We all see and hear what goes on over there. Kim will execute kids if they don’t cheer hard enough at his birthday party or something? He’s always threatening to nuke countries and is probably has the highest domestic kill count out of any world leader today.
So I ask? Why don’t any other countries step in to help those people. I saw a survey asking Americans and Escaped North Koreans would they migrate to North Korea and to the US if given the chance (hypothetical for the refugees). And it was like <0.1% to 95%. Obviously those people live in terror.
Why do we just allow this to happen in modern civilization? Nukes on South Korea? Is just not lucrative to step in? SOMEONE EXPLAIN TO ME PLEASE!?
Jesus Fucking Christ. Stop trying to “liberate” other countries. Don’t you understand what that entails? Rampant slaughter of civilians followed by propping up a colonial regime. How many times are you gonna try this shit before you learn? When has it ever worked?
At least DPRK minds it’s own business. Imo, the country most in need of a war of liberation is the United States, which not only has a backwards, oppressive regime that’s disappearing people off the streets, but also has been directly involved in multiple wars of conquest and aggression, and indirectly involved in more. Whatever you wish upon Korea, let it happen here, let’s let China or someone bomb our cities and set up a government they like. Will you be greeting them as liberators? Not so fun when the shoe’s on the other foot, is it?
Someday I hope y’all are able to see yourselves for the warmongers you are. I have no idea how liberals are able to convince of themselves as “peace-loving” while saying shit like this.
Liberal has nothing to do with peace loving, or pacifism, that’s a right wing delusion they use to pump their courage before committing more atrocities on them. No different than ‘God forgive me for what I’m about to do’.
Right wing revolutions end with the left in political prisons and slavery. Left wing revolutions end with the aristocrats/oligarchs, and their families, in the ground. It’s really just a question of what flavor of violence is about to happen.
It’s more of a liberal delusion that they’re “usually” antiwar, but the one that’s happening now is always “different.” Liberals are right-wing, and generally their (especially US) meddling with regime change ends up installing a fascist who kills or imprisons the left.
I mean sure, if you want to make up your own meaning for right wing, then go for it.
Liberalism is the ideology of capitalism. Capitalism is right-wing. Leftism is defined by anti-capitalism.
In the UK, for example, the “Liberal Democrats” are right-leaning. It’s primarily in the US that “liberal” and “leftist” are used interchangeably, because once there was no longer a substantial (self-indentifying) socialist presence to scaremonger about, the right started scaremongering about liberals by equating them to socialists, and the meaning stuck. But I reject that and stick by the original meanings, which are used internationally.
In the UK, for example, the “Liberal Democrats” are right-leaning.
Depends on the leadership. Sometimes they are, sometimes they aren’t. There have been times when they’ve been further left than Labour.
Currently of course, that’s easy because Labour is too busy trying to appeal to Reform voters and Conservatives and are governing like they were the Democratic Party, which is a shame, because the country is desperately needing some wealth redistribution.
Labour are in power because were gasping for some sanity after a succession of Conservative lunatics, but all the Conservative Party needs to do is stump up a leader who can sound like they have a couple of good ideas and have a bit of charisma and they’ll be back in power before you can say “short memory”.
Nukes. We know they have them and missiles to deliver them. Any situation where a wildcard like North Korea uses nukes in any offensive capacity is terrifying. “Nuclear War: A Scenario” is a great modern book on how things could go to hell if one single North Korean nuclear missile is launched towards the United States.
Artillery. In any case of open war on North Korea anyone within artillery range of the NK border will be bombarded with heavy shelling. Even if it lasted for just an hour or two before the batteries were eliminated the civilian casualties and destruction would be like a large natural disaster. Now imagine if chemical shells were added to the mix, because they have those too.
China has the most leverage to help North Korea on a humanitarian and diplomatic level without risking war, so if it could be done the best chance is through them.
To add to this, N Korea also has a huge conventional army, and is a very mountainous country. Lots of soldiers+mountains=very bloody to invade.
This is also why Iran is fairly safe from ground invasion. It’s like a gigantic Switzerland, which if you’re familiar with WW2 history, even Hitler left Switzerland alone despite kinda wanting to occupy the place. The cost was just too high compared to the benefits, so, y’know, may as well skip it and invade the USSR instead.
Despite what people keep saying, a war in NK would be short and one sided. While they could cause a lot of destruction at the start, after a few salvos their artillery would be taken out by air power. Then their entire command and control structure would be eliminated so they couldn’t communicate with their troops at all. And those troops are conditioned to not do anything without orders. So at best they’d be sitting ducks waiting to be taken out. And I’m pretty sure most of them would cost to surrender once it’s clear that the regime is gone. There’d be a share of diehards that would choose death over surrender but i don’t think that would be a large percentage.
Yes, that’s basically what we did in Iraq. It led to a 20y occupation, thousands of troops killed, hundreds of thousands to millions of civilian deaths, and several new terrorist organizations. It will cost the US alone about 8,000,000,000,000. Basically the entirety of cultural progress and then some was lost in a few months.
We saw how that failed in iran
Modern war planners mostly know better than to count on everything going well.
Because north korea only make empty threats and the west are hypocrites and never gave a damn,about internstional law, democracy and human rights in other countries
Or, just hear me out, because the west doesn’t want to enter into a war with China in Korea a second time.
