|
The biggest thing that has stopped coup's in NK is mostly the fear any fracture in leadership would encourage the US or SK to "liberate" the north and those who got in power through the coup would soon lose it. Ultimately however as the North Korean people get more exposed to outside information the more the faith in the ruling class diminishes. I wouldn't be all that surprised if a few generals quietly got rid of Un.
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:00 |
|
|
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that he just doesn't want to be seen with a leg brace on. If there really had been a coup then Best Korea would be shut up tighter than a crab's rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:26
|
|
|
Zeroisanumber posted:Yeah, I'm pretty sure that he just doesn't want to be seen with a leg brace on. If there really had been a coup then Best Korea would be shut up tighter than a crab's rear end in a top hat. Depends on the type of coup, not all involve tanks and bombs. The most effective ones are always the ones that go large unnoticed for a long time. The recent outreach by senior NK officials points at the leadership finally being fed up with the extremely mediocre quality of life for even NK's elite.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Mightypeon posted:Nah, Il Sungs degree of ripping of was actually pretty normal. He could also, not unfactually, state that his North Koreans did kick the South Koreans in the Korean war, before the US/UN troops intervened. In their communications, they claimed it as a victory because the US agreed on a White peace, despite intervening directly and despite the Soviets not being forced to intervene directly themselfs. You can guess that the Chinese, especially a decade or so later, were kind of offended by this reasoning since it placed them a Tier below the Soviets, who sacrificed far less. So how long was KJI running the show before KIS kicked the bucket?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
SinetheGuy posted:So how long was KJI running the show before KIS kicked the bucket? Kim2 actually took control of the state machine before kim1 kicked the bucket. In that sense he was an usurper and prevented the regular political succession like the rest of the communist countries. If the power was passed down to a non-Kim leader in 94 North Korea most likely would have embraced a China/Vietnam style economic reform. Not that I think about it, the succession also happened after the fall of Berlin Wall. If Kim1 died before 1990, the rest of the communist countries probably would have given pressure to NK to pass down the power to a non-Kim comrade. As for China's attitude toward Kim2, my theory is the Chinese leadership probably wanted to keep an amusing communist dystopia around to give the hardliners inside China an active warning what would have happened if China didn't embrace reform.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
Alexzandvar posted:Depends on the type of coup, not all involve tanks and bombs. The most effective ones are always the ones that go large unnoticed for a long time. The recent outreach by senior NK officials points at the leadership finally being fed up with the extremely mediocre quality of life for even NK's elite. Now that you mention it, what is life like for a non-Kim elite in NK? The average high military officer or divisional chief, for example. I think I heard that they live like American lower middle class, i.e. they have a house, a car, some electronics and they won't starve.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
It wouldn't surprise me if there was a coup, if only because Kim Jong-Un hasn't quite been brought forward into the spotlight as the next big leader as Kim Jong-Il was during Kim Il-Sung's reign. There probably isn't the same degree of respect and trust in Kim Jong-Un as the those before him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
William Bear posted:Now that you mention it, what is life like for a non-Kim elite in NK? The average high military officer or divisional chief, for example. I think I heard that they live like American lower middle class, i.e. they have a house, a car, some electronics and they won't starve. Some of the favored residents of Pyongyang have access to a shopping mall, but it's difficult to say exactly how people live because it's illegal to invite a foreigner into your home and tours are so heavily stage managed. http://world.time.com/2013/08/19/while-the-rest-of-north-korea-struggles-pyongyangs-fortunate-few-go-shopping/
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
They live ok, but are butthurt because random Chinese People live better. While they theoretically have Access to considerable riches, actually using/enjoying those would free them up to attacks on their "bourgois livestyle" or whatever. Concerning the feasability of US/SK liberating it, well, SK has a realistic appreciation of how much uplifting NK would cost, so they arent very keen on that. What is possible is that Russia + China make a deal with SK + USA concerning reunification in return for Neutralisation + some extras. The thing is, neither trusts the USA enough for that, and that the biggest loosers in such a scenario, the kim family, has enough people in North Koreas Military to quite literally kill/purge such a deal. Absent of a major training programm for North Koreas Military in either Russia or China, it is pretty impossible to wrest control of North Koreas army away from the extended Kim family without couping the Kims first, and it is also impossible to safely coup the Kims while they still control the army.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
