North Korea

[LNC]

I hope this doesn't turn political. I'm sincerely confused! I mostly check online sources for news, but I've also watched all the cable networks about this topic since Saturday.

 

Why is their sooooo little alarm/discussion that North Korea set off an underground nuclear bomb as big as HIROSHIMA???? I saw one news source said that the White House said N.K. are "blustering". What on earth are we going to do about it? Is the plan to just befriend them like China so they don't attack us?

 

Please don't make this a conservative/liberal, Repub/Dem debate - I really just want to understand it as a foreign policy issue.

[Guest Virginia Dawn]

I don't know what to think. I hope there is no escalation.

 

I've always said that we really can't tell other countries not to make bombs when we could blast any of them out of the water if we wanted to. I can kind of understand how that would make a little country that wanted autonomy and self sovereignty very nervous and want to protect themselves. Hopefully it will be a stand off like Russia and the US were during the cold war, and still are in reality.

[TeacherZee]

I'm surprised you haven't heard more. Here in Europe North Korea has been the big news the past few days (today is the first day it isn't the first or second story on the news).

[Heather in the Kootenays]

There's lots of alarm and discussion north of the 49th. I'm not sure there's much anyone this side of ocean can do.

[asta]

I read a really great article about this yesterday by Gordon Chang:

 

We Have A Chinese Problem, Not A North Korean One;

 

 

a

[Heather in the Kootenays]

Thanks, it is a good article.

[MomofSeven]

I don't know what to think. I hope there is no escalation.

 

I've always said that we really can't tell other countries not to make bombs when we could blast any of them out of the water if we wanted to. I can kind of understand how that would make a little country that wanted autonomy and self sovereignty very nervous and want to protect themselves. Hopefully it will be a stand off like Russia and the US were during the cold war, and still are in reality.

 

 

North Korea and Iran are both developing their weapons as a form of aggression against neighboring countries.

[Guest Virginia Dawn]

North Korea and Iran are both developing their weapons as a form of aggression against neighboring countries.

 

Whereas our bombs are peace-keeping bombs. :D

[Spy Car]

I read a really great article about this yesterday by Gordon Chang:

 

We Have A Chinese Problem, Not A North Korean One;

 

 

a

 

Actually Gordon Chang over-states China's influence over North Korea. Yes, it is true North Korea would collapse without Chinese support. But in the topsy-turvy world of North Korean geo-politics this threat of a chaotic collapse is actually a source of strength for the North Korean regime.

 

Both China and South Korea are scared sense-less of an implosion of order in North Korea and the destabilizing situation that would ensue.

 

Even an "orderly" re-integration of North Korea with South Korea would put a "western ally" on China's border, and eliminate a "buffer state".

 

Kim Jong Il, while a loath-some tyrant, plays his cards well. And he doesn't care if his people suffer. He's proved that.

 

Plus, North Korea has a vast system of artillery and rocket in dispersed in hardened bunkers (not to mention a large army) that could rain terror and destruction on South Korea in the event of military actions against them.

 

Military estimates show Seoul could be largely damaged or destroyed before conventional forces could do anything to stop a North Korean artillery and rocket attack.

 

And this leaves "nukes" out of the equation.

 

The problem with the North Korean situation is that no one has that much leverage. And Kim is good at using "ju jitsu" and turning his "weakness" into a "strength".

 

China's role is vital. But this is a vexing problem with no great solution. The reason it hasn't been "amplified" more as a thread is that policy-makers believe Kim is using these provocations to build bargaining capital, and that escalating the tenor of our response only strengthens his perception of his hand.

 

But believe me, no one is unconcerned.

 

Bill

Edited May 28, 2009 by Spy Car

[MomofSeven]

Whereas our bombs are peace-keeping bombs. :D

 

I don't remember the last time a leader of our country talked about annihilating a neighboring country. There's a huge difference between a free, democratic government having nuclear bombs in their arsenal and an unstable, irrational and totalitarian government having access to them.

