Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

haele

(12,692 posts)
50. No, there are too many levels of NK political crazy down for outsiders to do it.
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 03:46 PM
Mar 2017

If it were an internal removal, North Korea would just become a dysfunctional state and collapse internally from the infighting and wild accusations. I suspect that most of the population will apply for reunification with South Korea once the party members top levels in government, military, and science sort themselves out and no actual evidence is found that any Outsider had anything to do with it.

If another Country was involved with the removal of the Kim Dynasty, that would give North Korea a reason to focus on that agency as the cause of any subsequent dysfunction, and the global "we" would be worse off. Remember, these people have lived at least four generations as sacrificing subjects to a "God King" that brooks no political dissent; what little dissent is in the country is viewed as criminal behavior by most people there - and punishment, including execution, is acceptable to most of the citizens there.
The brainwashing is strong, and no matter how the Kim Dynasty falls, it will take a decade or more for the majority of North Koreans that were not already inclined to leave to accept the larger outside world and be comfortable taking responsibility for their own future rather than living under an autocrat that tells them how to live.

Heck, much of our own population has a problem living in the outside world and prefer to live under local autocrats who use "God's observable Favor" as an excuse to tell them the right way to act and think - and to that everyone needs to keep to their place in local society if they don't want to be cast out and end up in Hell.

Haele

OPPOSE! Aristus Mar 2017 #1
I oppose too, but supremacy doesn't have much to do with this, I think. randome Mar 2017 #9
Good grief, NK by itself. Then CHINA Hortensis Mar 2017 #38
I know. NK is a tragedy with no clear solution. randome Mar 2017 #40
Sorry but the wording is confusing ProudLib72 Mar 2017 #2
Oppose maryellen99 Mar 2017 #3
NK cannot be allowed to continue building longer range delivery vehicles Calculating Mar 2017 #4
Depends on what China might do. If they stand back, then yes. SharonAnn Mar 2017 #27
Sounds like something the UN/international community should address. meadowlander Mar 2017 #28
If no one has a pre-emptive strike, we would have eliminated war HoneyBadger Mar 2017 #5
We are treaty bound to defend Japan and South Korea* if they are attacked. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #6
South Korea, maybe? randome Mar 2017 #10
I support preemptive diplomacy... Blanks Mar 2017 #7
Yes! I am totally in favor of not preemptively using nuclear weapons on the DPRK NurseJackie Mar 2017 #8
N.K. nuke sub over halfway built already Tom the Mechanic Mar 2017 #11
North Korea has the technology to build a nuclear submarine? DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #12
You can see it from satelite Tom the Mechanic Mar 2017 #15
Do you have a link? DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #16
It's for real and even though by all standards it's rudimentary, if completed it would change a lot. NWCorona Mar 2017 #30
Even if it is not mechanized DK504 Mar 2017 #33
I'd like to see a link to that too. nt cwydro Mar 2017 #23
See post #30 NWCorona Mar 2017 #32
Thanks! cwydro Mar 2017 #55
Really... Why are Republican policies given equal credence here? procon Mar 2017 #13
There are defenses of a pre-emptive strike in this thread. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #14
An incidental happenstance; and not the focus of this thread, yeah? procon Mar 2017 #18
Oh, I knew it would be lopsided. I was trying to get the pre-emptive strikers to reveal themselves. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #20
Hogwash. procon Mar 2017 #24
Wow. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #25
The assumption of any "value" in the rhetorical question presented is open to debate. procon Mar 2017 #54
My thread has fostered discussion as intended, your pomposity and pretentiousness notwithstanding. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #56
As stated above, this is just another attention seeking poll. procon Mar 2017 #59
I intended to foster discussion on a discussion board. The tragedy. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #60
I Support Regime Change erpowers Mar 2017 #17
Oh sure MFM008 Mar 2017 #19
It would probably be a preventative strike, not pre-emptive wiggs Mar 2017 #21
I oppose. LP2K12 Mar 2017 #22
He's going to kill us all, but first he'll take his family and fly to Mother Russia to live. SummerSnow Mar 2017 #26
I say favor ExciteBike66 Mar 2017 #29
Not only no, but Hell NO! haele Mar 2017 #31
Sorry, N Korea has nowhere near the megatonnage needed for what you said. EX500rider Mar 2017 #37
Nine nuclear weapons going off is nine nuclear weapons too much. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #43
It's not just what they can deliver in a strike. haele Mar 2017 #46
So would just assassinating him work? Kittycow Mar 2017 #39
No, there are too many levels of NK political crazy down for outsiders to do it. haele Mar 2017 #50
I'm against the Bush doctrine except for extreme cases. NWCorona Mar 2017 #34
I apposed it for the obvious reason, the war thing. Javaman Mar 2017 #35
SHIT! get the red out Mar 2017 #36
By "pre-emptive", you mean before they strike? Thanks. nt. NCTraveler Mar 2017 #41
Yes, of course... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #42
If a strike by them was certain, of course we should strike them ahead of time. NCTraveler Mar 2017 #44
We have military treaties with Japan and South Korea. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #45
"It's also the moral thing to do. " That poses little significance. NCTraveler Mar 2017 #47
All I know is if they attack Japan or South Korea we should do whatever is necessary to repel the... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #48
Fucking hell no!!!! Initech Mar 2017 #49
We don't need another war we're bound to LOSE. eom BlueCaliDem Mar 2017 #51
no 'preemptive wars. period heaven05 Mar 2017 #52
Strongly Oppose JDC Mar 2017 #53
I voted "No vote" because I need more context for the question. stevenleser Mar 2017 #57
Why isn't ARE YOU NUTS? a choice? tavernier Mar 2017 #58
No! I would like Seoul and the rest of SK to remain intact...please Kimchijeon Mar 2017 #61
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Do you favor or oppose a ...»Reply #50