In that case they should stop pretending to care about what i mentioned instead of acting like they care about Palestinians but still buying arms from them and keep great economical relation with the terrorist state , celebrating Israel attack on Iran under of the pretext that Iran is ruled by authoritarian regime while having great connection with Saudis, not pressuring UAE to stop support the RSF in Sudan using UAE, Israeli and USA arms
The goal poasts moved so far that I can not even see them in the field. Good talk!
Are you familiar with the Korean war? There was a massive conflict which got drawn out into a stalemate and everybody agreed a temporary ceasefire was preferable to even more destruction.
Trying to topple a regime that has nothing to lose and a highly indoctrinated population is not an easy ask. We can only hope that like most authoritarian regimes they eventually succumb to the weight of their own opression. It’s better than torching the whole continent in the name of freedom.
The difference is that the North Koreans still fight with the same technology as back then while the other side has made some advances.
Even if true, an old nuke will destroy your city just fine, don’t worry about that.
China is the answer. Nobody does anything about North Korea for the same reason China doesn’t invade Taiwan.
And this goes back to the Cold War, which goes back to WWII, and the politics of the president and military commanders, specifically MacArthur, who wanted to continue north and take North Korea decisively to keep the Soviet Union and China from controlling it before it could be reinforced by Chinese soldiers.
At the time, North Korean soldiers were outnumbered by UN forces 3:1, with far more tanks, etc than NK had.
The UN waffled, and by the time they decided Korea should be reunified, China had shipped in nearly 300,000 troops, and an unknown amount of matériel.
Fuck the UN. It’s their fault this is still going on.
Why “fuck the UN” and not “fuck China?”
Sounds like the UN could have made better choices, but the real villain (at least in the part of the history you describe) is China. No?
No
Generally countries in the west only get involved in conflicts if they get something out of it, be it directly via getting wealth from the country, or indirectly like curbing successful non-capitalistic economies before they catch on and their own people start questioning the billionaires. The “we’re there to liberate people” is just marketing speech.
You’re saying that no one with empathy has any power to help these people?
It’s one of the most heavily fortified countries with an extreme nuclear power regime out in the mountains. How could a country like the United States help North Koreans without threatening intense military conflict?
I wonder why you say “countries in the west” and not just “countries”. It’s not like, I don’t know, Banín is shouting about North Korea every day and nobody listens.
Generally frowned upon to invade countries.
Ludicrously costly. Your tax payers will want to know why it’s more important than everything else you do with their money.
Immense suffering. Mostly by the people you’re trying to liberate but also your own troops and their families.
They have nukes and could probably blow up at least a few regional cities. If the regime is threatened they will most likely use them.
South Korea or China or Russia are the only countries with land borders. China and Russia find NK useful to have arround to annoy US. Seoul is within artillerty range of the border.
Building up a new state in it’s place is very difficult. Remember how the Taliban took back power about 15 minutes after the US left Afghanistan?
That’s not how it would play out or herw, but even in the best case scenario, you’d end up with a huge area with rampant poverty and discontent that would take generations to develop. We’ve had something similar in Germany. Even after thirty years and vast amounts of money spent, East Germany is still way behind and there are areas that have no perspective at all.
We all see and hear what goes on over there.
Bullshit.
Yeah all the terrible shit we see is just a tip of the iceberg.
Western chauvinism is a faith based belief.
Nukes baby!
Who knew nukes would be terrible for human rights? /s
But it is great for a country’s sovereignity
china is the only reason why NK doesnt collapse right away, the ccp uses NK as a buffer against SK and the west. NK is a true vassal state of china, and ccp has recently begun making headways into russias natural resources.
America already tried to save the North Koreans once. It was called the “Korean War”.
We bombed them back to the stone age, then permanently isolated them from most of the world. Despite having good reasons for the start of the war, America treated NK like Israel currently treats Gaza.
Even if North Koreans tried to forget that America bombed every hospital, every water purification plant, all the electricity production, etc; the Kim regime’s propaganda will make sure they never forget.
If we actually wanted to help those people, the first step would be removal of economic sanctions. There is no clean way to remove dictatorship, but the “Arab Spring” model is much more effective and humane than the “Afghanistan War” model.
the Kim regime’s propaganda will make sure they never forget.
It’s the peak of chauvinism to think people would need propaganda to remember you leveling their entire country.
Yes I agree.
If you use context instead of cherry picking a half-sentence then maybe you would understand that is part of the broader point I am trying to get across to a western, chauvinism-brained audience.
Nobody wants to do that. North Korea is a shithole-class country that hates SK, is propped up by China, and to a lesser extent, Russia, who basically use them as slave labor and cannon fodder for their illegal war in Ukraine.
While NATO could easily steamroll NK, SK is right there and would get heavily damaged in a war. And then SK would probably have to take care of a ton of starving, brainwashed, uneducated people and a bombed flat country. Nobody wants to fix them, and superpowers like China are actively working against peaceful initiatives like reunification.
It’s an injustice for the world, but there’s much bigger fish to fry on the world stage right now. Existential, extinction-class threats like climate change and nuclear war. Democracies fighting tooth and nail against totalitarianism, like Ukraine. And western countries in various fights against the predictable but extremely annoying rise in fascism.
We live in a sad world, western democracy with high standard regarding human right are the exception, not the norm.
So are we gonna start war against every dictatorship? Look at the results in Afghanistan instead of freeing them, they now rank worse than North Korea in the economist democracy index not only they got a 20 year long war, but in the end stayed one one of the worst dictatorship in the planet, not really a success
The western democracies who support the longest occupation? That organized ton of coups? That support genocide??
western democracy with high standard regarding human right
Oxymoron
Because China doesn’t want anyone to.
