North Korea shells the South, South retaliates

[-Snafu- 77]

You can't compare WW2 to the current situation. Completely different times and circumstances.

The world 'sat on its collective ass' because it couldn't see into the future and judging them with what we now know is silly. The mass casualties of WW1 was still fresh in the minds of people of Europe and nobody wanted that to happen again. They all thought Hitler was a rational man and the demand to have the majority German Sudetenland seemed reasonable. I say again they did not know what would happen in the future so judging them with what we now know is stupid. Only post-Munich did the leaders of France, UK and Poland realise that Hitler could not be trusted. Churchill could afford to be a voice in the woods in the 1930s because he was not in a position of political power. Not that hew knew what Hitler was really like.

The only direct similarity with Munich and the current situation (I really don't know why they are being compared in the first place) is that the people and governments do not want to see millions die.

Nobody 'give a shit' about NK because a conflict would result in millions of casualties and lots of damage to SK, NK and economies of the world. Not so much is at stake, compared to WW2, and the costs outweigh the benefits.

The west is 'morally superior' in that they are not totalitarian states and don't starve their people. Just because you don't agree with wars in Afghanistan and Iraq doesn't make NK any better.

[Derbysieger 11]

Everyone who read 'Mein Kampf' with a clear mind knew what kind of person Hitler was. Although this book is close to unreadable (Almost no structure, horrible mental leaps etc.) his intentions become clear. I gave up after ~150 pages (I read Goethe's Faust in a few days). But thats enough to know that he was a maniac.

[Dwarden 1124]

i would concur that west (namely US) gave s*** about Chine

in fact there is welll documented incident in past where Russia asked USA (or more just wanted warn in advance) they will be using multiple nuclear weapons against Chine

thus they wanted to make sure USA don't think it's start of attack against them

USA told Russia that if they attack Chine with nuclear weapons they will consider it attack on US and respond with tactical nuclear weapons at all Russian targets in area

result, Russia resolved the problem using conventional weapons ... millions of lives were saved ...

sometimes people not realize that the bad bad capitalism democracy is way better than evil dictature of communism or similar

[krzychuzokecia 710]

To add a bit of spice: 15 min ago in TV I saw short news from SK where people are protesting because... SK government don't want to start the war! And what the protesters said wasn't "Let's kill Kim Jong-Ill" but more like "Let's kill all the f*cking North Koreans!". Oh, and it was shown in pro-US, pro-EU televison.

Maybe NK are brainwashed, but SK looks like crazy! I remember only one guy in 20th century who really wanted war: Hitler.

Don't get me wrong, we gotta do something with Kim, but first we must be sure he don't have nuke and SK won't get it too...

[Archamedes 10]

People ask america if they are prepared to step up in this war the reply was

"whats the oil situation over there?"

[mosh 0]

sometimes people not realize that the bad bad capitalism democracy is way better than evil dictature of communism or similar

That's the nicest thing I've read about the U.S here in years.

[Baff1 0]

The west is 'morally superior' in that they are not totalitarian states and don't starve their people.

For the record, famines have occoured in the west too. Ireland for example.

While the North Koreans I have seen interviewed were the first to admit that their governments mistakes were the largest contributor to their famine, I don't think it is a correct assertion to make that totalitarian regimes starve their people. You make it sound like it was a willful and deliberate act.

Clearly this is not the case but is a lazy propaganda, something along the lines of using their own children as human shields or using WMD on their own people.

A cheap demonisation, nothing more.

There maybe be many flaws you could argue about specific totalitarian regimes... but this is not one I am willing to swallow.

There was funny story this Korean mother told about the famine in the documentry "A State of Mind". (

)

On her daughters birthday, to celebrate, her daughter was given a bowl of rice and all her daughters friends half a bowl!

Despite all that I have to note that North Korean people show no physical signs of that famine. No rickets for example. It's clear that it wasn't as bad as say the famine in Ethiopia.

The daughter went on to be a gymnastics star.

The U.S. certainly has a history of coming to China's aid. Not least in WW2.

But China threw it back in their face. They had just got rid of Japan, they didn't want a new master.

I think the American pysche still resents that to some extent.

My country has long benefitted from the Pax Americana, as indeed I suspect have many others of those who post here.

But China has other plans for it's region. The Pax China.

Edited November 27, 2010 by Baff1

[Big Mac 19]

Clearly this is not the case but is a lazy propaganda, something along the lines of using their own children as human shields or using WMD on their own people.

