|
Has he ever been pictured with a cane before? That seems kind of odd to me. No matter how sick KJI got I never saw him use anything other than a bodyguard to prop him up, although It's certainly possible I just missed it.
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 22:05 |
|
|
That cane might be a symbol that the Kims are effectively out of power. It does seem like a stretch, but that assertion that a council wouldn't let Un make a fool of himself...well, after those incidents, he disappears, misses an extremely important function, and comes back using a cane. That's tinfoil hat territory, for sure, but the military can't really make a blatant play on Kim's life due to how intertwined the Kim bloodline is with the actual North Korean Government. Deposing a Kim by force could lead to a total breakdown. Instead, he steps out of line a couple of times, you show him who the REAL boss is, and you get these overtures out of the blue. Or maybe they really are just insane and this is just business as usual and he actually did just give himself gout. Some bonus vice coverage Full Battle Rattle fucked around with this message at 04:10 on Oct 15, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
Is it fair to say this is the worst shape they've been in yet? They're never exactly paragons of stability and I have read about the soldiers barely having enough to eat...god, what a catastrophe.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:No. The 90s famine was definitely the worst in their time. Despite how bad things are now, it actually marks an improvement from the 90s (though it's still a massively worse place than the 80s and especially than the 70s). Ah, thanks for the clarification. Most sources that I read claim that they never really came back from the 90's famine and it's just been all downhill ever since, but I found that a little hard to believe.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2014 12:45
|
|
|
TheRamblingSoul posted:Are there any good documentaries on Kim Il Sung and the transformation of North Korea into the totalitarian state it became (like with the countless statues and the development of Juche ideology, etc) after the Korean War? I want to focus specifically on the end of the Korean War to Kim Il Sung's death, but it seems like a lot of documentaries focus on Kim Jong Il instead. Kimjongilia, I think, was pretty good. KJI is what was relevant by the time the western world really started paying attention, which I suppose was after the fall of the Berlin Wall/Soviet Union, so naturally a lot of stuff is going to be about him. I Watching this will probably get you put on some kind of list: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-Kbn298m0A
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 04:00
|
|
|
here, have an article: http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/jan/06/north-korea-major-announcement-artificial-earthquake-nuclear-test-site-live
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
For KJU, something like that may well be suicide. His life is an insane balancing act and a large part of his being alive is probably because it's only marginally better than what would happen if he were to die. To me, a nuke test reeks of desperation, KJU might be feeling his support slipping among hardliners.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
So did nobody care at all about this bomb test or what?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2016 07:25
|
|
|
Usually people get very upset about any of the DPRK's nuke tests. KJU may have needed world powers to come to the table over something. If there's absolutely no concessions made at all it kinda shifts the power dynamic, but it's been shifting ever since KJI died. KJU needs allies if he intends to keep the DPRK going as a cohesive political entity. The world can't just say 'gently caress it' and walk away and North Korea just keeps chugging along, it doesn't work like that. Someone's probably going to have to start doing some propping sooner or later, and if absolutely everyone is unwilling or unable who knows what could happen.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:I disagree, North Korea is rich in natural resources, has a good geographic location and doesn't cost much to run. It can keep going indefinitely as long as the world politely looks away and some unscrupulous characters exist to purchase those goods. All they need is people to not actively resist their activities and all is well for them. ayyy lmao
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:I think in the case of North Korea, a palace coup than a civil war, but whomever would take over would most likely play more or less the same game they are doing right now. Nevertheless, I wouldn't be that surprised if North Korea has some more missile tests in the near future to more or less project their full capacity. I still don't think they have true ICBM, but even a single/double stage missile armed with a boosted fission warhead is something to ponder (especially if you're Japanese). That would be all fine and dandy if it wasn't for the cult of Kim being necessary to a functioning government. They could install one of his other idiot kids I suppose, but my guess is when/if KJU goes down it'll take the whole country with him.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