[Jenny in Atl]

I've actually heard some in the North Korean military are growing tired of Kim Jong Il, and would rather see a government w/o the family. I would not be surprised if some within North Korea are working with the Chinese in hopes of removing Kim as his health continues to deteriorate. At least one can hope so.

[Spy Car]

I've actually heard some in the North Korean military are growing tired of Kim Jong Il, and would rather see a government w/o the family. I would not be surprised if some within North Korea are working with the Chinese in hopes of removing Kim as his health continues to deteriorate. At least one can hope so.

 

It's always hard to know exactly what's happening inside the hermit-kingdom, but the reports I've seen indicate Kim has already picked out a son to succeed him. I'd view with great skepticism notions that the military (which is totally reliant on the Kim family for rank and privilege) is going to turn on them in a move towards "pragmatism".

 

I'd like to hope so, but I don't believe it. The regime has to fall sooner or later. Sooner would be better (all things being equal) but no counties in the region, especially China and S Korea, want to deal with the chaos of a N Korean collapse. And this largely ties their hands.

 

This is one of those maddening times when there are no great alternatives to "crisis avoidance". I wish it was other-wise. N Korea is a menace, and its people are basically enslaved. And they will proliferate.

 

It's a very tough situation.

 

Bill

Edited May 28, 2009 by Spy Car

[Ibbygirl]

The reason it hasn't been "amplified" more as a thread is that policy-makers believe Kim is using these provocations to build bargaining capital, and that escalating the tenor of our response only strengthens his perception of his hand.

 

But believe me, no one is unconcerned.

 

Bill

 

 

Wow! I was thinking about this statement and wondering how that pertains to the various media outlets. I'm thinking specifically about the recent swine flu as an example. It was reported on so much and made out to be bigger story than it really was so much so that people started to panic. The news is always competing to get the more sensational story in order to boost their ratings or readership and yet this story of North Korea is hardly being reported on. :confused::confused: I certainly don't think that a lack of reporting on their parts is out of a sense of duty to their country in order to not play into North Korea's strenths. I honestly don't think the various media outlets even think of those kinds of terms of loyalty and honor. I think there are probably people in the news media who would sell their own mother in order to further their own ambitions. Are you saying that you think the government is controlling what the media reports on in regards to this issue?

 

Sorry I wrote that so poorly, I wish I were a better writer, but I'm too much of a dummy. :D hehe I'm just trying to see if I'm reading your comment correctly, Bill, and what the implications of it are. :)

[TeacherZee]

Wow! I was thinking about this statement and wondering how that pertains to the various media outlets. I'm thinking specifically about the recent swine flu as an example. It was reported on so much and made out to be bigger story than it really was so much so that people started to panic. The news is always competing to get the more sensational story in order to boost their ratings or readership and yet this story of North Korea is hardly being reported on. :confused::confused: I certainly don't think that a lack of reporting on their parts is out of a sense of duty to their country in order to not play into North Korea's strenths. I honestly don't think the various media outlets even think of those kinds of terms of loyalty and honor. I think there are probably people in the news media who would sell their own mother in order to further their own ambitions. Are you saying that you think the government is controlling what the media reports on in regards to this issue?

 

Sorry I wrote that so poorly, I wish I were a better writer, but I'm too much of a dummy. :D hehe I'm just trying to see if I'm reading your comment correctly, Bill, and what the implications of it are. :)

 

*Putting on my cynics cap here*

 

I think part of the reason that North Korea hasn't been reported on as much as the swine flu is that for most people in America North Korea is very far away. It is much easier to get people riled up about swine flu that could affect us all right now. Than the pajama wearing loony over in that country which has been our enemy for centuries.

 

As I have already said it was big news here but has today been replaced by more local stories (in Sweden a murder of a young woman and the fact that our future Prince had a kidney transplant and in the UK we are back on expenses) and European stories (we have elections to the European parliament next week).