Propaganda in a two street dude. You're spouting off propaganda from the extreme left.

While the North Koreans I have seen interviewed were the first to admit that their governments mistakes were the largest contributor to their famine, I don't think it is a correct assertion to make that totalitarian regimes starve their people. You make it sound like it was a willful and deliberate act.

Have you ever lived under a totalitarian regime? I don't think so.

Despite all that I have to note that North Korean people show no physical signs of that famine. No rickets for example. It's clear that it wasn't as bad as say the famine in Ethiopia.

The daughter went on to be a gymnastics star.

Baff you're an idiot. Anyone who google's north korean famine is treated with a wealth of horrible images of kids who just skin and bones.

These kids and their families starve so this guy

can have more of these these

and these

so he can do this

To anyone who he wants to conquer.

Dude honestly you seriously just need take your ball and go home. People tolerate most of your trolling because it's amusing to see someone talk out of their ass, but to side with a country that is in the truest sense evil just because you're anti-western is offensive.

Edited November 27, 2010 by Big Mac

[sprayer_faust 0]

There was funny story this Korean mother told about the famine in the documentry "A State of Mind". (

)

I don't find this documentary very representative. It is known that camera crews are told what (not) to film. The documentary shows only the capital, which is a show-case city. Not all are allowed to live there - they filter out the weak...

I would like to see more videos filmed with a hidden camera. This documentary (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQXfMMHV8FM) has some undercover footage. Unfortunately only the first part (of five) is available on youtube for me. On this site (http://www.tubehome.com/watch/undercover-in-north-korea-2-of-3) parts 2/3 and 3/3 are available. So there is a small gap you won't see.

[-Snafu- 77]

Everyone who read 'Mein Kampf' with a clear mind knew what kind of person Hitler was. Although this book is close to unreadable (Almost no structure, horrible mental leaps etc.) his intentions become clear. I gave up after ~150 pages (I read Goethe's Faust in a few days). But thats enough to know that he was a maniac.

Don't want to drag the thread OT.

We know now what he was like but the people at the time did not. Mein Kampf was not a blueprint or schedule for his plans and politicians often say one thing and do the other. The demand for the majority German Sudetenland was seen as reasonable and not the actions of a madman. Furthermore, there was no way Britain and France would shape their foreign policy on his book. A PM would have an incredibly difficult time justifying a war against Germany in 1938 on the basis of one of the books he wrote.

For the record, famines have occoured in the west too. Ireland for example...

I am not denying horrible stuff has not happened in 'the west' (I dislike that generic term that constantly changes meaning). A famine in Ireland (it did not only effect Ireland FYI) that occurred 100+ years ago in a different time period in completely different circumstances cannot be used to justify the actions of modern NK.

My point is that NK is willing to put large parts of its population at risk so it can pursue military development. Not many people flee from SK to NK.

[krzychuzokecia 710]

There is one thing that, I think, is really important when comes to NK vs SK. This is the fact that Kim and friends... don't want war with South. Why? As you've said, people in NK are brainwashed so much that they don't even know they're starving and they love evil KJI. But what have made so much ignorant to obvious facts? Their enemy - South Korea. Kim needs one thing that will unite N Koreans, and if he'll (let's assume he have nukes) destroy SK, soon people (after loosing their enemy) will discover that they live in totalitarian country. So destroying SK equals political suicide for Kim Jong-Il. That's why he's only showing his muscles, but he's not going for full-scale conflict.

Not to mention the fact that NK nuclear bomb is most likely myth. They aren't developed enough. Have we saw something in NK that we could associate with term 'hi-tech'? I don't think so. But these 'facilities' are good fakes and some might believe they're real. This way NK have impassable barrier, because 'maybe they do have nukes?'.

But now, more interesting is South Korea. Today we had burial of two soldiers, who'd died in last artillery barrage, and protest of veterans from last NK-SK war. After listening to the speeches (at burial and protest) it looks like army (at least navy) and society in SK really wants war. Government is still reluctant to start the war, but for how long? George Washington is going to SK, and it might be dangerous, because SK navy is willing to start war, exercises are close to NK, and NK is only waiting to do another provocation.

