Korea Thread: Fumbling to take a bite of kimchi

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Korea Thread: Fumbling to take a bite of kimchi

Main Paineframe: Oct 27, 2010

tsa posted:

It's pretty humorous how people and moreso the Obama administration focus on Iran, a country that is hardly a good actor but is certainly not a crazy one, yet the threat of NK has consistently been laughed away or completely ignored(just check this thread for examples). Yet if the government doesn't collapse (unlikely) and China can't find some balls (highly likely) at the current rate it's only a matter of time before they make the blast bigger and the size smaller. And a delivery device to go with it. This poo poo gets easier and easier by the day, the most difficult part is the fuel and if they ramp that production up a functional nuke program (rather than experimental) could come much quicker than a lot of people seem to think. But even if we are still 20 years out (which is probably optimistic), what exactly is the plan? The current one seems to be to pray to god the regime collapses and kicking the can.

Are you kidding? The current plan is to pray that North Korea doesn't collapse - it'd be an incredible disaster on multiple levels.

# ? Aug 18, 2016 03:01

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 18, 2024 18:02

Kurtofan: Feb 16, 2011; hon hon hon

Ragingsheep posted:

Wait, so communists in Western countries still look towards North Korea as something they admire?

the looniest of loons only, the kind of party followed by parentheses " Real Communist Party of Great Britain (6th International-Maoist)"

# ? Aug 18, 2016 16:37

boner confessor: Apr 25, 2013; by R. Guyovich

tsa posted:

It's pretty humorous how people and moreso the Obama administration focus on Iran, a country that is hardly a good actor but is certainly not a crazy one, yet the threat of NK has consistently been laughed away or completely ignored(just check this thread for examples). Yet if the government doesn't collapse (unlikely) and China can't find some balls (highly likely) at the current rate it's only a matter of time before they make the blast bigger and the size smaller. And a delivery device to go with it. This poo poo gets easier and easier by the day, the most difficult part is the fuel and if they ramp that production up a functional nuke program (rather than experimental) could come much quicker than a lot of people seem to think. But even if we are still 20 years out (which is probably optimistic), what exactly is the plan? The current one seems to be to pray to god the regime collapses and kicking the can.

so what exactly do you think would happen if north korea launched a couple of nukes at japan or the us, that somehow didn't malfunction. what would happen afterwards? why would north korea do this in the first place?

# ? Aug 18, 2016 21:22

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Ragingsheep posted:

Wait, so communists in Western countries still look towards North Korea as something they admire?

yeah, though not as there used to be. mostly dipshits like this clown.
https://maoistrebelnews.com/

forkboy84 posted:

Tankies love the North Koreans. Most of the rest of the left regards them somewhere between an embarrassment & hellish dystopian nightmare land.

this too. also whats a tankie?

Dapper_Swindler posted:

this too. also whats a tankie?

People who support the Soviet Union sending tanks into Hungry when they wanted to leave the loving embrace of communism.

# ? Aug 19, 2016 05:10

WarpedNaba: Feb 8, 2012; Being social makes me swell!

Kurtofan posted:

the looniest of loons only, the kind of party followed by parentheses " Real Communist Party of Great Britain (6th International-Maoist)"

The kind of fellows who cheered on Idi Amin because he was anti-Britain? Yup, say no more.

# ? Aug 19, 2016 07:09

Halloween Jack: Sep 12, 2003; I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!

Ragingsheep posted:

Wait, so communists in Western countries still look towards North Korea as something they admire?

BR Myers posted:

You've just finished your life's work, a bold new history of the Watergate burglary in which you manage to prove that the White House was out of the loop, but the ink is hardly dry when an eighteen-minute tape surfaces in a Yorba Linda thrift shop, and soon the whole country is listening to Nixon gangsta-rap about how he personally jimmied the door open. It's every revisionist's nightmare, but Bruce Cumings, a history professor at the University of Chicago, has come closest to living it. In a book concluded in 1990 he argued that the Korean War started as "a local affair," and that the conventional notion of a Soviet-sponsored invasion of the South was just so much Cold War paranoia. In 1991 Russian authorities started declassifying the Soviet archives, which soon revealed that Kim Il Sung had sent dozens of telegrams begging Stalin for a green light to invade, and that the two met in Moscow repeatedly to plan the event. Initially hailed as "magisterial," The Origins of the Korean War soon gathered up its robes and retired to chambers. The book was such a valuable source of information on Korea in the 1940s, however, that many hoped the author would find a way to fix things and put it back into print.

