Is North Korea really a problem?

[Yamato]

10 hours ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

150,000 or however many it is? 

In the event Trump shoots his bombs off again, they'll enter North Korea not as Regime Changers but as bulwarks to US aggression and a stabilizing force.   It's not that they're all medics but medical aid et al is representative of the mission.   If Kim then rolls a nuke into Seoul on a wheelbarrow and kills a million people, the resident neocons will cream their jeans after Trump patriotically retaliates with beautiful nukes and kills another million people.

[Einsteinium]

9 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Do you have a source for this 30% drop in population cause the only source for it that I can find is from globalresearch, a known anti-west website that post almost if not exclusively fake news.

What I have found are multiple sites that had population data on North Korea before and after the Korean war.  Different sites give different values of the North Korean population but it all seems to be around 9.6 to 9.8 million in 1950 and about 8.5 to 8.9 million in 1953.  

A study by South Korea estimated 1.5 million North Korean civilians died in the war.  Once you factor in about 200,000 to 300,000 North Korean soldiers were killed at most you are looking at most 1.8 million North Koreans killed.

Given the demographic data and the South Korean study, both of which are probably off to some extent, you have a lower bound of about 1.1 million killed an a upper bound of 1.8 million killed over the course of the war.  If you put those into percentages it would be between 11% and 19% of the North Korean population killed with the actual percentage being somewhere in between those two values.

30% may be high yes thank you for correcting me. Here is where I got my numbers from:

"The bombing was long, leisurely and merciless, even by the assessment of America’s own leaders. “Over a period of three years or so, we killed off — what — 20 percent of the population,” Air Force Gen. Curtis LeMay, head of the Strategic Air Command during the Korean War, told the Office of Air Force History in 1984. Dean Rusk, a supporter of the war and later secretary of state, said the United States bombed “everything that moved in North Korea, every brick standing on top of another.” After running low on urban targets, U.S. bombers destroyed hydroelectric and irrigation dams in the later stages of the war, flooding farmland and destroying crops."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-us-war-crime-north-korea-wont-forget/2015/03/20/fb525694-ce80-11e4-8c54-ffb5ba6f2f69_story.html?utm_term=.49da0d73119b

The problem with estimating the true number comes from that last sentence, the destruction of dams and the resulting destruction in food causing widespread famine and starvation that killed untold numbers. North Korea will not release the actual numbers of people who died from that, but it surely was quite high. So there is a high level of uncertainty as to how many were killed as a result of the longer term collateral damage we caused, but it most likely was quite high, and might have pushed it up to 30%, of course some of that can be contributed to the way the NK regime handled the problems as well. As with all things political and in war, it is complicated.

[Yamato]

The Russian minister lobbied Stalin to bless the attack and the war was on.   Stalin felt that South Korea's regime needed a change.  

The way it all turned out, Korea would have been better in Japan's hands.  Which is probably what Trump meant when he said Korea used to be part of China...got China mixed up with Japan.  I know it's hard to tell them apart they look exactly the same.  

[AnchorSteam]

2 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

Do you have a source for this 30% drop in population cause the only source for it that I can find is from globalresearch, a known anti-west website that post almost if not exclusively fake news.

What I have found are multiple sites that had population data on North Korea before and after the Korean war.  Different sites give different values of the North Korean population but it all seems to be around 9.6 to 9.8 million in 1950 and about 8.5 to 8.9 million in 1953.  

A study by South Korea estimated 1.5 million North Korean civilians died in the war.  Once you factor in about 200,000 to 300,000 North Korean soldiers were killed at most you are looking at most 1.8 million North Koreans killed.

Given the demographic data and the South Korean study, both of which are probably off to some extent, you have a lower bound of about 1.1 million killed an a upper bound of 1.8 million killed over the course of the war.  If you put those into percentages it would be between 11% and 19% of the North Korean population killed with the actual percentage being somewhere in between those two values.

They blow up stats to cover up the fact that North Koreans have been starving to death in vast numbers since 1953. Remember that the Communists inflated the death toll of the Allied bombing of Dresen in 1945 by a factor of ten times over. It wasn't 336,000, the Soviets just took the German estimate of 33,600 and added a zero.... and a lot of dummies in the west fell for it!

