North and South Korea vow to end the Korean War in historic accord - Page 7 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#14913875
One Degree wrote:You are still evading answering why reunification is necessary to improve economic conditions. Simply posting economic differences is meaningless. No one is arguing there is a difference.
DPRK is incapable of improving its conditions. This is self-evident to all but the most stubborn and ignorant. DPRK has stagnated and has a trivial GDP. It's under continued sanctions that would be lifted under unification.

One Degree wrote:Even the reunification of Germany is questionable.
Germany is one the most powerful countries in the world in terms of economy, and one of the best countries in the world in terms of freedoms and other Western liberties. It's a European powerhouse.

One Degree wrote:As usual, you just assume your view is what everyone accepts.
You are incapable of providing any argument against unification. You've presented nothing to support your claims. Perhaps you should try instead of pretending your feelings are hurt by someone contradicting your opinion.

One Degree wrote:It would appear Germany is facing some divisions and some of those divisions are more apparent along previous East West divisions.
Germany is not having problems that will result in it splitting. can you provide some evidence of East/West divisions, or is it just more opinion? You "appear" to not know what you are talking about. Let's see some source material supporting your claims.
#14913883
Godstud wrote:DPRK is incapable of improving its conditions. This is self-evident to all but the most stubborn and ignorant. DPRK has stagnated and has a trivial GDP. It's under continued sanctions that would be lifted under unification.

Germany is one the most powerful countries in the world in terms of economy, and one of the best countries in the world in terms of freedoms and other Western liberties. It's a European powerhouse.
N
You are incapable of providing any argument against unification. You've presented nothing to support your claims. Perhaps you should try instead of pretending your feelings are hurt by someone contradicting your opinion.

Germany is not having problems that will result in it splitting. can you provide some evidence of East/West divisions, or is it just more opinion? You "appear" to not know what you are talking about. Let's see some source material supporting your claims.


Ah, back to the liberal view of ‘white man’s burden’. You always end up showing you believe others are inferior. Why are North Koreans incapable of advancing without unifying with South Korea? Supposedly, they have some of the highest IQ’s on the planet.
Look at German election results. I never said they were on the verge of splitting. I am saying the unification increased the number of people who have their views denied.
#14913889
Ah, back to the liberal view of ‘white man’s burden’. You always end up showing you believe others are inferior.
I said nothing of the sort. The proof is that 60+ years after the Korean war has ended, DPRK is a country in trouble. Liberalism or Conservativism doesn't enter into it. You're trying to deflect with your "feelings".

One Degree wrote:Why are North Koreans incapable of advancing without unifying with South Korea?
The evidence is clear. They are not advanced, and have not advanced. They are one of the poorest countries on earth, and the most backward, despite having nuclear capability(if they actually do have it).

The poverty line. Forty percent of the population, about 24 million people, live below the poverty line.Most workers earn $2 to $3 per month. The standard of living has deteriorated to extreme levels of deprivation while the average life expectancy has fallen by five years since early the 1980s.

Food shortages. With the prevalent poverty in North Korea, food shortages are widespread. A famine that started in the 1990s had a lasting effect, forcing the country to become reliant on international aid to feed its people. However, since 2009 food assistance has declined significantly. A study by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization found that 84 percent of households have “borderline or poor food consumption.” The food crises had resulted in thousands of deaths. According to the World Food Programme, one-third of children are stunted due to malnutrition and the infant mortality rate is 33 percent. Due to the government’s “two meals a day campaign” food riots are a common occurrence.

The giant rabbit feeding program. In order to solve the widespread food shortages, Kim Jun-il began to breed giant overweight rabbits in 2007. He got this idea after seeing Karl Szmolinsky, a German rabbit breeder, breed the world’s largest rabbit. Szmolinsky sent overweight rabbits to North Korea but the experiment turned out to be a failure when it was suspected Kim was eating the rabbits himself.

Human feces government program. Farming fertilizers used to be imported from South Korea. However, South Korea stopped sending them in 2008. The government, therefore, created a program where farmers had to use their own feces as fertilizers. Factory workers have to meet a quota of two tons of human feces.