Not really.

For a long time, North Korea scholarship in the U.S. was split along a right-left divide. In the 50s many criticized the DPRK as an autocracy and a Soviet puppet--not without reason, but of course there were also the people who regard communism as literally Satanic. The left-liberal response to this was to say, hey, Korea has a long history of foreign occupation, the United States has its own legacy of imperialism to own up to, and North Korea has good reason to fear Western imperialism. Whether they toed the Soviet line or departed from it, either could be explained as a more-or-less rational actor playing both sides to protect its independence.

Now that we have access to a great deal more information about the regime than we did in the 1970s, this sympathetic left-liberal view of North Korea doesn't hold up (not that a simplistic right-wing view of the country does either). You can still find sympathies for North Korea among people I'd wouldn't classify as "loony left," but I think that's more often based on ignorance or an outdated viewpoint rather than earnest conviction, e.g. this idiotic political stunt. But what these liberals have in common with fringe tankie parties is that they're mostly old, and formed their views of North Korea in the 60s and 70s when American politics were rife with Red Scare bullshit.

# ? Aug 19, 2016 14:17

icantfindaname: Jul 1, 2008

WarpedNaba posted:

The kind of fellows who cheered on Idi Amin because he was anti-Britain? Yup, say no more.

i'm the 50 year old examples of far leftists having bad opinions

# ? Aug 19, 2016 22:15

R. Guyovich: Dec 25, 1991

Halloween Jack posted:

Not really.

For a long time, North Korea scholarship in the U.S. was split along a right-left divide. In the 50s many criticized the DPRK as an autocracy and a Soviet puppet--not without reason, but of course there were also the people who regard communism as literally Satanic. The left-liberal response to this was to say, hey, Korea has a long history of foreign occupation, the United States has its own legacy of imperialism to own up to, and North Korea has good reason to fear Western imperialism. Whether they toed the Soviet line or departed from it, either could be explained as a more-or-less rational actor playing both sides to protect its independence.

Now that we have access to a great deal more information about the regime than we did in the 1970s, this sympathetic left-liberal view of North Korea doesn't hold up (not that a simplistic right-wing view of the country does either). You can still find sympathies for North Korea among people I'd wouldn't classify as "loony left," but I think that's more often based on ignorance or an outdated viewpoint rather than earnest conviction, e.g. this idiotic political stunt. But what these liberals have in common with fringe tankie parties is that they're mostly old, and formed their views of North Korea in the 60s and 70s when American politics were rife with Red Scare bullshit.

A constant stream of outlandish, unsourced or barely sourced stories from major press that are later proven false doesn't help things, either.

# ? Aug 19, 2016 23:28

WarpedNaba: Feb 8, 2012; Being social makes me swell!

icantfindaname posted:

i'm the 50 year old examples of far leftists having bad opinions

Gotta have a history before you prove a correlation, buddy.

# ? Aug 19, 2016 23:58

Nckdictator: Sep 8, 2006; Just..someone

Shockingly it turns out fringe groups can be astoundingly stupid.

http://www.workers.org/2016/05/11/solidarity-with-peoples-korea/#.V7fUH61ceUk

quote:

There seems to be an unwritten law among the colonizers and imperialists that the peoples they have attacked the most must be insulted the most.

U.S. history is replete with examples. None is more repugnant than the universally offensive treatment heaped on the Democratic People�s Republic of Korea by the U.S. political establishment and media.