Fellow travelers, one must assume.

They now swallow the very same sort of BS coming out of the same sort of sources regarding the last fully Communist nation ( in both Political and Economic terms). It is disgusting, but no surprise to anyone who has seen it all before.

Now get ready for them to dust off the usual Peacenik routine, something they have been keeping a VERY tight lid on for the last 8 years. Like magic, Trump will be attacked (none of these people are aware of anyone else on planet earth) for doing the very thing saint Hussein Obama was supposed to do, and would have done if he was being consistent about anything at all. 

We will also be attacked ourselves if we mention the open-air slave markets in Libya that have arisen thanks to Obama enabling the Muslim Brotherhood to overthrow that Govt, and the ever-continuing failure of #save our girls to stop Boko Haram from stealing and selling young Nigerian girls.

[DarkHunter]

3 hours ago, Einsteinium said:

30% may be high yes thank you for correcting me. Here is where I got my numbers from:

"The bombing was long, leisurely and merciless, even by the assessment of America’s own leaders. “Over a period of three years or so, we killed off — what — 20 percent of the population,” Air Force Gen. Curtis LeMay, head of the Strategic Air Command during the Korean War, told the Office of Air Force History in 1984. Dean Rusk, a supporter of the war and later secretary of state, said the United States bombed “everything that moved in North Korea, every brick standing on top of another.” After running low on urban targets, U.S. bombers destroyed hydroelectric and irrigation dams in the later stages of the war, flooding farmland and destroying crops."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-us-war-crime-north-korea-wont-forget/2015/03/20/fb525694-ce80-11e4-8c54-ffb5ba6f2f69_story.html?utm_term=.49da0d73119b

The problem with estimating the true number comes from that last sentence, the destruction of dams and the resulting destruction in food causing widespread famine and starvation that killed untold numbers. North Korea will not release the actual numbers of people who died from that, but it surely was quite high. So there is a high level of uncertainty as to how many were killed as a result of the longer term collateral damage we caused, but it most likely was quite high, and might have pushed it up to 30%, of course some of that can be contributed to the way the NK regime handled the problems as well. As with all things political and in war, it is complicated.

It is highly unlikely that any famine that resorted from the Korean war would of killed enough North Koreans to push the percentage up to 30% killed.  

First off there is the problem that immediately after the Korean war, according to all demographic accounts, North Korea had a steadily growing population that only started to plateau in about the 90's.  If a famine resulted from the Korean war was bad enough to push the dead up to 30% of the population then there should of atleast been little to no population growth, if not a decline, instead of steady growth.  If a famine is bad enough to kill that many people population growth won't be able to cover it.

Second when looking at famines from this century even the worst ones on average haven't killed the 10% to 20% needed to put the death rate to 30%, most famines kill between 1% and 5% of the population.  The famines that have killed about 10% or more of a population happened under very specific conditions, such as the location being occupied/under siege by a foreign power and being purposefully denied food such as what happened a few times in WW2 by the Germans and Japanese or being done deliberately by the ruling government like what happened in Ukraine in 1932-1933 by the Soviet Union.  

North Korea was bombed extensively during the Korean war but there is no reason to believe that any famine that would of came as a result of the Korean war would of killed the amount necessary to reach the 30% of population killed.  To top it off despite the extensive bombing there has been no record of a famine immediately following the Korean war, largely cause the Soviet Union and China gave extensive aid to North Korea.

[Einsteinium]

8 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

It is highly unlikely that any famine that resorted from the Korean war would of killed enough North Koreans to push the percentage up to 30% killed.  

First off there is the problem that immediately after the Korean war, according to all demographic accounts, North Korea had a steadily growing population that only started to plateau in about the 90's.  If a famine resulted from the Korean war was bad enough to push the dead up to 30% of the population then there should of atleast been little to no population growth, if not a decline, instead of steady growth.  If a famine is bad enough to kill that many people population growth won't be able to cover it.