[TacKLed 10]

Im pretty sure that it is Sunday in Korea right now and the USS George Washington is suppose to conduct war games with the South Korean Navy in the Yellow Sea and North Korea said that if any war games are held then they will attack. Now a lot of the population, from what I've read about the protest, want a war with North Korea and the South Korean Marine Corps Commander said that the two Marines' deaths will be avenged. If North Korea attacks the war games then they will most likely kill some US personal and that would drag both the South and the US into war with North Korea, let alone what China will do since they have been mostly quiet.

Whatever happens, we will only know in the next couple of hours.

[Baff1 0]

China hasen't been quiet at all.

They have been very vocal. They cancelled their diplomatic visits to SK and called for the U.S. fleet to stay out of the Yellow Sea and for people to stop holding provocative war games.

They say the same thing everytime and they host and encourage peace talks between all the relavent parties in China. They have called for the resumption of these talks, but America has once again refused to take part. (Until NK gives up it's nuclear weapons).

A couple of notes @Kryz, the people in NK are not starving. 1996 ended. Today it is 2010.

The other thing that strikes me is that although the people of SK are (understandably) crying out for war today, in the aftermath of the recent aggression towards them...

A couple of years ago they were all protesting for reunification and the expulsion of U.S. forces from SK.

It's a very politically divisive issue in SK.

In all honesty I think if North Korea thought they could win it easily, they would invade SK tomorrow.

They might not want a war with SK given ther memory of the last one... but I think they want it in their hearts. Much as Americans want it too.

It's unfinished business.

---------- Post added at 12:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 AM ----------

Have you ever lived under a totalitarian regime? I don't think so..

Have you?

---------- Post added at 12:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:39 AM ----------

I am not denying horrible stuff has not happened in 'the west' (I dislike that generic term that constantly changes meaning). A famine in Ireland (it did not only effect Ireland FYI) that occurred 100+ years ago in a different time period in completely different circumstances cannot be used to justify the actions of modern NK.

My point is that NK is willing to put large parts of its population at risk so it can pursue military development. Not many people flee from SK to NK.

I'm not sure I agree with that.

I think it's quite obvious that famines occour for a multitude of simultaneous reasons. A perfect storm so to speak. Crop failure (act of god) + trade sanctions + bad policy decisions + wars etc.

And I think this is common to all famines.

I don't think any one of those circumstances alone is enough to cause a famine. So the famine in NK didn't happen becuase the government deliberately starved the people in preference of buying weapons. It happened because they fluffed their agricultural reforms and the crops failed and they wrere under trade sanctions (so they couldn't buy much externally/earn foreign currency) and they were in state of war/under threat of war so they still needed to maintain an expensive military.

Neither do I agree that they put large amounts of their populations at risk to pursue a military policy during a famine. It is equally arguable that their population was still at risk from external military threat at this time. The yearly war games off their coast didn't all stop out of respect for them when their crops failed.

I think it's quite reasonable to assume that they in fact did what they thought they had to do to protect their citizens at this time.

As a historical comparison, I would cite to you Great Britain in WW2. Starved by military blockade, we still spent a load of money on our war effort instead of food. We didn't consider this to be putting ourselves at risk so much as protecting ourselves from a deadly enemy at any cost.

There is a closer parallel with NK in the ten year period after 1945 when GB continued to ration food with war time portions in order to fund our nuclear weapons program.

Quite simply we were more scared of Soviet aggression than we were of going hungry.

Like Nk our domestic food production in GB is unable to support our population. Unlike NK, we aren't under massive trade embargo. We have the same problems here, but we are not so vulnerable to it all going wrong at the same time... in no small part because of our effective expeditionary military forces.

We regularly go to war in foreign lands to limit our exposure to this kind of "a perfect storm".

Other people often call this unprovoked aggression, but our motivations are not so. We are striving to protect our population too.

P.S. I wholeheartedly agree. I don't see anyone emigrating to Nk in a hurry.

Edited November 28, 2010 by Baff1

[TacKLed 10]

I know they have been vocal so to speak but from what I read, they have been quiet in regards to what NK did, but then again, NK is blaming SK and SK is blaming NK. Nothing new.

[Big Mac 19]

Have you?

No, but I never claimed to know better than what people who have lived under NK said about NK, unlike you.

Seriously dude you don't know what you're talking about and you're making yourself look like a retard every time you post.

A couple of notes @Kryz, the people in NK are not starving. 1996 ended. Today it is 2010.