William Bear posted:Now that you mention it, what is life like for a non-Kim elite in NK? The average high military officer or divisional chief, for example. I think I heard that they live like American lower middle class, i.e. they have a house, a car, some electronics and they won't starve. Really the best thing the NK elite have access to is nice cars, but not much other than that. Many of the high officials who have defected to south Korea remark that living qualities outside the top few that surround the Kim's are surprisingly mediocre with the only real permanent luxury they have is they won't starve to death. Mightypeon posted:They live ok, but are butthurt because random Chinese People live better. The NK military is hyped up to be way more powerful than it really is, since the collapse of the soviet union their army has been literally rusting away.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:
Nah, it's partially an inherited mess and partially that it's easier to have a contained nuisance that you know than an uncontained one that you don't. Like, imagine the US & Israel relationship, except Israel is on the US border, still antagonizing their other neighbors, but if you ever deal with them it'll cause millions of refugees flooding into your country. Even if you don't really like the guys, it's better to keep the status quo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:
Yeah, this...is dead wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Alexzandvar posted:Really the best thing the NK elite have access to is nice cars, but not much other than that. Many of the high officials who have defected to south Korea remark that living qualities outside the top few that surround the Kim's are surprisingly mediocre with the only real permanent luxury they have is they won't starve to death. They can still murder North Koreans, or considerable numbers of South Koreans, which is all they need to do in order to torpedo any kind of deal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Nah, it's partially an inherited mess and partially that it's easier to have a contained nuisance that you know than an uncontained one that you don't. Are you saying US can't control Israel? I disagree. US just pretend they can't control Israel while the crusader elements in the US want Israel to stick it to the Muslim. Badera posted:Yeah, this...is dead wrong. Who are you so say I am wrong? Are you a member of the CCP?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:A source in Beijing is reporting that Kim Jong Un injured his leg during a visit to a military base in which he, "ordered all the generals to take part in drills." Hmm, that last part there may have something to it, the 'ordered all the generals to take part in drills.' A way to clear a logjam of elderly, unfit, or inconvenient generals is to declare that during an exercise commands must be issued in person or from horseback or something like that. High command gets an airtight reason to dump an officer when it is discovered, with mock surprise, that 80 year old three star General So-and-so is breaking fields regulations by his inability to mount a horse or descend into a trench.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Are you saying US can't control Israel? I disagree. US just pretend they can't control Israel while the crusader elements in the US want Israel to stick it to the Muslim. It's not a perfect analogy for other reasons (I don't think the general public in China really like North Korea in any sense) but it's a definite fact that Obama does not like Netanyahu and the feeling is mutual (the latter explicitly endorsed Romney during 2012).
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Are you saying US can't control Israel? I disagree. US just pretend they can't control Israel while the crusader elements in the US want Israel to stick it to the Muslim. You don't understand the US government. The US can't control Israel, Bibi has all but spit in Obama's face. Why it can't control Israel may have to do with internal factors in the US, but the US government can't just renege on all its promises and kill or imprison everyone who complains like the PRC can. You might say a theoretical US government with a different composition might be able to control Israel but that's not reality.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 01:17
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:You don't understand the US government. The US can't control Israel, Bibi has all but spit in Obama's face. Obama may dislike and disagree with Israel, but the political force inside US won't let him do anything that stab Israel's back (for example, stop blocking UN resolution for a start). Obama is kind of checked out on international politic in his 2nd term anyway. Since I don't agree with Israel/NK analogy anyway, I will stop.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Who are you so say I am wrong? Are you a member of the CCP? Well, no, but strictly speaking, you're the one that needs to back up your extraordinary claim. What you suggested makes no sense. It ignores the agency of the NK regime, for one. They've shown more than once that they're perfectly willing to tell China or whoever else to piss up a rope.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
Badera posted:Well, no, but strictly speaking, you're the one that needs to back up your extraordinary claim. I think it is you that is denying the Chinese their agency to be the center of the universe. You should apologize.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 03:40
|
|
|
Badera posted:Well, no, but strictly speaking, you're the one that needs to back up your extraordinary claim. I refer to you this book to understand why the North Korean need Chinese. I also have multiple family members who were member of CCP. Again, how dear you to tell me my theory of CCP's point of view is wrong. What I suggested doesn't need to make sense, I just tell you what members of CCP think. whatever7 fucked around with this message at 04:16 on Oct 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 04:13