Right to health is denied. Although the country declares that healthcare is free, residents are denied medical treatment unless they can pay the high prices for medicine.
Military programs use most of the funds. North Korea spends a lot of its funds on the military. In 2001, the country spent more than $5 billion on military spending alone, which is more than 30 percent of the country’s GDP. North Korea is believed to have around half a dozen nuclear weapons.
Despite high poverty rates, the leader is worth $5 billion. According to the 2011 corruption index from Transparency International, North Korea is officially the world’s most corrupt country. It is estimated that Kim inherited $4 billion from his father. According to a South Korean news organization, he is worth as much $5 billion. The money is held in secret accounts in European banks and comes from counterfeiting, the sales of narcotics and other illegal endeavors. Kim also spends vast amounts of money on luxury goods. It is reported he spent $645.8 million in 2012.
Refugees who are caught are sent to prison labor camps. Leaving the country without official permission is a crime. The government uses the threat of detention and forced labor as repercussions for disobedience. Many families flee to China to seek refuge overseas. However, those that are caught are sent to political prisoner camps. The camps carry out systemic abuse. Death rates at these camps are reportedly very high. U.S. and South Korean officials estimate that between 80,000 to 120,000 people are imprisoned in these camps.

Crystal meth epidemic. North Korea suffers a widespread meth epidemic. To negate the horrid economy with little to no government help, the production of drugs is used as an economic stimulus. In 2000, North Korean factories began to produce methamphetamine. This caused an increase in the domestic use of meth. The drug is now very occurrence and is seen as something of a luxury. As a result, many North Koreans have become addicted to the drug. It is estimated that 80 percent of residents have used the drug while 40 percent are addicted.

The satire film “The Interview” gets a lot right. According to an expert, the film gets a lot right, specifically the psychology of North Korea. Visitors to Pyongyang in the famine years used to describe supermarkets that displayed plastic produce, just as is portrayed in the film.

https://borgenproject.org/poverty-in-north-korea/

One Degree wrote:Supposedly, they have some of the highest IQ’s on the planet.
According to who? can you support this claim?

You are still not providing any evidence or argument about why unification is a bad idea for Korea.
#14913899
Pick any source you choose on IQ. South Korea will be in the top 3 in them all. Though we lack evidence on North Korea, it would go against everything you profess to believe in to suggest theirs would be significantly different from the South.
North Korea’s poverty is due to them being the ‘hermit kingdom’.
This is not proof that eliminating sanctions and a loosening of totalitarianism would not have the same results whether they reunify or not. One does not depend on the other. You are simply accepting a ‘globalist liberalist’ view without questioning it.

Edit: I have provided my reasoning twice in this thread why reuniting is not the best option. No one has disputed it, you simply ignore it.
#14913924
Finally, another legendary GOP leader to add to the list through aggressive revisionism and ignorance!

Gerald Ford: Brought a decisive end to the Vietnam war by strategically denying aid to the South.

Trump: Enabled South Korea to initiate aggressive diplomatic outreach by relieving it of foreign pressure and influence.

I can't wait to see how the diplomatic summit goes next month and how ill prepared Trump will be.
#14913961
One Degree wrote:
Edit: I have provided my reasoning twice in this thread why reuniting is not the best option. No one has disputed it, you simply ignore it.


I'm sorry 1 degree, but saying that smaller countries' governments respond better to their people than larger ones, as a opinion on why countries that were once together should not remain so is a bit of an abstraction that isn't necessarily born out by the evidence. Whatever the socio-economic system of Korea, it should be one nation because the Korean people feel that it should be so, as it was historically in the past. Again, should not the sins of Japanese Imperialism and Colonialism by corrected? America abandoned the Kingdom of Korea and facilitated Japanese occupation in order to help build up Japan against Russia and China in the 1900's, and today Korea is divided in order to ''Justify'' an American presence in Northeast Asia. This is the ''bottom line'' as we Americans say, the reality of the situation all this talk obscures.
#14914004
One Degree wrote:Edit: I have provided my reasoning twice in this thread why reuniting is not the best option. No one has disputed it, you simply ignore it.
No. You have given your opinion on it, numerous times, but never provided a source or anything that would suggest that you know what you are talking about.

You gave no source about IQ, and it's relevance to the discussion, so I assume you are still talking out your ass. No, I will not do the research for you. If you are going to make the claim, then the onus is upon you to show the proof, otherwise your claim is so much hogwash.