You obviously haven't taken the time to do research yet again. You really think a famine just ends in a country who gives what little food only to the military and the ruling class? If so then you truly are more stupid than a pack of retards. I suggest you watch Nat. Geo's Inside North Korea.

Edited November 28, 2010 by Big Mac

[mic1402 10]

A couple of notes @Kryz, the people in NK are not starving. 1996 ended. Today it is 2010.

LOL::j:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/southkorea/8165274/North-Koreas-undercover-journalists-reveal-misery-of-life-in-dictatorship.html

[TacKLed 10]

LOL..... http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2010/11/28/63/0301000000AEN20101128005100315F.HTML

So how do you "accidently" fire an artillery piece?

[Tonci87 163]

#113

Baff1

Sergeant Major

Join Date: Sep 2006

Posts: 1,649

China hasen't been quiet at all.

They have been very vocal. They cancelled their diplomatic visits to SK and called for the U.S. fleet to stay out of the Yellow Sea and for people to stop holding provocative war games.

They say the same thing everytime and they host and encourage peace talks between all the relavent parties in China. They have called for the resumption of these talks, but America has once again refused to take part. (Until NK gives up it's nuclear weapons).

I hae to agree with BAff on this one. But on the other hand, who wants the NK to have Nukes? If there is a country that really shuldn´t have these Weapons then this is NK.

So I can fully understand the US and especially the SK.

Edited November 28, 2010 by Tonci87

[-Snafu- 77]

I don't think any one of those circumstances alone is enough to cause a famine. So the famine in NK didn't happen becuase the government deliberately starved the people in preference of buying weapons. It happened because they fluffed their agricultural reforms and the crops failed and they wrere under trade sanctions (so they could buy much externally/earn foreign currency) and they were in state of war/under threat of war so they still needed to maintain an expensive military.

Neither do I agree that they put large amounts of their populations at risk to pursue a military policy during a famine. It is equally arguable that their population was still at risk from external military threat at this time. The yearly war games off their coast didn't all stop out of respect for them when their crops failed.

I think it's quite reasonable to assume that they in fact did what they thought they had to do to protect their citizens at this time.

I am more interested in what in-depth studies think on the matter rather than someone who has thought about the subject for 30 seconds and passes off what he thinks as fact.

Problems in production have been compounded by difficulties in distribution and in the use of output. Shortages of fuel and spare parts for vehicles have hampered distribution. At the same time, some outside observers have questioned the uses to which output has been put: scarce cereals appear to continue to be used to produce luxury products such as noodles, urban areas with high concentrations of Korean Workers Party (KWP) members and government officials have received preferential allocations, and it has been claimed that military stockpiling continues. The end result of these difficulties has been a secular deterioration in food production and, in the absence of additional imports, a deterioration in the food balance.

Despite the desperate situation internally, the government maintains the most militarized society on earth, with more than one million men (and increasingly women) under arms, and estimated 25 percent of GDP devoted to military expenditures (US ACDA 1997). This point is reinforced if one believes that certain military or military-related expenditures are hidden in the economic development budget. Estimates of North Korean military manpower and equipment do not reveal anything like this economic decline over the relevant period. Indeed, US and South Korean defense ministry figures show a slight increase in North Korean military deployment during this period. This suggests that the non-military part of the economy is

being severely squeezed.

pp. 1-2.

From:

FAMINE IN NORTH KOREA:Causes and Cures

Marcus Noland

Institute for International Economics

Sherman Robinson

International Food Policy Research Institute

Tao Wang

Institute for International Economics

http://www.iie.com/publications/wp/99-2.pdf

The country could improve food availability by freeing up resources currently devoted to the military, but as long as the country pursues “military-first†politics, this is unlikely.

It is not at all clear that the current leadership is willing to countenance the erosion of state control that would accompany the degree of marketization necessary to revitalize the economy.

pp. 26-27.

Famine and Reform in North Korea

Marcus Noland

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.145.4829&rep=rep1&type=pdf

While the desire to maintain power and diversion of resources to military policies are not the only causes (I never said they were), most things have a number of causes, however, they are without a doubt key reasons.

As a historical comparison, I would cite to you Great Britain in WW2. Starved by military blockade, we still spent a load of money on our war effort instead of food. We didn't consider this to be putting ourselves at risk so much as protecting ourselves from a deadly enemy at any cost.

Your comparison is flawed. Different time and circumstances.

