I've been trolling you guys all this time. I'm actually Kim Jong Ill.

I'm sure they can be adapted to be used from a plane, and can be used for bombing.

What really needs to be done is a full scale invasion, hitting all their military instalations with bombing all at once before. A joint world coalition. And wipe em out, all of em!

out of curiousity, how old is sf gold

North Korea has the right to self-defense!
Saturday, May 30, 2009

Washington's aggression is the real threat

The following is a statement issued by the Party for Socialism and Liberation.

North Korea rally
The North Korean people have endured
Washington's aggression for decades—but
they are ready to fight back.
"It is the view of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that the necessary air, naval, and ground operations, including the extensive strategic and tactical use of atomic bombs, be undertaken, so as to obtain maximum surprise and maximum impact on the enemy, both militarily and psychologically." The chilling decision, as communicated in the above words by Gen. Omar Bradley, was made on May 19, 1953.

It was only North Korea’s signing of the truce in July of that year that averted the nuclear destruction of the country by the Pentagon.

All people in North Korea know the history of U.S. nuclear threats, massive carpet bombing, invasion and massacres against their country.

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica of 1967, more than 5 million Korean people died during the war between June 25, 1950, and the conclusion of military hostilities in July 1953.

Today, Korea is threatened with a new war and the government of North Korea is preparing for military conflict.

An official communiqué of the government of Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, or North Korea, explained that "The DPRK will deal a decisive and merciless retaliatory blow, no matter from which place, at any attempt to stop, check and inspect its vessels, regarding it as a violation of its inviolable sovereignty and territory and a grave provocation to it."

On May 27, the North Korean government nullified the 1953 truce between Korea and the United States that ended open military hostilities.

This is a highly significant decision and an indication that the Korean Peninsula has become hypertense with the prospect of a new, major war. For years, North Korea has called for a replacement of the truce with a peace treaty that would allow for normalization of its relations with the United States. Washington has refused to sign such a peace treaty, and thus remains technically at war with North Korea, as it has now for the past 59 years.

What triggered the new conflict?

The rapidly escalating march toward a new war is the result of the new economic sanctions and political demonization of North Korea by the U.S. government. When North Korea launched a communications satellite in April, the United States and Japan scrambled land, air and sea power, and rallied for sanctions even harsher than those already in place.

The hysteria directed against North Korea reached a frenzied crescendo when the Korean government announced on May 25 that it had successfully carried out an underground nuclear test. The United States and its allies in the Security Council in the United Nations passed a harsh resolution condemning North Korea.

The Pentagon maintains 9,962 nuclear warheads and performs an unknown number of test launches with the most advanced military weaponry in the world. But these are not mere tests. With this military might, the United States has launched war of aggression after war of aggression, illegal covert action after illegal covert action. Yet somehow, hypocritically, Washington retains the title of the "responsible" military power while North Korea is portrayed as an aggressor nation for taking such threats seriously—for having dared to even test their comparatively small arsenal.

Washington’s aggression has given North Korea a simple choice: Arm yourselves, or be annihilated. That was the lesson of the Iraq war. By means of genocidal sanctions, Washington pushed Baghdad to disarm. While presented by U.S. officials as a condition to end the sanctions, the disarmament only paved the way for the 2003 invasion. The goal is the same in North Korea as it was in Iraq: regime change.

U.S. and South Korean ships have threatened to seize and search any North Korean vessel under the pretext that they may be transporting weapons of mass destruction or related technology. A North Korean military spokesperson responded: "Any hostile act against our peaceful vessels, including search and seizure, will be considered an unpardonable infringement on our sovereignty." The North Korean government will rightly consider it an act of war.

The North Korean government has adopted a military strategy of deterrence with the goal of maintaining its independence and sovereignty. Its standing military and arsenal serve to protect its right to self-determination, to defend the gains of its socialist revolution, and to hold off the capitalist plunder that would follow its overthrow by Washington. Having defended its country from a near-genocidal assault between 1950 and 1953, the North Korean government has made it clear to all that, while it seeks peace and the normalization of relations with the United States, it has readied all weapons in its arsenal to defend itself against its nuclear-armed foe.

Hands off North Korea!