[quote='One Degree"]North Korea’s poverty is due to them being the ‘hermit kingdom’.[/quote] North Korea has sanctions imposed upon it that prevent trade with most of the world(since 2006). You are omitting important details to create your own narrative. Can you provide a link supporting this, or do we just have to believe you because you say so?

It's also had some horrendous leadership, that has set it back. It's had leaderships that has isolated the people, and brain-washed them, and yet you cite that they might want to not reunify because of "different views" :lol: . Can you identify these "views" with a source, or is it more guesswork?

North Korea goes even further backward under Kim Jong-un
Many predict that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea cannot survive much longer, given its pervasive poverty, genocidal prison camp system identified by a UN commission of inquiry as committing crimes against humanity, self-imposed economic isolation, confrontations with all of its neighbours, and its leader's youth and inexperience.
http://www.afr.com/news/world/asia/north-korea-goes-even-further-backward-under-kim-jongun-20160905-gr90fi

All in all, @One Degree, you have provided no argument with any substance, for the Koreas NOT to reunite.
#14914021
B0ycey wrote:Cowboy diplomacy will never work. It can be detrimental had the words he used been acted upon. All that is happening now is Trump's becoming the jester that people will tolerate because they have economic ties to America. And this toleration is diminishing rapidly to the advantage of Asian and Russia today. I suspect even former allies are re-evaluating their dependence of America evonomically and diplomatically due to Trumps diplomacy. And if Europe turns East perhaps this would indeed prove to be detrimental after all.

I put "cowboy diplomacy" in quotes to mean whatever Trump does (and which you call cowboy diplomacy). But going by its wiki entry, it seems to have worked for Russia in Crimea. Note that bluster and bravado doesn't seem to be a necessary ingredient, rather it was apparently used to describe Roosevelt's approach, "speak softly and carry a big stick" which today is often used to describe China's foreign policy.

As for the consequences you anticipate, none of them seem likely or even make objective sense. America, even under Trump, is a far superior partner to Russia or China by pretty much any measure. What's more, even those who are dismayed by Trump becoming president obviously know that he will be gone after this or at best a second term. "Turning away" from the US because of him and hence jeopardising the relationship with the most powerful country in the world would not only be short sighted, but possibly something Trump opponents would regard as "trumpish" in any other context. Now perhaps the western world is really that stupid, but if so, as far as I'm concerned, we don't really deserve any better than submit to Russia or China anyway.

B0ycey wrote:Nonetheless if he was a leader of any other nation not within the UN security council, his Cowboy diplomacy would have already had sanctions placed upon his nation due to being a national threat for global security. So his twitter feeds are actually no advantage to anything. His nations power is more potent. And you don't need to be agressive to get results. China is doing quite well without threating anyone due to the same power it holds.

Well, of course the rules are different for more powerful countries and as it happens this includes Russia and China. This is the international relations arena where, contrary to popular belief, power ultimately rules. As for China's foreign policy, how on earth can you claim they are not threatening anyone or that they are not aggressive? Are you aware of their position and actions in the South China Sea?

B0ycey wrote:Reagan was the face of the cartel but was not a loose cannon like Trump is today. SU collapse was economical rather than diplomatic btw. Giving Reagan credit for this due to his words is so mindboggling I can't believe you even suggest it.

I haven't attributed anything to Reagan's words. My point is that the reactions to his rhetoric were similar in that it was claimed that he was escalating the situation and causing a nuclear war.
#14914028
SpecialOlympian wrote:Finally, another legendary GOP leader to add to the list through aggressive revisionism and ignorance!

Gerald Ford: Brought a decisive end to the Vietnam war by strategically denying aid to the South.

Trump: Enabled South Korea to initiate aggressive diplomatic outreach by relieving it of foreign pressure and influence.

I can't wait to see how the diplomatic summit goes next month and how ill prepared Trump will be.