Second when looking at famines from this century even the worst ones on average haven't killed the 10% to 20% needed to put the death rate to 30%, most famines kill between 1% and 5% of the population.  The famines that have killed about 10% or more of a population happened under very specific conditions, such as the location being occupied/under siege by a foreign power and being purposefully denied food such as what happened a few times in WW2 by the Germans and Japanese or being done deliberately by the ruling government like what happened in Ukraine in 1932-1933 by the Soviet Union.  

North Korea was bombed extensively during the Korean war but there is no reason to believe that any famine that would of came as a result of the Korean war would of killed the amount necessary to reach the 30% of population killed.  To top it off despite the extensive bombing there has been no record of a famine immediately following the Korean war, largely cause the Soviet Union and China gave extensive aid to North Korea.

I stand corrected. Thank you for that, I learned something

[Bama13]

14 hours ago, Einsteinium said:

The US killed off 20-30% of the North Korean population during the Korean war. It is no wonder why they think they need nukes to defend themselves against us. We decimated them, utterly. Imagine having 30% of your population killed off. I honestly cannot blame them for developing nukes. Obviously they should not have them, considering how crazy and backwards their leadership is, but they do have a well founded fear of the US and our tendancy to force regime change and cause chaos and death in places far from our homeland has only served to strengthen their resolve to continue their nuclear weapons program.

The world needs to do something about it, but we cannot just keep using force without a solid political and humanitarian strategy on the back end like the failure in Iraq proves.

If you don't want to have your population killed perhaps you shouldn't invade your neighbor. You make it sound like the US just unilaterally bombed the crap out of them. In case you didn't know N Korea started that damn war.

And it was the UN, not just the US. 

[Einsteinium]

8 minutes ago, Bama13 said:

If you don't want to have your population killed perhaps you shouldn't invade your neighbor. You make it sound like the US just unilaterally bombed the crap out of them. In case you didn't know N Korea started that damn war.

And it was the UN, not just the US. 

Yes I know NK started the war. I also know that it was the UN but the vast majority (about 90%) of the troops sent in on the allied side were US troops.

China sent a lot of troops to fight on the NK side as well.

 

We DID bomb the crap out of them and for better or worse they are scared we will do it again and think the only way to prevent that from happening is to possess nuclear weapons. They should have never invaded the south, just as we should have never invaded Iraq (bad comparison I know, but we have our hands dirty too). It just never turns out well in the modern age to invade a sovereign nation and force regime change or take territory which is what the North Korean's tried to do.

[Merc14]

21 minutes ago, Bama13 said:

If you don't want to have your population killed perhaps you shouldn't invade your neighbor. You make it sound like the US just unilaterally bombed the crap out of them. In case you didn't know N Korea started that damn war.

And it was the UN, not just the US. 

Yep lot's of facts missing here and what was here was wrong.  The North attacked the South with the backing of China and Russia who didn't want a capitalist enclave on their southern borders.  the invasion was brutal and overwhelming and the South was on its knees until the invasion at Inchon and the subsequent North's full retreat.  That would've been the end of the war until China decided a free Korea was not acceptable and they entered the war.   Somehow America is still the bad guy!  Incredible when you look at the deplorable conditions the North had planned for all Koreans but America haters are myopic and don't want to se anything that doesn't fit their theme.

3 minutes ago, Einsteinium said:

Yes I know NK started the war. I also know that it was the UN but the vast majority (about 90%) of the troops sent in on the allied side were US troops.

China sent a lot of troops to fight on the NK side as well.

 

We DID bomb the crap out of them and for better or worse they are scared we will do it again and think the only way to prevent that from happening is to possess nuclear weapons. They should have never invaded the south, just as we should have never invaded Iraq (bad comparison I know, but we have our hands dirty too). It just never turns out well in the modern age to invade a sovereign nation and force regime change or take territory which is what the North Korean's tried to do.

Scared is good when you are dealing with a murderous regime.   If you want to see how NOT to treat with a murderous regime look no further than Bill Clinton who gave them billions of dollars and eased off the sanctions thereby winning his great victory of old Kim promising to not build a bomb.  A couple of years later the result of that kindness went off under a mountain in North Korea and the world had a new nuclear power. 

 

Edited April 24, 2017 by Merc14

[Einsteinium]

19 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Scared is good when you are dealing with a murderous regime.