Why does Israel need nuclear arms? I have a feeling that most of the people who are quick to support sanctions against the DPRK are also supporters of Israel's right to defend itself.

North Korea has been under constant assault by the West since it was formed and this increased pressure against it is nothing new.

I'm not a supporter of the DPRK and the way they've dealt with those journalists is quite flawed in my opinion, but I'm not going to support continued aggression against them.

Sanctions just make the situation in the DPRK worse.

Let's see if I can do this calmly without resorting to the obvious ad hominem.

The problem here is that you are comparing Israel and North Korea:

- Israel is a democratic country; their poor choice of leadership is secondary to the fact that they have a choice.
- North Korea is a dictatorship with a hereditary order of succession.

- Israel is a Parliamentary Democracy, meaning the government consists of many elected representatives and there are checks and balances in place to ensure that no single person can act contrary to the wishes of the people.
- North Korea is a Stalinist dictatorship obedient to the will of a single man: Kim Jong-Il.

- Israel is surrounded on all sides by enemies, either present or historical. In spite of a standing official policy of preemptive attacks, their contemporary military actions are reactionary (retaliatory).
- North Korea is surrounded on all sides by allies. Other than the official state of war, North Korea and South Korea are essentially allies and trade partners. North Korea engages in regular border incursions with China and (like I pointed out earlier in this thread) has even officially admitted to abducting people from other countries.

- Israel has not been able to effectively establish an equilibrium of MAD with their regional enemies.
- North Korea has large amounts of artillery and chemical weapons aimed at Seoul, establishing MAD.

- Israel's enemies have a stated interest in the genocide of the Jewish race.
- North Korea's enemies are not interested in genocide.

- Israel has a free market economy. Primary exports consist of cut diamonds, high-technology equipment and agricultural products.
- North Korea has the world's most restrictive command economy. Primary exports consist of illegal narcotics and slave labor.

- Israel is not terribly likely to use nuclear weapons. The Israeli people would not support a nuclear strike, leading to local political backlash. Foreign governments (including the United States) would not support a nuclear strike, leading to trade sanctions and the suspension of economic and military support. Retaliatory nuclear strikes are also likely.
- North Korea is very likely to use nuclear weapons. The North Korean people are deliberately misinformed and have no participation in government. The North Korean government has no interest in the support of foreign governments. Retaliatory nuclear strikes are almost certain, but Kim Jong-Il is dying and he doesn't care about what happens to his country after he's dead.

I don't think you quite comprehend how serious the situation will be when North Korea possesses nuclear ICBMs. This "increased pressure" is, actually, quite new.

Which makes me glad you have absolutely zero authority in this matter.

But it doesn't really matter, does it? If we opened (for instance) our borders entirely, none of our goods would get to the people anyway because of their terrible form of government. They already steal food from all of their citizens, there is already mass starvation to the point that they are shorter than their south korean brethren strictly due to malnutrition, so how the **** would getting rid of sanctions help?

The US isn't being aggressive at all. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it has been North Korea that has been testing weapons underground, and also has been seen through satellites transporting long range missiles.

All the US is said that if they ever launch a rocket at Hawaii, they are ****ed, plain and simple. You may consider sanctions being "aggressive", but considering that a lack of sanctions we'd be in the same spot, it doesn't really matter

Let's see if I can do this calmly without resorting to the obvious ad hominem.

- Israel is a democratic country; their poor choice of leadership is secondary to the fact that they have a choice.
- North Korea is a dictatorship with a hereditary order of succession.

- Israel is a Parliamentary Democracy, meaning the government consists of many elected representatives and there are checks and balances in place to ensure that no single person can act contrary to the wishes of the people.
- North Korea is a Stalinist dictatorship obedient to the will of a single man: Kim Jong-Il.

- Israel is surrounded on all sides by enemies, either present or historical. In spite of a standing official policy of preemptive attacks, their contemporary military actions are reactionary (retaliatory).
- North Korea is surrounded on all sides by allies. Other than the official state of war, North Korea and South Korea are essentially allies and trade partners. North Korea engages in regular border incursions with China and (like I pointed out earlier in this thread) has even officially admitted to abducting people from other countries.

