

“ There shall be perpetual peace and friendship between the President of the United States and the King of Chosen and the citizens and subjects of their respective Governments. If other powers deal unjustly or oppressively with either Government, the other will exert their good offices on being informed of the case to bring about an amicable arrangement, thus showing their friendly feelings

But the US did nothing. Should point out that in 1905 there was a so called non-official agreement but which carried weight between the US and Japan in which in return for the US looking the other way when it came to Korea that Japan would look the other way when it came to the US territory of the Philippines. It was called the Taft–Katsura Agreement. US and Japanese historical sources say nothing that was said during that particular meeting which lead to the so called the Taft–Katsura Agreement was binding. Korean historians say otherwise.

Korean nationalist point to all this has evidence that the treaty was violated by the US and they were left to fend for themselves.

Korean reaction

Some Korean historians (e.g., Ki-baik Lee, author of A New History of Korea, (Harvard U. Press, 1984) believe that the Taft–Katsura Agreement violated the "Korean–American Treaty of Amity and Commerce" signed at Incheon on May 22, 1882 because the Joseon Government considered that treaty constituted a de facto mutual defense treaty while the Americans did not. The Joseon Dynasty, however, ended in 1897. The Agreement has been cited by some in Korea as an example that the United States cannot be trusted with regards to Korean security and sovereignty issues

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft%E2%80 ... _Agreement

Notice how that treaty doesn't, at any point, require the US to enter into a military intervention.

[United States of Peace]

Manila approves US usage of bases in the Philippines if war breaks out
http://tribune.com.pk/story/535080/mani ... rea-war-2/

We don't have bases there to begin with? Seems like something we should have extorted from them when granting them independence.

You missed the part in the article mentioning that we held bases till the 90s.

In the early 1990s US forces vacated Clark Air Base and Subic Naval Base, two large facilities used during the Vietnam War, after a disagreement over rents.

[Rio Cana]

Manila approves US usage of bases in the Philippines if war breaks out
http://tribune.com.pk/story/535080/mani ... rea-war-2/

Found a story about Spain helping the Philippines when it comes to military hardware against China.

Story - http://www.philstar.com/headlines/73368 ... ernization

Video of Spanish troops training, probably in Spain. Chances are they will be training with Filipino troops in this way. -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifo4EqbF ... r_embedded

So it seems Spain, which use to control the Philippines for 400 years is trying to get involved again in Las Filipinas and Asia. The Philippines is also buying SK. and US equipment.

Problem with the Philippines military is that the US has tended to sell them really old used equipment thus they have never been able to really modernize parts of there military branches. With China modernizing its military hopefully the US will finally sell the Philippines much more modern weapons. In reality, the Philippines should be a regional power.

Map of the Spanish East Indies. Manila was administrative center of the Spanish East Indies.

[Rio Cana]

So what happened in 1910 when the Empire of Japan annexed the Empire of Korea.

The US and Korea had signed the Treaty of Peace, Amity, Commerce and Navigation in 1882. Some Koreans considered that it called for the US to help Korea against any foreign aggression.

This is article one of that agreement



But the US did nothing. Should point out that in 1905 there was a so called non-official agreement but which carried weight between the US and Japan in which in return for the US looking the other way when it came to Korea that Japan would look the other way when it came to the US territory of the Philippines. It was called the Taft–Katsura Agreement. US and Japanese historical sources say nothing that was said during that particular meeting which lead to the so called the Taft–Katsura Agreement was binding. Korean historians say otherwise.

Korean nationalist point to all this has evidence that the treaty was violated by the US and they were left to fend for themselves.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft%E2%80 ... _Agreement

Notice how that treaty doesn't, at any point, require the US to enter into a military intervention.

But it did say "will exert their good offices on being informed of the case to bring about an amicable arrangementI". The important word is "exert". So the US could have exerted by sending a few gunboats in support of the Koreans. In the end. Koreans were sold out by the major nations of that time.

Definition for Exert

1.to put forth or use energetically; put into action or use: to exert strength, influence, etc.
2.to apply (oneself) with great energy or straining effort

[Samozaryadnyastan]

Diplomacy 101: Attack on an ally can be interpreted as attack on nation and is said nation's business should nation being attacked requests it.

So what happened in 1910 when the Empire of Japan annexed the Empire of Korea.

The US and Korea had signed the Treaty of Peace, Amity, Commerce and Navigation in 1882. Some Koreans considered that it called for the US to help Korea against any foreign aggression.

This is article one of that agreement

Article 1 provides:

“ There shall be perpetual peace and friendship between the President of the United States and the King of Chosen and the citizens and subjects of their respective Governments. If other powers deal unjustly or oppressively with either Government, the other will exert their good offices on being informed of the case to bring about an amicable arrangement, thus showing their friendly feelings

But the US did nothing. Should point out that in 1905 there was a so called non-official agreement but which carried weight between the US and Japan in which in return for the US looking the other way when it came to Korea that Japan would look the other way when it came to the US territory of the Philippines. It was called the Taft–Katsura Agreement. US and Japanese historical sources say nothing that was said during that particular meeting which lead to the so called the Taft–Katsura Agreement was binding. Korean historians say otherwise.

Korean nationalist point to all this has evidence that the treaty was violated by the US and they were left to fend for themselves.