Since occupying the south of Korea in 1945, the imperialists have tried to defeat the Korean people�s efforts to build socialism and overcome the poverty and devastation they inherited from decades of Japanese colonial rule. From 1950 to 1953, the Pentagon launched one of the most unequal wars in history against the DPRK. But the Korean Revolution succeeded anyway in the northern part of the peninsula. Showing incredible morale and bravery, the newly liberated Korean people in the DPRK under the leadership of the legendary Kim Il Sung and the Workers� Party fought the invaders to a standstill and then rebuilt their country.

So the imperialists, while still occupying the south and holding annual �war games� that threaten the DPRK with both conventional and nuclear weapons, have intensified their insults against the leaders of north Korea.

Workers World totally rejects this war propaganda offensive. It stands in solidarity with the DPRK, its people and leaders, in defense of their sovereignty and social system.

A momentous event has just taken place in Pyongyang, capital of the DPRK. Starting on May 6, the Workers� Party of Korea held its 7th Congress to chart the next phase of its development. The Secretariat of the National Committee of Workers World Party sent the following solidarity message to the First Secretary of the WPK:

�Dear Comrade Kim Jong Un,

�Workers World Party sends comradely greetings to the Workers� Party of Korea on the occasion of your party�s 7th Congress.

�Many years have passed since the great revolutionary struggles that liberated the northern half of Korea from the colonial oppressors and their puppets, and all that time the Workers� Party of Korea has remained true to its commitments.

�Despite the strident hostility of the imperialist ruling classes, your Party has organized the people of the DPRK into a strong, educated, sincere force for building socialism that refuses to be intimidated. It has dealt firmly with those who would return all of Korea to the days of vassalage to international finance capital. It has guided the building up of the advanced scientific foundations of the economy and defense, and thus neutralized the constant war threats of the imperialists.

�We are sure you have much to celebrate in this remarkable Congress of your Party. The Korean revolutionaries have shown the world that a determined and politically conscious people can take on any challenges and succeed when imbued with the spirit of unity, courage and independence.�

Since this was written, the news from Pyongyang is that Kim Jong Un has been elected chair of the Workers� Party of Korea and is stressing the policy of �byungjin,� which means the simultaneous buildup of both economic and military strength, including nuclear weapons. As the U.S. has threatened the DPRK with nuclear attack ever since the 1950 war, the development of such weapons by the Koreans can only be seen as a necessary defensive measure. Ever since 1953, the Koreans have asked for negotiations to end that war with a peace treaty, and the U.S. has refused.

All progressives must continue to �demand that Washington abandon its futile attempts to overthrow the DPRK
and sign a peace treaty NOW

# ? Aug 20, 2016 04:59

Halloween Jack: Sep 12, 2003; I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!

Speaking of byungjin, have they actually done a drat thing to prioritize economic development? Besides selling their citizens as slave labour in Eastern Europe, that is.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 05:03

Heer98: Apr 10, 2009

They have apparently redoubled their efforts to acquire capital abroad and monetize the normal economy so as to fund the development of a gift economy that provides a facsimile of a western existence to the apparatchiks and upper classes that support the regime.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 07:02

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Nckdictator posted:

Shockingly it turns out fringe groups can be astoundingly stupid.

http://www.workers.org/2016/05/11/solidarity-with-peoples-korea/#.V7fUH61ceUk

what a bunch of loving idiots. now a days i feel embarrassed to be left wing. if its not weird oversentive assholes online who write psudo progressive clickbait for money, its loving dumb tankies jerking off about despotic shitholes because they currently ascribe/at one point ascribed to a left leaning system. if the right wernt a million times worse.

but seriously, how do they think that NK is workers paradise. how. It hasn't even been technically communist for a while now.

Halloween Jack posted:

Not really.

For a long time, North Korea scholarship in the U.S. was split along a right-left divide. In the 50s many criticized the DPRK as an autocracy and a Soviet puppet--not without reason, but of course there were also the people who regard communism as literally Satanic. The left-liberal response to this was to say, hey, Korea has a long history of foreign occupation, the United States has its own legacy of imperialism to own up to, and North Korea has good reason to fear Western imperialism. Whether they toed the Soviet line or departed from it, either could be explained as a more-or-less rational actor playing both sides to protect its independence.