Juffo-Wup posted:This is ignoring the possibility of a messy regime collapse where a firm chain of ownership for those weapons is not assured. I wonder just how likely this is? A messy regime change I mean. I also wonder how global warming has affected the DPRK's climate. A couple of bad growing seasons and no way to bargain for aid from a position of strength? Not great.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
Juffo-Wup posted:I honestly don't know. What degree of likelihood do you think would amount to an unacceptable risk? Honestly, the way that the parties involved reckon risk I think any likelihood is probably too much for them. Even a totally peaceful regime change has so many challenges and problems it's mind boggling. Juffo-Wup posted:Yes, if you manage to convince yourself that The Enemy is an irrational brute that will squander any opportunity to advance their interests in favor of short term advantage then there will never be any incentive on our part to extend an olive branch ever again, that's right. Well done, you've doomed the world to perpetual war. The DPRK has made it beyond clear that they're going to maintain their nuclear program no matter what. The DPRK is like a geopolitical version of the boy who cried wolf. After a while it's just tough to take them seriously at all, and going to maximum red alert every time they do some saber rattling is extremely counter-productive. Honestly, far more than any kind of movement by the DPRK military I'd be more worried about sharing of nuclear fuel and secrets with rogue actors.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
I still can't believe all the crap the VICE guy pulled off. At least he wasn't dumb enough to ask a Korean Citizen point blank if they had any criticisms of the Kim family in front of a camera like Lisa Ling did.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
That period where they tried to make the DPRK the go-to villain in movies was a fun year or two. What's especially funny is that in at least two cases I can think of (Red Dawn and Homefront) they were used at the last minute in place of the Chinese.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
Juffo-Wup posted:For Red Dawn, wasn't it a condition of the film's Chinese release? http://screenrant.com/red-dawn-villains-china-north-korea-schrad-106177/ quote:Around the time MGM first delayed the release of Red Dawn, a Chinese newspaper called the Global Times expressed concerns that the film would demonize their state and its citizens (thanks in part to certain leaked images from the set). Evidently, this may have been a factor in scaring off potential distributors who were apprehensive about what effect their involvement with the film would have on future dealings with China. Nope, they just chickened out! For good reason, probably. The DPRK aren't really credible scary villains either. They have an aging conventional military that's largely been contained, and it really strains credible thought to think that the DPRK would be able to mount an occupation of the western United States. Halloween Jack posted:We're more likely to be invaded by aliens and fight them off with battleships than to be invaded by North Korea. See now that's plausible
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
There's already been a lot of signs that the regime is under a ton of strain, and KJU isn't his father.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Have there? There have been signs that Kim Jong-Un's position is under strain, but that doesn't mean the regime itself is in danger - it just means that KJU himself is in danger of having some tragic accident, like falling down the stairs...into a hail of machinegun fire. Dictatorships run by weak dictators are usually more stable than they appear, because the system isn't overly dependent on a particular Supreme Leader, so it's quite easy for a military coup to kill the current one and swap in a new one at the slightest hint of trouble. The Kim cult of personality is famous for a reason. He is the state. I don't think there's any real way to predict what would happen if there was a coup that attempted to place someone in power who wasn't a legitimate heir to the Kim dynasty. They might be able to contort some kind of working world view out of it, but there's an equally likely chance of becoming a failed state that requires international support to stabilize.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2016 00:53
|
|
|
I think that kids sentence is way too harsh 10 years would have probably been fine, or maybe a public beating. Any 20 year old should be more than able to understand 'North Korea is absolutely not loving around'.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
WarpedNaba posted:You seem to be under the impression that North Korea is a rational state governed by the rule of law, with an eye towards proportional punishment. It is not. I was being glib, actually
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2016 14:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 22:05 |
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:And, not that anyone noticed, but South Korea's ruling party just not only lost its legislative majority but actually (barely) came in second behind the main opposition group in their legislative elections. I don't follow Korean politics, so could you elaborate on the implications?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2016 05:38
|
|