You know he's got a Trump Card though SO. They're going to sign an agreement that the Korean War is ending and/or had already ended.
#14914045
One Degree wrote:Why wish reunification on them as if bigger is automatically better? Yes, create friendly relations, but there is no reason to unify into one country.
Bigger is not necessarily better but to unite people of the same nation into one state is the best option for any divided nations. Think of German unification or Italian. Russians could not challenge successfully the Mongol yoke until they united. Division is always weakness. Good example of that is Scandinavians, perhaps if they could have united into one state, they would have proven more prominent in history.

The only reason I see why you would not want a unified Korea is for geopolitical reasons. USA might not want a potentially stronger geopolitical rival in long-term; However, if South Korea inherits the government after reunification how west Germany did with its reunification with east. US stands to gain a stronger ally in the region. Korea is de facto partner in Nato like Japan, so it is win for both Korea and USA if reunification commences.

For US, Korea can provide good counterbalance in the region between China and Japan. Provided that Pan-Asianism is kept in check, (and Rei is not allowed to span that idea around East Asia,) but that does not seem to be an issue that could arise anytime soon.

Edit: Come to think of it, Germany should have not been allowed to unite, but kept divided. Then you would not have disbalance of power that you have in EU at the moment. Germany is a powerful nation, to keep it divided would have been in interest for Europe as a whole. But I believe Korea is not analogues with Germany so there will not be the same issue in east Asia because of reunification.
#14914056
If USA is to continue to exert dominance in east Asia such ideas as Pan-Asianism needs to be kept in check. I heard China indeed promotes Pan-Asianism and there is not a way for USA to combat that idea within China at the moment, but it can restrict its spread to other Asian countries like Japan and Korea.

If reunification of Korea will mean that Korea will leave US sphere of dominion, then US should (and most likely will) oppose it. As that will mean seceding Korea to Chinese influence.
#14914078
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:As for the consequences you anticipate, none of them seem likely or even make objective sense. America, even under Trump, is a far superior partner to Russia or China by pretty much any measure. What's more, even those who are dismayed by Trump becoming president obviously know that he will be gone after this or at best a second term.


Knowing Trump only has two terms max at least gives me some hope for America, but then I think of the Lobbyists and that hope fades a little but anyway...

Currently, as things stand, Europe has been over reliant on America -especially in terms of defence. Today this is changing. Do you honestly believe Europe wants to side with the devil? They will continue to do the right noises to keep America happy until they are able to speak out and remove themselves from their foreign policy. Pesco is the start of good things for Europe. They are already looking East for trade. That's the next step. Then it will be making the Euro a viable alternative to the Dollar. Iran for example now trades in Euros for foreign exchange. Then it will be international diplomacy and affairs through cooperation with new partners and finally freedom. America is only a more superior partner to both Russia and China today because they have decided to make the rules up so they are. But things are changing due to how Trump has reacted to international diplomacy today (from tariffs to threats). And when they do ultimately change, they won't be a more superior partner any longer.

"Turning away" from the US because of him and hence jeopardising the relationship with the most powerful country in the world would not only be short sighted, but possibly something Trump opponents would regard as "trumpish" in any other context. Now perhaps the western world is really that stupid, but if so, as far as I'm concerned, we don't really deserve any better than submit to Russia or China anyway.


America are making allies turn away from them by being selfish. It's not the other way round. I for example don't hate Americans. I hate their foreign policy. And with Brexit and our government sucking up for America for trade (as they know they need to as we have decided to remove ourselves from our most viable trading partner), we will become a vessel US state and Air Strip One soon. I have been resigned in the knowledge my nation are going to slaves for the foreseeable future for a while now, but I see Europe being liberated from US imperialism nonetheless. That doesn't mean that they are going to become Russian or Chinese vessel states. A United Europe is more than capable of looking after themselves. They have the capital and military to defend themselves. They will look after their own affairs and be truly liberated. They won't need to surrender their will as they will indeed be a superpower themselves. And I have faith they won't become an imperialist nation such as America when they do.

Well, of course the rules are different for more powerful countries and as it happens this includes Russia and China. This is the international relations arena where, contrary to popular belief, power ultimately rules. As for China's foreign policy, how on earth can you claim they are not threatening anyone or that they are not aggressive? Are you aware of their position and actions in the South China Sea?