Now that we have access to a great deal more information about the regime than we did in the 1970s, this sympathetic left-liberal view of North Korea doesn't hold up (not that a simplistic right-wing view of the country does either). You can still find sympathies for North Korea among people I'd wouldn't classify as "loony left," but I think that's more often based on ignorance or an outdated viewpoint rather than earnest conviction, e.g. this idiotic political stunt. But what these liberals have in common with fringe tankie parties is that they're mostly old, and formed their views of North Korea in the 60s and 70s when American politics were rife with Red Scare bullshit.

this. it reminds me of what happend with Venezuela. every left wing person supported Chavez and the PSUV after bush hosed up the coupe but now that people have seen that whats going on(also the fact that the sacred leader is in hell currently) international support outside the usual suspects has dried up. everyone is finally seeing it for what it is. a burning,starving failure that is eventually going to topple led by a retarded illiterate bus driver(and his lovely cronies) that is in economic free fall and mass starvation. eventually it will fully implode and maybe become a syria like warzone.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 18:06

Halloween Jack: Sep 12, 2003; I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!

That makes sense. Improving the lives of the privileged class gains him political capital, whereas investing in improving the lives of the average Korean does not.

I recently watched a Victor Cha lecture where he was asked about Kim Jong Un's new ski resort. He pointed out that while this benefits the elite, his last trip to China included visits to several high-tech initiatives. China wants him to tone down military provocations and focus on economic development, and it doesn't seem to have influenced him at all.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 19:00

Eifert Posting: Apr 1, 2007; Most of the time he catches it every time.; Grimey Drawer

In the case of an actual collapse South Koreans I've spoken to are hesitant regarding unification and absolutely delusional regarding Chinese expansionism.

"South Korea can't unify, it would destroy our economy."

"So you're OK with China taking over the territory outright or installing a puppet government?"

"Why would they do that? It's Korea, not China."

:psyduck:

Had that conversation with a couple dozen people, including my very plugged in wife.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 19:10

Cerebral Bore: Apr 21, 2010; Fun Shoe

There's no way in hell that China will want to take over the basket case that is North Korea, though.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 19:16

Eifert Posting: Apr 1, 2007; Most of the time he catches it every time.; Grimey Drawer

Cerebral Bore posted:

There's no way in hell that China will want to take over the basket case that is North Korea, though.

Natural resources and rampant expansionist sentiment?

# ? Aug 20, 2016 19:19

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Halloween Jack posted:

That makes sense. Improving the lives of the privileged class gains him political capital, whereas investing in improving the lives of the average Korean does not.

I recently watched a Victor Cha lecture where he was asked about Kim Jong Un's new ski resort. He pointed out that while this benefits the elite, his last trip to China included visits to several high-tech initiatives. China wants him to tone down military provocations and focus on economic development, and it doesn't seem to have influenced him at all.

yeah, it seems he has distanced himself from china a bit. which is probaly why china has been a lot more open to the US/SK loving him economicaly.

Eifert Posting posted:

In the case of an actual collapse South Koreans I've spoken to are hesitant regarding unification and absolutely delusional regarding Chinese expansionism.

"South Korea can't unify, it would destroy our economy."

"So you're OK with China taking over the territory outright or installing a puppet government?"

"Why would they do that? It's Korea, not China."

Had that conversation with a couple dozen people, including my very plugged in wife.

Id honestly be ok with that sorta. china isnt a magical paradise but its a 1000 times more caring then NK government. idk. either way its going to hurt the asian economy.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 19:20

Eifert Posting: Apr 1, 2007; Most of the time he catches it every time.; Grimey Drawer

Dapper_Swindler posted:

Id honestly be ok with that sorta. china isnt a magical paradise but its a 1000 times more caring then NK government. idk. either way its going to hurt the asian economy.