There was no famine. Furthermore, the UK was facing a possible invasion. National survival was at stake. DPRK was not about to be invaded by the ROK. It was not fighting a war for national survival.

There is a closer parallel with NK in the ten year period after 1945 when GB continued to ration food with war time portions in order to fund our nuclear weapons program.

Quite simply we were more scared of Soviet aggression than we were hungry.

Like Nk our domestic food prioduction in GB is unable to support our population. Unlike NK, we aren't under massive trade embargo. We have the same problems here, but we are not so vulnerable to it all going wrong at the same time... in no small part because of our effective expeditionary military forces.

The main reason there was a food shortage from 1945 onwards was that Europe had been devastated by WW2. People were killed, industry was destroyed and agricultural production slumped. It had very little to do with developing nuclear weapons which began as early as late 1945, long before the Cold War was in effect.

Edited November 28, 2010 by Snafu

[Big Mac 19]

The U.S. certainly has a history of coming to China's aid. Not least in WW2.

But China threw it back in their face. They had just got rid of Japan, they didn't want a new master.

I think the American pysche still resents that to some extent.

And what makes you such an expert on the American psyche? I hold no resentment towards china and neither do most Americans. We don't like the fact that "Made in China" means more than "Made in the USA" nowadays, but yet again you're talking out of your ass...

So the famine in NK didn't happen becuase the government deliberately starved the people in preference of buying weapons. It happened because they fluffed their agricultural reforms and the crops failed and they wrere under trade sanctions (so they couldn't buy much externally/earn foreign currency) and they were in state of war/under threat of war so they still needed to maintain an expensive military.

Right thats why the ruling class and and the military get all the food and the joe blow is left with nothing. Dude their military is a 3rd rate military, if you bothered to read up before posting you'd know that everyone here except you is right.

In all honesty I think if North Korea thought they could win it easily, they would invade SK tomorrow.

The same could be said for SK invading NK. They have US support and they have a modern military, bet yet even with the sinking of one of their ships and the bombardment of one of their islands they hold back. You obviously don't understand that everything NK does has a purpose. Do you really think they bombarded that island just to see what would happen? They did it to get the world's attention for reasons no one is sure of yet, if they wanted to invade SK they could very will win because they have surprise on their side. Edited November 28, 2010 by Big Mac

[Baff1 0]

LOL::j:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/southkorea/8165274/North-Koreas-undercover-journalists-reveal-misery-of-life-in-dictatorship.html

I*'m not trying to tell you that Nk is a nice place to live, just that the famine ended a long time ago, as your article rightly pointed out.

---------- Post added at 03:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:11 PM ----------

No, but I never claimed to know better than what people who have lived under NK said about NK, unlike you..

In the contrary, unlike you I have taken the time to listen to people living in Nk discuss the subject.

I don't know better than them, I am simply repeating their words to those people who haven't bothered.

---------- Post added at 03:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:13 PM ----------

LOL..... http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2010/11/28/63/0301000000AEN20101128005100315F.HTML

So how do you "accidently" fire an artillery piece?

I thinnk it's possible during a training execise to fire them at the wrong co-ordinates...

or to fire them provocatively close to enemy positions and then miss.

Certianly in areas where the map is disputed, you could conceivably be firing safely into your own territory by the letter of your own law, and attacking foreign soil by the letter of someone elses.

---------- Post added at 03:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:15 PM ----------

I am more interested in what in-depth studies think on the matter rather than someone who has thought about the subject for 30 seconds and passes off what he thinks as fact.

Problems in production have been compounded by difficulties in distribution and in the use of output. Shortages of fuel and spare parts for vehicles have hampered distribution. At the same time, some outside observers have questioned the uses to which output has been put: scarce cereals appear to continue to be used to produce luxury products such as noodles, urban areas with high concentrations of Korean Workers Party (KWP) members and government officials have received preferential allocations, and it has been claimed that military stockpiling continues. The end result of these difficulties has been a secular deterioration in food production and, in the absence of additional imports, a deterioration in the food balance.

Despite the desperate situation internally, the government maintains the most militarized society on earth, with more than one million men (and increasingly women) under arms, and estimated 25 percent of GDP devoted to military expenditures (US ACDA 1997). This point is reinforced if one believes that certain military or military-related expenditures are hidden in the economic development budget. Estimates of North Korean military manpower and equipment do not reveal anything like this economic decline over the relevant period. Indeed, US and South Korean defense ministry figures show a slight increase in North Korean military deployment during this period. This suggests that the non-military part of the economy is

being severely squeezed.

pp. 1-2.