Apart from creating new islands from international waters or arguing for sovereignty of islands between nations, they have yet to threaten 'fire and fury' or sent troops to illegal wars. Their international affairs are local and trade is international. Comparing them to America is stupid. If you do, you know who the true devil is. Nonetheless, America by your own admittance is playing under different rules. They don't want nations to have nuclear weapons or threaten other sovereign nations - but do just that anyway and possess nuclear weapons themselves because they can. They are hypocrites and as such are hated globally for it. And that is fair. Practice what you preach or be called upon it.

I haven't attributed anything to Reagan's words. My point is that the reactions to his rhetoric were similar in that it was claimed that he was escalating the situation and causing a nuclear war.


So why even bring up Reagan? His words did nothing but provoke conflict and so did Trump's. The fact that the other nations (USSR and NK) showed restraint fron such words is not evidence that aggression works. It doesn't. Diplomacy works. As shown when NK offered an olive branch to SK without having to fire a single bullet or shout out on Twitter with aggression.
#14914106
The only benefit of larger countries is ‘power’. This does little for the average citizen. More people in Germany, Korea’s, etc. would have the government they want if divided. None of you are disputing this, because you can’t except it reduces their ‘power’. What the Koreans decide is up to them, but unification is only necessary for political reasons, not society.
There is nothing stopping them from acting in concert while haveing automony.
The above arguments are based upon continuation of power politics being paramount to societal improvement.
Feel free to educate me exactly how one Korea is better for the people than two friendly Korea’s? After 70 years of separation, it is no different than arguing Hungary and Austria should unite.
All you are saying is it was wrong to divide Korea therefore it must go back to what it was 70 years ago. How many other things from 70 years ago should we go back to?
#14914108
North Korea has the government they want? :eh:

One Degree wrote:There is nothing stopping them from acting in concert while haveing automony.
What real argument do you have against reunification, except that it'll be bad for the United States of Assholes?

One Degree wrote:What the Koreans decide is up to them, but unification is only necessary for political reasons, not society.
How does a society like in DPRK flourish with huge poverty and oppression? Please show me a society that flourished under extreme poverty and oppression and how it was soooo good for them.

One Degree wrote:The above arguments are based upon continuation of power politics being paramount to societal improvement.
You have yet to provide ANY argument against reunification.

One Degree wrote:Feel free to educate me exactly how one Korea is better for the people than two friendly Korea’s? After 70 years of separation, it is no different than arguing Hungary and Austria should unite.
One state is impoverished, while the other is thriving, and can handle the reunification. it doesn't take a fucking rocket scientist to determine that the one living in poverty would benefit greatly from it, and a people separated by war wouldn't wan to reunify. Families separated by a war will be reunited. A people separated will be reunited. A culture will be reunited. Of course, you have no fucking argument for your opinion, anyways...

Austria and Hungary are not comparable and that's a shit argument. Think East and West Germany for a realistic comparison. They are now one of the greatest countries on earth.

One Degree wrote:All you are saying is it was wrong to divide Korea therefore it must go back to what it was 70 years ago. How many other things from 70 years ago should we go back to?
Do you have an actual argument, or are you just spouting out 'what ifs'? All I see is you telling us how you feel about it. There are real benefits.

But what of South Korea’s gains? The costs of reunion will be staggering—by conservative estimates about $1 trillion, or three-quarters of annual GDP. Its social-security system would need to provide for 25m Northerners, many of them brutalised and malnourished, and including tens of thousands of prisoners in the North’s gulag. Yet the South would also merge with a population that is younger and has almost twice as many babies. That would be a demographic boon, as South Korea's working-age population begins to shrink from 2017. Disbanding the North’s standing army, the fourth-largest in the world, would free up workers. In total, about 17m workers would join the South’s 36m—though admittedly with far lower skills and education. South Korea would also reap a windfall in reserves of rare earths, which are used in electronics. An estimate from 2012 by a South Korean research institute values the North’s mineral wealth at $10 trillion, 20-odd times larger than that of the South.
https://www.economist.com/blogs/graphic ... ortunities

But hey.... don't let facts get in the way of your feelings. :knife:
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 11
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

@JohnRawls General Election Summary 2022 Date[…]

Claims that mainstream economics is changing rad[…]

Isn't oil and electricity bought and sold like ev[…]

@Potemkin I heard this song in the Plaza Grande […]