Yeah, it wouldn't be awful to us but South Koreans would be apoplectic. My own wife shouted me down for pointing it out.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 19:22

Tacky-Ass Rococco: Sep 7, 2010; by R. Guyovich

I can't see why China would want to actually move in. They'd be much better off by creating a government that would listen to them for a change and which followed their model.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 19:23

computer parts: Nov 18, 2010; PLEASE CLAP

Eifert Posting posted:

Natural resources and rampant expansionist sentiment?

China has more than enough Lebensraum within the country, and outright territorial expansion isn't what they do. They prefer (even though they're not as good as the US) at using trade deals and using infrastructure projects in return for favorable access to resources.

They might install a puppet government, but if they did it would be for the eventual goal of reunifying Korea. Because then they have a much more favorable (and/or anti-US) ally in the region, and it supports their narrative of "One China/Korea/Nation-State".

# ? Aug 20, 2016 19:25

Cerebral Bore: Apr 21, 2010; Fun Shoe

Eifert Posting posted:

Natural resources and rampant expansionist sentiment?

Even if you're an expansionist, you don't generally expand into places that are just not worth having. North Korea is such a basket case that the profits of any resources that China could extract from it would be dwarfed by the costs it would take to get the place into some semblance of a working order.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 19:26

Halloween Jack: Sep 12, 2003; I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!

Eifert Posting posted:

Natural resources and rampant expansionist sentiment?

Rehabilitating NK could cost upwards of a trillion dollars, to say nothing of the cultural effects of integrated the population into Chinese or Korean society. North Korean refugees aren't looked favourably upon in China and have a lot of problems integrating in South Korea. The natural resources in North Korea are valuable but you're looking at a massive, massive investment.

AFAIK China is actually quite amenable to a reunified Korea under the South Korean government's control, provided that said reunified Korea wouldn't host American troops and weapons anywhere near the border with China. But for South Korea to to lead a reunification project, even with a lot of American and Chinese help, you're looking at a huge negative economic impact for 10-20 years if not longer. South Koreans really don't want to live through that, frankly.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 20:24

Kurtofan: Feb 16, 2011; hon hon hon

So what, does the UN take over.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 20:26

Cerebral Bore: Apr 21, 2010; Fun Shoe

What happens is that everybody muddles along and hopes that somebody else will fix the problem.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 20:54

Kurtofan: Feb 16, 2011; hon hon hon

a bit like Syria then.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 20:56

Cliff Racer: Mar 24, 2007; by Lowtax

Halloween Jack posted:

That makes sense. Improving the lives of the privileged class gains him political capital, whereas investing in improving the lives of the average Korean does not.

I recently watched a Victor Cha lecture where he was asked about Kim Jong Un's new ski resort. He pointed out that while this benefits the elite, his last trip to China included visits to several high-tech initiatives. China wants him to tone down military provocations and focus on economic development, and it doesn't seem to have influenced him at all.

Well why on earth would it influence him? He and the current power-holders make enough money to live a life of luxury while having complete control. Yes, going in a China-like direction will enrich the country and ultimately its leaders too, but it would also lead to many of them losing power or losing it relative to a new class of ambitious people from outside the system. It might seem impossible for us to imagine that a North Korean book-keeper could see the status quo as being "okay", let alone "good," but that is exactly what the situation seems to be.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 21:25

Halloween Jack: Sep 12, 2003; I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!

You would think that China would understand better than the US that Kim's political capital is based on fostering a paranoid ideology, not economic development, but perhaps not.

Edit: Then again, China has many incentives to at least try to influence him in that direction, not least because a push for economic development would require Kim to open the country toward China while making him more dependent on them...something his grandfather avoided despite great economic costs. It's not like taking him on a tour of a bunch of factories is costly and time-consuming.

Halloween Jack fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Aug 20, 2016

# ? Aug 20, 2016 21:33

Cerebral Bore: Apr 21, 2010; Fun Shoe

Halloween Jack posted:

You would think that China would understand better than the US that Kim's political capital is based on fostering a paranoid ideology, not economic development, but perhaps not.

Dunno, the Bush years aren't that far in the past.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 21:36

Halloween Jack: Sep 12, 2003; I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!