[Spy Car]

Wow! I was thinking about this statement and wondering how that pertains to the various media outlets. I'm thinking specifically about the recent swine flu as an example. It was reported on so much and made out to be bigger story than it really was so much so that people started to panic. The news is always competing to get the more sensational story in order to boost their ratings or readership and yet this story of North Korea is hardly being reported on. :confused::confused: I certainly don't think that a lack of reporting on their parts is out of a sense of duty to their country in order to not play into North Korea's strenths. I honestly don't think the various media outlets even think of those kinds of terms of loyalty and honor. I think there are probably people in the news media who would sell their own mother in order to further their own ambitions. Are you saying that you think the government is controlling what the media reports on in regards to this issue?

 

Sorry I wrote that so poorly, I wish I were a better writer, but I'm too much of a dummy. :D hehe I'm just trying to see if I'm reading your comment correctly, Bill, and what the implications of it are. :)

 

I'm hardly taking it as far as as suggesting a "grand-conspiracy" of government and media (as much as some people believe that's exactly what it is.). But the media is undeniably "cues-off" responses from any Administration, especially in how it responds to "crises".

 

So if we were hearing either a "panicked" of more bellicose tone from the President and his Administration, that it would be reflected in the main-stream media. No doubt about it.

 

Presidents can "frame" the debate and can focus (or de-focus) media attention (for better or worse) and the media (at least initially) tends to go along. And that includes beating a drum for war, or trying to soft-peddle a response. The media usually goes along. At first. The "carping" comes later.

 

This is a "grand-tradition" and nothing new.

 

Bill

[Ibbygirl]

I'm hardly taking it as far as as suggesting a "grand-conspiracy" of government and media (as much as some people believe that's exactly what it is.). But the media is undeniably "cues-off" responses from any Administration, especially in how it responds to "crises".

 

So if we were hearing either a "panicked" of more bellicose tone from the President and his Administration, that it would be reflected in the main-stream media. No doubt about it.

 

Presidents can "frame" the debate and can focus (or de-focus) media attention (for better or worse) and the media (at least initially) tends to go along. And that includes beating a drum for war, or trying to soft-peddle a response. The media usually goes along. At first. The "carping" comes later.

 

This is a "grand-tradition" and nothing new.

 

Bill

 

 

Wow!! So what does that say then about the reporting of the swine flu?? Did the Administration really want to cause a widespread panic?

[Ibbygirl]

swine flu that could affect us all right now. Than the pajama wearing loony over in that country which has been our enemy for centuries[/i].

 

 

 

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

[Guest Virginia Dawn]

I don't remember the last time a leader of our country talked about annihilating a neighboring country. There's a huge difference between a free, democratic government having nuclear bombs in their arsenal and an unstable, irrational and totalitarian government having access to them.

 

I agree that for me, and perhaps the majority of people, the difference is practical and desireable one. But I don't see a fundamental difference, the potential is still the same. A bomb for the greater good is still a bomb.

 

So we effectively have decided that we write the world's (big) gun control laws: We get the guns, because we are responsible. Noone else gets them without our approval. Why should we have such power?

 

If it was up to me, and thank God it isn't, I would say that any country that wishes to could create a nuclear weapon, with the understanding that if they ever use it on any other country, they would be annihilated.

 

Aren't you glad I will never be president?

[Spy Car]

Wow!! So what does that say then about the reporting of the swine flu?? Did the Administration really want to cause a widespread panic?

 

"Panic"? No. I don't think we've seen panic. Widespread or other-wise. Except maybe in circles prone to panic ;)

 

A pandemic of deadly flu is a serious threat, and it would have been highly irresponsible not to have measures in place, and a "strategic plan" in place if the flu outbreak became wide-spread.

 

Mexico, by breaking their economic back largely quarantined the outbreak, and we've been fortunate thus far the flu has been more mild and less widely spread that some feared. People have still died here in the USA, and else-where. So this flu was not something to be blasé about.

 

Is news reporting ever "sensational"? Sure. FOX is nothing but. But being prepared for a "worst case" scenario was prudent and wise. Better than responding inadequately "after-the-fact" when you've been given adequate warning.