Korean reaction

Some Korean historians (e.g., Ki-baik Lee, author of A New History of Korea, (Harvard U. Press, 1984) believe that the Taft–Katsura Agreement violated the "Korean–American Treaty of Amity and Commerce" signed at Incheon on May 22, 1882 because the Joseon Government considered that treaty constituted a de facto mutual defense treaty while the Americans did not. The Joseon Dynasty, however, ended in 1897. The Agreement has been cited by some in Korea as an example that the United States cannot be trusted with regards to Korean security and sovereignty issues

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft%E2%80 ... _Agreement

However, American participation is this time assured by a sizeable presence on the Peninsula, and a definite desire to not lose trade from South Korea's thriving technology industries.
Their compliance to intervene is very much secured in blood.

Notice how that treaty doesn't, at any point, require the US to enter into a military intervention.

But it did say "will exert their good offices on being informed of the case to bring about an amicable arrangementI". The important word is "exert". So the US could have exerted by sending a few gunboats in support of the Koreans. In the end. Koreans were sold out by the major nations of that time.

Definition for Exert

1.to put forth or use energetically; put into action or use: to exert strength, influence, etc.
2.to apply (oneself) with great energy or straining effort

Exertion can be done diplomatically, not only militarily.
Like I said, this time, the US has a practical blood pact with the Koreans to defend the South, as well as a myriad of other reasons.

[Wisconsin9]

NK releases new propaganda video
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wor ... ere-it-is/

NK has probably not moved the mobile launchers
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northko ... 0320F.HTML

Where'd they steal the music from this time?

[Mkuki]

I wouldn't be surprised if the Norks do something like Yeonpyeong again. But a large-scale conflict definitely isn't going to happen.

Am I the only one that's kinda sad? Not because I'm some kind of masochist that enjoys watching countries going to war, but because if NK ever provoked the U.S. it would mean liberation and relief for the oppressed northerners?

Doubt it. Most South Koreans, from what I've learned from new reports, don't want reunification. Mostly because they know the South Korean economy can't afford to absorb 30 million plus destitute, poverty-stricken, starving North Koreans. Not to mention absorbing an area larger than their own country with little modern infrastructure and modern amenities.

As nice as it would be, reunification would probably hurt the South Korean economy significantly. And that's after a war that would have decimated their economy already.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

ASB's suggestion was very good, in my opinion. Running the North as a puppet state for a decade or two, trickling SK companies north to utilise cheaper labour (without stooping to exploitation), and moving limited technological advancements north as well.
Within 10-15 years, then surely the reunification would be much less painful than rushing everyone across the DMZ as soon as hostilities cease.

[Myrensis]

Doubt it. Most South Koreans, from what I've learned from new reports, don't want reunification. Mostly because they know the South Korean economy can't afford to absorb 30 million plus destitute, poverty-stricken, starving North Koreans. Not to mention absorbing an area larger than their own country with little modern infrastructure and modern amenities.

As nice as it would be, reunification would probably hurt the South Korean economy significantly. And that's after a war that would have decimated their economy already.

Any reunification of Korea is going to be an international effort of decades. It's not just a question of the drastic difference in standard of living, it's also that after the last 50 years North and South have pretty much completely separate cultures.

Reunification is essentially going to be South Korea trying to assimilate a culturally alien third world country.

[Vietnam]

ASB's suggestion was very good, in my opinion. Running the North as a puppet state for a decade or two, trickling SK companies north to utilise cheaper labour (without stooping to exploitation), and moving limited technological advancements north as well.
Within 10-15 years, then surely the reunification would be much less painful than rushing everyone across the DMZ as soon as hostilities cease.

The money able to be obtained from the north's large reserves of natural resources will probably help to integrate the north. @__@

[Vietnam]

Doubt it. Most South Koreans, from what I've learned from new reports, don't want reunification. Mostly because they know the South Korean economy can't afford to absorb 30 million plus destitute, poverty-stricken, starving North Koreans. Not to mention absorbing an area larger than their own country with little modern infrastructure and modern amenities.

As nice as it would be, reunification would probably hurt the South Korean economy significantly. And that's after a war that would have decimated their economy already.

Any reunification of Korea is going to be an international effort of decades. It's not just a question of the drastic difference in standard of living, it's also that after the last 50 years North and South have pretty much completely separate cultures.

Reunification is essentially going to be South Korea trying to assimilate a culturally alien third world country.

Eh, not as much as you think.

Same language, same holidays (minus like Kim Il-sung's birthday and all that crap), same hatred for the Japanese, same cuisine, same racial nationalism, etc.

[Vietnam]

ASB's suggestion was very good, in my opinion. Running the North as a puppet state for a decade or two, trickling SK companies north to utilise cheaper labour (without stooping to exploitation), and moving limited technological advancements north as well.
Within 10-15 years, then surely the reunification would be much less painful than rushing everyone across the DMZ as soon as hostilities cease.

Why only limited technological advancement for the north? What justification would there be for a puppet state? After all, the ROK sees itself as the legitimate government of all of Korea, rather than just South Korea. How would the ROK justify splitting the country in half? Would the justification being "more equalization of wealth between north and south" be good enough? Or would the northern puppet state also be unrecognized by the south?