From:

FAMINE IN NORTH KOREA:Causes and Cures

Marcus Noland

Institute for International Economics

Sherman Robinson

International Food Policy Research Institute

Tao Wang

Institute for International Economics

http://www.iie.com/publications/wp/99-2.pdf

The country could improve food availability by freeing up resources currently devoted to the military, but as long as the country pursues “military-first†politics, this is unlikely.

It is not at all clear that the current leadership is willing to countenance the erosion of state control that would accompany the degree of marketization necessary to revitalize the economy.

pp. 26-27.

Famine and Reform in North Korea

Marcus Noland

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.145.4829&rep=rep1&type=pdf

While the desire to maintain power and diversion of resources to military policies are not the only causes (I never said they were), most things have a number of causes, however, they are without a doubt key reasons.

Your comparison is flawed. Different time and circumstances.

There was no famine. Furthermore, the UK was facing a possible invasion. National survival was at stake. DPRK was not about to be invaded by the ROK. It was not fighting a war for national survival.

The main reason there was a food shortage from 1945 onwards was that Europe had been devastated by WW2. People were killed, industry was destroyed and agricultural production slumped. It had very little to do with developing nuclear weapons which began as early as late 1945, long before the Cold War was in effect.

In 1945, Britain still sourced it's external food requirements from the Commonwealth countries, not Europe.

in 1955 rationing had absolutely nothing to do with available food supply any more than it did in 1940, it did not take Europe 10 years to agriculturally recover and the Commonwealths infrastructure was never destroyed.

In WW2, the problem was not the availability of food supply, it was getting it here past all the Uboats and also.. paying for it.

The U.K.'s trade dependancy on Europe is a relatively modern occourance. Food dependancy in particular is a new one brought on by EU regulation.

There was no famine in the UK during WW2, but all it would have taken was a crop failure at that time and there would have been.

All the other key contributary factors were in place. We were lucky, or rather.. we weren't unlucky. The threat however was very real.

My observations on the sources of the NK famine come from the interviews I have seen given by North Koreans.

I haven't read any studies.

I listened to people who had reason to know, and what they said was making sense. Given that it broadly mirrored what I had learnt of the Ukrainian and Ethopian famines and what you have just told me about the Irish one.

Bearing in mind the state of political repression in North Korea, the fact that they were openly allowed to criticise the NK government (who they described as "we") as the greatest factor in this, and that this part of the interview was not censored by the state, leads me to believe that what they said was probably true.

They have no reason to lie other than fear of state reprisal and clearly the state of NK offers none for this subject and openly recognises it's mistakes. Despite whatever studies you may have read, I truely believe that the people best positioned to understand the causes of the that famine where those people it happened to.

With great respect, studies conducted by NK's enemies, SK and America into this are probably the most bias and least credable ones I could imaginably expect to read.

Also the ones with the least available information to base their judgements on. Nk is not reknowned for it's co-operation with enemy intelligence agencies.

I would also concur that the NK government was not willing to give up the level of control it has over it's country in return for foreign food relief. But then.. neither was Churchill.

It is not my impression that the North Korean people resent that choice any more than the people of Great Britain did, (even though they suffered far more form it). While they obviously had a miserable time of it, there wasn't any political revolution sparked by the crisis and they didn't discuss the issue in terms of "us and them", but rather identified themselves with the mistakes of their leaders.

They are proper commies. All in it together.

The urbanites certainly get better treatment than the peasants. Living in Pyonyang is a privildge. They have a class system, peasant class, academic class, military class etc.

Quite frankly, even their privilidged academic classes look a lot worse off than your average career unemployed type does round here.

But I will hold with my observation. There is no obvious signs of long term malnitrition in North Koreans. No physical deformities. Rickets etc. Not in the cities and not in the villages. As bad the famine was, it clearly didn't last too long. If you look at pictures of Ethiopians for example they are often all bow legged and hobbled. Their famine must have been much more severe.

Edited November 28, 2010 by Baff1

[Tonci87 163]

YOu know that nothing that is said in front of a camera in NK isn´t controled by the Party right? Journalists that travel into the country get an immediate warm welcome by some Officers that follow them everywhere. No in fact it is the other way round. The Officers take the Journalists to specific Places they are allowed to see, introduce them to People they are allowed to talk to (and you can bet that those People had a long talk with a Polit Officer before that) and you really believe this shit? Jesus......