 

Bill

[Ibbygirl]

"Panic"? No. I don't think we've seen panic. Widespread or other-wise. Except maybe in circles prone to panic ;)

 

A pandemic of deadly flu is a serious threat, and it would have been highly irresponsible not to have measures in place, and a "strategic plan" in place if the flu outbreak became wide-spread.

 

Mexico, by breaking their economic back largely quarantined the outbreak, and we've been fortunate thus far the flu has been more mild and less widely spread that some feared. People have still died here in the USA, and else-where. So this flu was not something to be blasé about.

 

Is news reporting ever "sensational"? Sure. FOX is nothing but. But being prepared for a "worst case" scenario was prudent and wise. Better than responding inadequately "after-the-fact" when you've been given adequate warning.

 

Bill

 

 

I keep going over your previous statement in my head and I wonder to how much of an extent the White House controls the aspects of our lives. I know that they put a ban on pictures of the soldiers coffins coming back from Iraq and Afganistan, but the thought of them giving cues to the media as to what they are allowed to report on or not report on is troubling. I must be really naive. I always thought we had a free press. :confused:

[Spy Car]

I keep going over your previous statement in my head and I wonder to how much of an extent the White House controls the aspects of our lives. I know that they put a ban on pictures of the soldiers coffins coming back from Iraq and Afganistan, but the thought of them giving cues to the media as to what they are allowed to report on or not report on is troubling. I must be really naive. I always thought we had a free press. :confused:

 

You are reading things into what I said. I never said the press wasn't allowed to report on vital issues.

 

All leaders through out history, and American Presidents are no exception, has a capacity to influence public opinion. That is what makes them "leaders". They articulate a vision and attempt to use the powers of the office, including the "bully pulpit" to move things in that direction.

 

That does mean the press or the people are not "free" and don't have independent minds.

 

But the President, whoever that might be, is responsible for conducting foreign policy. It's his (or her) job to try to set a national response. We need (want) a free and skeptical press that is not a just propaganda tool. Debates need to be kept open. Reasonable alternatives discussed. Criticisms raised and answered. A free and independent press is essential to our way of life.

 

But it might be more than counter-productive if, instead of presenting expert analysis of a situation, and reasonable debates on what's to be done in say N Korea, a cable-network decided they wanted a war. And started playing martial music with flying graphics screaming: COUNTDOWN TO WAR. KWIM?

 

Bill

[Ibbygirl]

You are reading things into what I said. I never said the press wasn't allowed to report on vital issues.

 

All leaders through out history, and American Presidents are no exception, has a capacity to influence public opinion. That is what makes them "leaders". They articulate a vision and attempt to use the powers of the office, including the "bully pulpit" to move things in that direction.

 

That does mean the press or the people are not "free" and don't have independent minds.

 

But the President, whoever that might be, is responsible for conducting foreign policy. It's his (or her) job to try to set a national response. We need (want) a free and skeptical press that is not a just propaganda tool. Debates need to be kept open. Reasonable alternatives discussed. Criticisms raised and answered. A free and independent press is essential to our way of life.

 

But it might be more than counter-productive if, instead of presenting expert analysis of a situation, and reasonable debates on what's to be done in say N Korea, a cable-network decided they wanted a war. And started playing martial music with flying graphics screaming: COUNTDOWN TO WAR. KWIM?

 

Bill

 

Phew, I'm glad I misunderstood your meaning then because what I thought you were implying was really troubling to me. Thank you for spelling it out more clearly for me. :)

[Melissa in Australia]

I'm surprised you haven't heard more. Here in Europe North Korea has been the big news the past few days (today is the first day it isn't the first or second story on the news).

 

It is big news here in Australia as well, after swine flue which is the main story.

[Melissa in Australia]

Whereas our bombs are peace-keeping bombs. :D

 

ha!

and Australia doesn't worry about peace - keeping bombs, just sucks up to America in the hope they will protect us.