- Israel has not been able to effectively establish an equilibrium of MAD with their regional enemies.
- North Korea has large amounts of artillery and chemical weapons aimed at Seoul, establishing MAD.

- Israel's enemies have a stated interest in the genocide of the Jewish race.
- North Korea's enemies are not interested in genocide.

- Israel has a free market economy. Primary exports consist of cut diamonds, high-technology equipment and agricultural products.
- North Korea has the world's most restrictive command economy. Primary exports consist of illegal narcotics and slave labor.

- Israel is not terribly likely to use nuclear weapons. The Israeli people would not support a nuclear strike, leading to local political backlash. Foreign governments (including the United States) would not support a nuclear strike, leading to trade sanctions and the suspension of economic and military support. Retaliatory nuclear strikes are also likely.
- North Korea is very likely to use nuclear weapons. The North Korean people are deliberately misinformed and have no participation in government. The North Korean government has no interest in the support of foreign governments. Retaliatory nuclear strikes are almost certain, but Kim Jong-Il is dying and he doesn't care about what happens to his country after he's dead.

I don't think you quite comprehend how serious the situation will be when North Korea possesses nuclear ICBMs. This "increased pressure" is, actually, quite new.

Did you miss the fact that North Korea receives the most food aid per capita in the whole world?

Did you also miss the fact that the sanctions are designed to restrict only the import of luxury goods, which go directly to Kim Jong-Il?

Can you provide sources for these claims?

Let's see if I can do this calmly without resorting to the obvious ad hominem

But I'm not going to go into the whole "free market = better" argument (and how it's wrong) right now.

Oh boy, I can tell this has the potential of going on for a while and I'm not too sure how much effort I really want to put into arguing why the West shouldn't be an aggressor towards the DPRK, especially considering the fact that I'm by no means a DPRK sympathizer.

The government of the DPRK has significant power in the country and certainly doesn't rely on the West for survival like some countries do, considering their ideology is all about self sufficiency.

Do you really think that sanctions could do anything other than hurt the people of North Korea?

Yes, the DPRK has tested missiles. The amount of Nukes they have versus the United States or any of the other major powers is quite insignificant, however.

Israel is "democratic" for a certain percentage of people who live under their control indeed. However, by most independent groups: they don't grant equal rights to all who live there, especially in the occupied territories.

Israel has been an aggressor to its neighbors and continues to do so. See Lebanon and Palestine and what it is considering doing to Iran (every few months a new story comes out about an Israeli plan to attack Iran).

The DPRK only really has China, and even then China is more of an ally of convince than anything else (the DPRK is seen more as leverage for China, as we can see by China's lack of support for them over the current nuclear issue).

There may be some small factions of Islamic extremists who would call for such thing

I was under the impression that their main export was military goods.

Oh goody, Watch a dumb socialist try to support the most backward and stupid government in history. I would have thought people had given up on Socialism as not too smart after the collapse of the USSR, but alas people still pretend to follow it to be "different". I know, I did too untill I actually researched the history.

Right right right, because socialist/economically unfree (make sure you are clear on what that means before you say anything about it)-governed countries have always proved successful economically in the past and are much better than countries with slight semblance to free-markets

No, you're worse than a sympathizer. You have the exact opinion North Korea wants you to have: apathy. As long as people don't care, countries like North Korea will be free to do anything they want. You're helping them.

If their ideology is "all about self sufficiency," why does the North Korean government have a deliberate agricultural shortfall of 25% (according to their statistics)? Why do they accept 1 million tons of food aid from South Korea annually? Why do they accept 700 thousand tons of food aid from China annually?

What, exactly, are you arguing? Do you think North Korea should be entitled to nuclear weapons because they exist? Why do you think nuclear proliferation would make North Korea a better place to live?

Just in case anybody didn't understand, absolutely every person who unironically calls themselves socialist is an upper-middle class kid who never actually earned any of the money they want to part ways with. Examples: Karl Marx, Lenin, Fidel Castro, TSM_Bguitar, etc.

As opposed to North Korea, where all people are treated equally poorly?

I mean, other than privileged workers. And soldiers. And party elites. And people immediately useful to Kim Jong-Il. They don't have any more say in how things are run but at least they get bigger TV sets and the occasional Japanese slave girl.