[Big Mac 19]

In the contrary, unlike you I have taken the time to listen to people living in Nk discuss the subject.

I don't know better than them, I am simply repeating their words to those people who haven't bothered.

Right and did you buy into the sugarcoated version about how NK is a paradise and how Kim Il Sung defeated the Japanese in WW2 single handed by throwing pine cones which turned into grenades? As I said watch Nat Geo's Inside North Korea for a non-bullshit version.

[Baff1 0]

YOu know that nothing that is said in front of a camera in NK isn´t controled by the Party right? Journalists that travel into the country get an immediate warm welcome by some Officers that follow them everywhere. No in fact it is the other way round. The Officers take the Journalists to specific Places they are allowed to see, introduce them to People they are allowed to talk to (and you can bet that those People had a long talk with a Polit Officer before that) and you really believe this shit? Jesus......

That is correct, but once those journalists leave the country they are free to point out which parts were censored and which were not.

The film "A state of mind" for example was not censored at all.

The choice of places you can visit is not just controlled by the state for journalists, it is also controlled by the state for the general populace.

(School trips to mount Kim Jong il. ROFL).

Obviously some subjects are just never going to get censored. Family life etc.

Given that we both recognise the level of state interference in these kinds of films... when someone in NK actually does criticise the state on film, I tend to believe them. If the state is OK with a description of events that paint it in a negative light, then it is probably something they all consider to be undeniably true.

I think however that it is important to recognise that these people are all heavily indoctrinated and controlled. There is no great divide between their opinions and the opinions of their political masters. Or at least nothing along the scale that we would consider normal in our countries. It's not really necessary to censor people who think the same things you do.

It is however very necessary not to allow "enemy" journalists to take pictures of sensetive military installations etc. or ask questions designed to provoke political dissent/sedition.

---------- Post added at 04:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:10 PM ----------

Right and did you buy into the sugarcoated version about how NK is a paradise and how Kim Il Sung defeated the Japanese in WW2 single handed by throwing pine cones which turned into grenades? As I said watch Nat Geo's Inside North Korea for a non-bullshit version.

I buy into the accounts of actual North Koreans far more than I buy into your blind hatred. They have a natural bias, as do you. I choose to recognise both when forming an opinion.

I have seen Inside North Korea. I have seen quite a few recently. BBC 4 had a North Korea week which had some excellent documentries. Those with a UK I.P. address might still be able to find some on Iplayer.

Edited November 28, 2010 by Baff1

[Big Mac 19]

That is correct, but once those journalists leave the country they are free to point out which parts were censored and which were not.

The film "A state of mind" for example was not censored at all.

The choice of places you can visit is not just controlled by the state for journalists, it is also controlled by the state for the general populace.

Obviously some subjects are just never going to get censored. Family life etc.

Given that we both recognise the level of state interference in these kinds of films... when someone in NK actually does criticise the state on film, I tend to believe them. If the state is OK with a description of events that paint it in a negative light, then it is probably something they all consider to be undeniably true.

---------- Post added at 04:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:10 PM ----------

I buy into the accounts of actual North Koreans far more than I buy into your blind hatred. They have a natural bias, as do you. I choose to recognise both when forming an opinion.

I have seen Inside North Korea. I have seen quite a few recently. BBC 4 had a North Korea week which had some excellent documentries. You might still be able to find some on Iplayer.

My hatred is not blind and it is not without just cause either. There very few people in this world who do not have a bias against NK on some level.

Actual accounts by NKs still inside NK are as worthless as monopoly money for two reasons.

1. They're either so brainwashed that if Kim Il Sung or Kim Jung Il said the 2 + 2 = 5 then they'd believe it despite however which way you do the problem you always end up with 4.

or

2. They know what the score is and they know they're in some really bad kimchi, but will put on a smile and tow the party line because if they do means they get to live another day and hopefully get the chance to defect.

So naturally when you combined the pictures of starving kids with first hand accounts by people who were there, and NK itself anyone with a lick of common sense can see that maybe the guy with a chip on his shoulder has a point.

Baff give it up, no one here is going to take you seriously when you defend NK so by continuing to you're only making yourself look like a troll.

Edited November 28, 2010 by Big Mac