[Melissa in Australia]

I must be really naive. I always thought we had a free press. :confused:

 

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

we hear all the time bout how the American press is full of propaganda. and the government basically controls what is reported on in places like Iraq

 

 

Not that Australia hasn't got a lot of propaganda in its media.

If you listen to our media you would think that there really hasn't been an invention that wasn't made by an Aussie, and that we are the hardest workers in the world, work the longest hours, build everything the best etc.etc.etc. and if it isn't the best in the world it is definitely the best in the southern hemisphere.

Edited May 29, 2009 by melissaL

[Spy Car]

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

we hear all the time bout how the American press is full of propaganda. and the government basically controls what is reported on in places like Iraq

 

Because you "hear it" doesn't make it so.

 

Our press reports very openly on the situation in Iraq. During the invasion itself the military did try to control the press by "embedding" them with troops. But there were practical concerns military officials have to confront, and their duty is to protect their troops. Journalists in 4 wheel-drives out in front of the invasion forces could have risked lives.

 

Other than that first invasion period the press has been quite free to report as it will. And their coverage has not always been favorable to the conduct of the war on our part. It's non-sense to say the American Government "controls the press".

 

Bill (who makes an exception for the network owned by that Australian guy. It is full of lies and propaganda :tongue_smilie:)

[LibraryLover]

*Putting on my cynics cap here*

 

I think part of the reason that North Korea hasn't been reported on as much as the swine flu is that for most people in America North Korea is very far away. It is much easier to get people riled up about swine flu that could affect us all right now. Than the pajama wearing loony over in that country which has been our enemy for centuries.

 

 

"Centuries" ?

[TXMomof4]

Because you "hear it" doesn't make it so.

 

Our press reports very openly on the situation in Iraq. During the invasion itself the military did try to control the press by "embedding" them with troops. But there were practical concerns military officials have to confront, and their duty is to protect their troops. Journalists in 4 wheel-drives out in front of the invasion forces could have risked lives.

 

Other than that first invasion period the press has been quite free to report as it will. And their coverage has not always been favorable to the conduct of the war on our part. it's non-sense to say the American Government "controls the press".

 

Bill (who makes an exception for the network owned by that Australian guy. It is full of lies and propaganda :tongue_smilie:)

 

The press is free to report what it will, but it does it from Baghdad which may not be anywhere near the events that are happening. Having the reporters embedded allowed them to see what was actually happening, not just getting a wire report and repeating whatever it said. I hated having them with the troops because it did cause trouble for the troops in terms of protecting reporters. However, I think we got a more accurate picture of what is happening. Hearing second hand that a suicide bomber ran into a group of kids is very different from a reporter being present and seeing the impact that it has.

 

One of the embedded journalists that I read very regularly is Michael Yon. He was embedded with my brother's brigade when he was over there the first time so I could read his dispatches and ask my brother "Is this true" and it was. He is honest in his assessment of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sometimes it is terrifying to read, but at least I feel like I"ve gotten a pretty accurate picture of what's going on.

 

That was a complete thread hijack - sorry. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

[Ibbygirl]

The press is free to report what it will, but it does it from Baghdad which may not be anywhere near the events that are happening. Having the reporters embedded allowed them to see what was actually happening, not just getting a wire report and repeating whatever it said. I hated having them with the troops because it did cause trouble for the troops in terms of protecting reporters. However, I think we got a more accurate picture of what is happening. Hearing second hand that a suicide bomber ran into a group of kids is very different from a reporter being present and seeing the impact that it has.

 

One of the embedded journalists that I read very regularly is Michael Yon. He was embedded with my brother's brigade when he was over there the first time so I could read his dispatches and ask my brother "Is this true" and it was. He is honest in his assessment of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sometimes it is terrifying to read, but at least I feel like I"ve gotten a pretty accurate picture of what's going on.

 

That was a complete thread hijack - sorry. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

 

 

It was a worthy hijack. :) Thank you for sharing that and also for the link. I bookmarked it. :)

[TeacherZee]

"Centuries" ?

 

Hyperbole