I agree. Just look at how well appeasement worked with Hitler's Germany just before WW2 as another example.

I never said America was wrong to bomb NK in the Korean war. All I am saying is that actions have consequences, and the US often causes a lot of collateral damage and unintended consequences in our efforts to be the 'good guy'. We should own that and admit it at least to ourselves. We are not God, we make mistakes, being the world superpower is not easy and heavy weighs the crown.

Edited April 24, 2017 by Einsteinium

[imrunningthismonkeyfarm]

18 hours ago, susieice said:

Kim is now threatening to sink the USS Carl Vinson as it heads to meet up with 2 Japanese destroyers off the Philippines. 

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/04/23/north-korea-threatens-to-strike-us-aircraft-carrier-to-show-militarys-force.html

We should put a big sign on the side, "Somebody stop me!". And everyone blames us!

Shall we look at the words JAPANESE DESTROYERS. Which carry an arsenal of missiles and torpedoes.

Or perhaps USS CARL VINSON which is an aircraft carrier carrying what again??

Oh that's it.. Warplanes, more missiles, more torpedoes and bombs..

They're hardly there selling ice creams. They are there to destroy N Korea. I think Kim's reaction is valid.

If you wasn't there you wouldn't get the blame!

 

[imrunningthismonkeyfarm]

18 hours ago, susieice said:

They also detained an American citizen who is a professor. He had gone to teach for a few weeks at a university.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/23/asia/american-detained-in-north-korea/index.html

Well it's highly unlikely that he's a professor of common sense.

[+susieice]

7 minutes ago, SNR said:

Shall we look at the words JAPANESE DESTROYERS. Which carry an arsenal of missiles and torpedoes.

Or perhaps USS CARL VINSON which is an aircraft carrier carrying what again??

Oh that's it.. Warplanes, more missiles, more torpedoes and bombs..

They're hardly there selling ice creams. They are there to destroy N Korea. I think Kim's reaction is valid.

If you wasn't there you wouldn't get the blame!

 

Why are you picking on me? I agree with Merc. Anyone who thinks they're going to appease this guy is a fool.

[Merc14]

42 minutes ago, Einsteinium said:

I agree. Just look at how well appeasement worked with Hitler's Germany just before WW2 as another example.

I never said America was wrong to bomb NK in the Korean war. All I am saying is that actions have consequences, and the US often causes a lot of collateral damage and unintended consequences in our efforts to be the 'good guy'. We should own that and admit it at least to ourselves. We are not God, we make mistakes, being the world superpower is not easy and heavy weighs the crown.

I think we admit and own it when we spend billions developing munitions that hit with pinpoint accuracy and we are now deploying smaller bombs for more controlled explosions.  War is an absolutely horrendous business that damages both sides waging it but turning and walking away just lets the bad guys know that there will be no consequences for their actions. 

[+susieice]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/23/politics/pentagon-north-korea/

[imrunningthismonkeyfarm]

15 hours ago, susieice said:

A lot more than that will die if somebody doesn't get Kim under control, and not just N Korean. I fear he's having a meltdown of his own. The Korean war was 70 yrs ago. It's still a crazy and backwards place, like you said. 

Yh yh its a crazy place and America ain't PMSL.

 You actually believe all you post don't you?

I get the feeling that N Korea hasn't forgotten like all the other nations Americas bombed won't forget. I doubt we'll see it on our lifetime but trust me Americas heading for a S**tstorm.

[Merc14]

8 minutes ago, SNR said:

Yh yh its a crazy place and America ain't PMSL.

 You actually believe all you post don't you?

I get the feeling that N Korea hasn't forgotten like all the other nations Americas bombed won't forget. I doubt we'll see it on our lifetime but trust me Americas heading for a S**tstorm.

So maybe you should earn more history because you're embarrassing yourself.  Most of the countries we have bombed are now our staunch allies and economic partners.  

[Farmer77]

 

Just now, susieice said:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/23/politics/pentagon-north-korea/

China to US: Be 'cool-headed' on North Korea 

[+susieice]

I think China is realizing that they let Kim get too out of hand. Kim and his father did nothing for the last decade but build up armaments and train a generation for war. He's gotten mentally unstable and unable to be reined in again. China has admitted they can't control him. No one wants it to start, but the longer we wait, the worse it will become. Hopefully there's a way to stabilize the area again, but we need to be ready in case that doesn't work out and that seems unlikely right now.