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:I refer to you this book to understand why the North Korean need Chinese. Right, ok, I don't deny that NK needs China? quote:I also have multiple family members who were member of CCP. Again, how dear you to tell me my theory of CCP's point of view is wrong. What I suggested doesn't need to make sense, I just tell you what members of CCP think. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority Again, you completely ignore the NK regime's own agency--what you're suggesting is virtually ahistorical in that regard. It's also faintly ridiculous to suggest that China would prop up a quasi-failed state just to scare the Maoists, since they lost power a long time before the socialist bloc collapsed. The CCP was inviting Milton Friedman to speak to them a long fuckin' time before North Korea was a horrifying dystopia.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 04:26
|
|
|
The idea that the CCP is ideological enough in a way beyond "more money for me, gently caress you" is the most questionable part of the whole thing IMO. The CCP might very well be keeping North Korea around in a purely Machiavellian Realpolitik sense, but to demonstrate the value of economic systems? Bullshit
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:As for China's attitude toward Kim2, my theory is the Chinese leadership probably wanted to keep an amusing communist dystopia around to give the hardliners inside China an active warning what would have happened if China didn't embrace reform. If this was the early 90s this makes rational sense because back then there were real hardline Communists who were still alive and in power. But since then most of those guys have died of old age. But then again, the spectre of Maoism does haunt the current generation of Chinese leadership whose formative experience was persecution during the culture revolution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
There was also a neo-"Maoist" glorification movement that became pretty influential and posing as a rival faction to the pure neoliberal wing of the party, and one of its leader, Bo Xilai, was slated to join the Politburo Standing Committee. Obviously he wasn't really socialist but he called for wealth distribution and relied on a lot of Maoist rhetoric and imagery. In addition, the rapid expansion of Chongqing (which he used to rule) made him a political force to be reckoned with. But his wife murdered a British businessman, his chief enforcer tried to defect to the United States, and he is in jail now after a highly televised political show trial. As far as I know that took a lot of the wind out of that particular movement, but it's not like Maoism is completely discredited in political discourse there. That said, as far as I know the primary motivation for propping up North Korea was to avoid having a more powerful, unified and pro-West Korean state on China's border.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:That said, as far as I know the primary motivation for propping up North Korea was to avoid having a more powerful, unified and pro-West Korean state on China's border. No, it's because they know that anything going down in North Korea means suddenly getting a ton more North Korean refugees. South Korea is already effectively on their border in all but the "can orchestrate a ground invasion" sense - and frankly if Korea even tried that after reunification the Chinese could easily crush that long before they reach any sort of major cities. You also have to consider that a reunification of korea means probably a decade or more of the currently quite robust South Korean economy being drained by rebuilding the North, and even after that a long time to go before unified Korea grows beyond its pre-unification economy. If what China wants is weak Korean competition, a unification will buy them that for a rather long time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 06:44
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:No, it's because they know that anything going down in North Korea means suddenly getting a ton more North Korean refugees. Talking about the motivation during the 90s, before China Strong
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 06:46
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:Talking about the motivation during the 90s, before China Strong Again, during the 90s their concern was all about dealing with North Korean refugees. South Korea was also weaker then too. Concerns that were based around "omg American-allied country on our border" were more of a 70s - early 80s issue - but then again during that time period North Korea was still doing quite well and had implicit backing of the USSR.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 06:50
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Again, during the 90s their concern was all about dealing with North Korean refugees. South Korea was also weaker then too. They are both concerns. It's true that refugees are a huge consideration in this policy, but I guess its a matter of judgment which is the "primary" factor driving the policy, unless you're a member of the Politburo and actually know what their priorities are. http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41043.pdf Congressional Research Service posted:PRC leaders have conflicting political and strategic motivations governing their North Korea policy. On the side of the ledger supporting China’s continued close relations with Pyongyang are: shared socialist political ideologies; the human and capital investment China has made in North Korea; Beijing’s credibility as a patron and ally; increased economic ties (particularly between China’s northeast provinces and North Korea’s northern region); Beijing’s desire for a “buffer” against South Korea; and the potentially catastrophic consequences for China’s