It's understandable that any North Korean would want North Korea to become a nuclear power. "The Yankee vampires invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, but not Iran, because Iran has nuclear weapons" is how the logic goes.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 21:38

fishmech: Jul 16, 2006; by VideoGames; Salad Prong

Halloween Jack posted:

You would think that China would understand better than the US that Kim's political capital is based on fostering a paranoid ideology, not economic development, but perhaps not.

Edit: Then again, China has many incentives to at least try to influence him in that direction, not least because a push for economic development would require Kim to open the country toward China while making him more dependent on them...something his grandfather avoided despite great economic costs.

Kim Il Sung had the luxury that up to the early 80s, North Korea actually traded quite a bit with the West in general, as well as the whole Eastern, Soviet-aligned, bloc. All that started to get cut off in the late 70s and the 80s because North Korea started refusing to pay back or only pay for things late. This quickly drove away western trade and investment, and soon even the Soviets couldn't force the Eastern Bloc countries to throw resources/goods away by selling them to a North Korea that barely paid.

Frankly, I don't think Kim Jong Un gives the tiniest poo poo what his grandfather did, and besides the country's heavily reliant on the Chinese anyway.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 21:40

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Eifert Posting posted:

Yeah, it wouldn't be awful to us but South Koreans would be apoplectic. My own wife shouted me down for pointing it out.

i agree. but either way, which ever country takes NK or lets in the mass of people. their economies will poo poo themselves.

Cliff Racer posted:

Well why on earth would it influence him? He and the current power-holders make enough money to live a life of luxury while having complete control. Yes, going in a China-like direction will enrich the country and ultimately its leaders too, but it would also lead to many of them losing power or losing it relative to a new class of ambitious people from outside the system. It might seem impossible for us to imagine that a North Korean book-keeper could see the status quo as being "okay", let alone "good," but that is exactly what the situation seems to be.

pretty much this. if he went china route, he would have to open up the country and its government(somewhat) and probaly close the concentration camps. sure he and his cadre may get more money, but they would lose power.

# ? Aug 20, 2016 21:41

Biggus Dickus: May 18, 2005; Roadies know where to focus the spotlight.

The Guardian has an article up about North Korean defectors. Not much new information, but still an OK read.

https://www.theguardian.com/global/2016/aug/27/north-korea-defectors-ian-birrell

# ? Aug 28, 2016 08:41

Kurtofan: Feb 16, 2011; hon hon hon

censored Jane Eyre? holy poo poo

# ? Aug 28, 2016 10:28

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Kurtofan posted:

censored Jane Eyre? holy poo poo

whats there to censor in jane eyre?

# ? Aug 29, 2016 01:21

suck my woke dick: Oct 10, 2012; I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!

Put this cum-loving slave on ignore immediately!

Dapper_Swindler posted:

whats there to censor in jane eyre?

a woman who doesn't 100% submit to authority 100% of the time

# ? Aug 29, 2016 13:23

Kurtofan: Feb 16, 2011; hon hon hon

That's extreme

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/30/north-korea-reportedly-executes-officials-anti-aircraft-gun-purge

edit: jesus

quote:

Ri was said to have been executed for falling asleep during a meeting chaired by Kim.

# ? Aug 30, 2016 12:22

Yinlock: Oct 22, 2008

Kim Jong-un what is your loving problem jesus

# ? Aug 30, 2016 13:16

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 18, 2024 18:02

The MUMPSorceress: Jan 6, 2012; ^SHTPSTS; Gary’s Answer

Yinlock posted:

Kim Jong-un what is your loving problem jesus

It seems like he is a true believer in the propaganda about him and his family, unlike his father and grandfather who simply used it to maintain power. He seems to be rapidly approaching the level of senselessly tyrannical behavior that inspires coups even in the most repressed countries. Although I don't know if it would be better or worse for the average North Korean/The rest of the world if NK was run by a competent military leader instead of a crazy Kim.

# ? Aug 30, 2016 15:22

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Korea Thread: Fumbling to take a bite of kimchi

«‹›260 »