You know what? There is just no way I can take someone seriously when they're trying to equate North Korea and Israel. I'm not even going to bother responding to most of this.

Rather interesting how you fail to include Russia and South Korea as among North Korea's allies. TSM_Bguitar, if you applied the same criteria to your personal life, the only person you'd call a friend would be your mother.

Small factions such as Iran.

I recommend you investigate the Pong Su incident. Then I recommend you watch North Korea - Children of the Secret State. Finally, I recommend you stop being a socialist. It's not cool anymore. Seriously.

Yes, It would.
Pong Su was when the Austrailian Navy stopped an NK boat full of drugs and with some high party members onboard.
If you don't support either the DPRK, or the USSR, then what exactly is it you do want?

Iran has not called for the extermination of the Jewish people. Even the most extreme case where the president called for the extermination of Israel (where he was actually referring to the ruling government at the time) is far from what you claim.

Maybe if you bothered to read my post you'd see that I don't actually support the DPRK.

And I know of almost no socialists who consider the USSR as a model of socialism. But of course I'm sure you and the others believe that USSR = Exactly what socialists advocate.

Socialism does not equate to "economically unfree" that's just an absurd useless definition. Your graphs don't really demonstrate your point either.

It's not apathy, I don't know where you get this from.

Because the system doesn't work, I thought we agreed on this.

Not exactly, but I don't think that the United States has much room to police the DPRK on the matter which is my point.

Not too sure how you're aware of my class status. (And Marx was not upper middle class, he had to rely on Engels for financial support for some time actually).

And most socialists I've ever met are certainly working class. You ought to look up the actual make up of an organization like the PSL in the United States.

Russia is not an ally of the DPRK, it only sometimes sides with it in the UN to oppose the US.

And South Korea is not an ally of the DPRK.

Iran has not called for the extermination of the Jewish people. Even the most extreme case where the president called for the extermination

of Israel (where he was actually referring to the ruling government at the time) is far from what you claim.

Would looking into the Pong Su incident demonstrate what their actual main exports are?

Socialism does not equate to "economically unfree" that's just an absurd useless definition. Your graphs don't really demonstrate your point either.

As previously discussed: yes you do.

You don't think collectivism robs people of their economic freedom? You don't think a command economy restricts the freedoms of manufacturers? You're insane.

Socialism at any level - including the relatively benign social programs of the United States - restrict certain markets. I don't have an issue with that, but clearly you do since you aren't even willing to acknowledge the basic nature of socialism.

Here's a tip for you: a fantasy golden age like Star Trek where people are brainwashed into thinking they have freedom because they don't need it is not actually freedom.

Haha, no. It's because the North Korean government is profit-minded and a lot of the arable land is being used for drug poppies. Why bother growing food when all of the first world nations - including the US, which you accuse of being aggressive and hostile toward the poor little DPRK - are tripping over themselves to feed Kim Jong-Il's minions?

Why not? The United States is probably the most responsible with nuclear weapons: they have only ever been tested in the desert or underground, and they've only ever been used against the worst enemy to the world you can imagine, which is thoughtfully glossed over in the history books (as written in the "Poor Little Inoffensive Japanese People Die" chapter).

Who else would be better at "policing the DPRK"? France, which tests neutron bombs on Tahiti? Russia, which tries to use thermonuclear weapons for civil projects with hilariously tragic results? India or Pakistan? Laffo.

Most socialists I've met are upper middle class spoiled white kids who have never had a job, never worked for anything they own, and have no concept of the value of money. They like the idea of socialism because it sounds right but because they've never worked they don't quite understand why someone might not want to buy what the government tells them to buy.

Your anecdote against my anecdote, I guess. At least mine has the virtue of being immediately evident.

South Korea has strong political and economic interests in the continued survival of the extant North Korean government. North Korea has strong political and economic interests in the continued survival of the extant South Korean government. You're obsessed with rhetoric at the expense of reality.

Would you need to personally catch Lee Myung-bak beating off Kim Jong-Il before you'll believe that North and South Korea are allies?

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is going to be the next Ayatollah.

Blatant backpedaling to diffuse international condemnation over his remarks.