economy and social structure if something goes terribly wrong in North Korea, with which China shares an 850 mile border. Congressional Research Service posted:Another collapse of North Korea’s economy (such as occurred in the 1990s) would severely tax the economic resources of the Chinese central government and, depending on how it dealt with the flood of refugees across its border with the DPRK, could shine a world spotlight on how China treats the refugees and open Beijing to increased criticism from the world community. Armed conflict between North and South Korea likewise would be disruptive to PRC economic and social interests, in addition to risking conflict between the U.S. and PRC militaries on behalf of their allies. Beijing would face a different set of challenges should North Korean political upheaval mirror the demise of East Germany, in which North and South Korea would unite under the latter’s terms. The PRC could then have a nuclear armed and democratic U.S. ally, and possibly U.S. troops and military facilities, directly on its border without the benefit of an intervening buffer state. Anyway I'm not saying that you're wrong, so please don't do your patented insufferable fishmech shitpost response.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:02
|
|
|
Dusty Baker 2 posted:If you missed this earlier in the year, PBS released a special on North Korea with undercover footage and poo poo. It's pretty alright. A bit late to the party but these sorts of reports always come across as concern trolling. While I would never, ever, ever equate life in a regular industrialized country to life in North Korea, it's a bit rich that a country with as much poverty as America is going "b-b-but there are homeless children and people going to bed hungry!  " It feels more like the opportunity for reveling in spectacle (Adam Curtis' "oh dearism") and less about useful information. Still, props to the people risking their lives for freedom.To clarify: what does it say about us that we're putting out the same kind of things as the North Koreans themselves? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkRT3C1mGRM
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:13
|
|
|
bbc posted:On Friday North Korean officials visited Kumsusan Palace, a mausoleum for late leaders Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il, to mark the 69th anniversary of the Workers' Party.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 08:28
|
|
|
Whatever 7 is right to say that she's just reporting what her family says. It's exactly as China-centered and dumb a perspective as you'd expect from a not-very-well-informed mid level CCP nobody. No offense! It's just the same sort of opinion as "Israel exists because we let them," coming from some county secretary in the US. Not even worth examining and certainly not a reliable description of reality. Best just ignore it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 10:21
|
|
|
BBC Breaking News posted:South Korea says it has returned artillery fire after being shelled from North Korea Ahh there we go! Normal service has been resumed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 10:54
|
|
|
wow, maybe there was a coup.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 12:19
|
|
|
Trogdos! posted:bbc posted: On Friday North Korean officials visited Kumsusan Palace, a mausoleum for late leaders Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il, to mark the 69th anniversary of the Workers' Party. [/quote] I was going to post that. Most concrete evidence that the little fat man is dead. In fact that blub about labor camp admission was probably NK new leadership building case against Kim3. Arglebargle: I am a guy. You have done it a couple times.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 12:33
|
|
|
pengun101 posted:wow, maybe there was a coup. Maybe it's just to create surprise and Kim^3 will pop out of a giant cake.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 15:38
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:
I think the dude is probably just being a passive aggressive baby, but a coup fits after he killed his uncle. He is not smart enough to make that move, it is a huge blunder.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
William Bear posted:Now that you mention it, what is life like for a non-Kim elite in NK? The average high military officer or divisional chief, for example. I think I heard that they live like American lower middle class, i.e. they have a house, a car, some electronics and they won't starve. This is also an excellent, quite a candid documentary worth watching. The guy is I guess, upper middle class by North Korean standards. Still he seems to have had it rough during the famine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LY0Wlk1BtXA E: Maybe he hurt his leg really bad and had to leave the country to get it fixed? Like China maybe. Certainly plausible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
About a month ago, CSIS had a big conference on Korean-unification: https://csis.org/event/korean-unification-new-era If you are primarily interested in security issues, maybe just watch panels C and D. A and B are really bullish projections of economic development. Here's B.R. Myers from a few years ago, giving a lecture on his book The Cleanest Race. It's fascinating. http://www.booktv.org/Program/11315/The+Cleanest+Race+How+North+Koreans+See+Themselves+And+Why+It+Matters.aspx Dilkington fucked around with this message at 22:28 on Oct 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:00 |
|
|
Dilkington posted:About a month ago, CSIS had a big conference on Korean-unification: Echoing the sentiment abut his lecture and also the book. It's required reading for anybody interested in the Korean unification issues and the history of the Korean conflict.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 22:47
|
|