[Einsteinium]

32 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

So maybe you should earn more history because you're embarrassing yourself.  Most of the countries we have bombed are now our staunch allies and economic partners.  

Yes you are right, but things can change fast. Stability historically does not last very long.

America IS headed for a shitstorm, in fact, all countries are all headed for a shitstorm eventually. If history is any clue it just happens periodically for a plethora of reasons. It is inevitable in the long term. With everything going on in the world it does feel like the world is headed for a big shitstorm sooner rather than later, but I hope not. On one hand it might be better to get it over sooner rather than later. I would rather it be me getting shot at and blown up in WW3 that happens now then my kid dealing with it when he is old enough to fight, assuming the US Midwest would not be directly hit or invaded lol

[Bama13]

54 minutes ago, SNR said:

Yh yh its a crazy place and America ain't PMSL.

 You actually believe all you post don't you?

I get the feeling that N Korea hasn't forgotten like all the other nations Americas bombed won't forget. I doubt we'll see it on our lifetime but trust me Americas heading for a S**tstorm.

N Korea started the damn war. I'm sure all the nations that sent troops to fight against N Korea's invasion of S Korea won't forget either. Jeesh y'all make it sound like the US just decided to bomb the crap out of N Korea for kicks. Only a complete idiot would blame the US/UN for bombing N Korea after they invaded their neighbor. 

 

[imrunningthismonkeyfarm]

44 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

So maybe you should earn more history because you're embarrassing yourself.  Most of the countries we have bombed are now our staunch allies and economic partners.  

Embarrassed. Huh.

So N Korea is now an ally? Syria is now an ally?

Also try telling all the bombing victims throughout the Middle East that. Just because a leader or leaders are bullied or bought doesn't mean the population is.

[imrunningthismonkeyfarm]

4 minutes ago, Bama13 said:

N Korea started the damn war. I'm sure all the nations that sent troops to fight against N Korea's invasion of S Korea won't forget either. Jeesh y'all make it sound like the US just decided to bomb the crap out of N Korea for kicks. Only a complete idiot would blame the US/UN for bombing N Korea after they invaded their neighbor. 

 

Chop and choose that's all I'm saying. The same as the UK government. There's been more than a few conflicts they haven't got involved in. And all of these wars are on others doorsteps not yours/ours. 

[Merc14]

34 minutes ago, Einsteinium said:

Yes you are right, but things can change fast. Stability historically does not last very long.

America IS headed for a shitstorm, in fact, all countries are all headed for a shitstorm eventually. If history is any clue it just happens periodically for a plethora of reasons. It is inevitable in the long term. With everything going on in the world it does feel like the world is headed for a big shitstorm sooner rather than later, but I hope not. On one hand it might be better to get it over sooner rather than later. I would rather it be me getting shot at and blown up in WW3 that happens now then my kid dealing with it when he is old enough to fight, assuming the US Midwest would not be directly hit or invaded lol

The cold war was one long shitstorm and we survived that.  WWII was the mother of all shitstorms, we came damn close to losing that one because we weren't ready, and we are still here.  The only thing that can defeat us, is us, and poor decisions at the top like allowing criminal countries access tio nuclear weapons just to kick the political can down the road.  The shitstorm you are complaining about started the day Clinton took his foot off Kim Sr's neck and an even bigger one started boiling the day Obama gave Iran $150B and a timeline to nuclear weapons.  

You know what,  I have spent my entire adult life listening to guys like you tell guys like me how our political philosophy will be the end of us all and I have been part of the end of the USSR, Hussein ejected from Kuwait and stopping the genocide in BH.  Every single time I was told that we would lose or suffer tremendous losses and therefore shouldn't challenge the thugs and every single time we won.  You'd think sooner or later you'd start questioning your philosophy, that is batting zero, but nope, same old arguments and same old trembling about the US flexing its muscle.  

Allowing these thugs to fester and metastasize is what is dangerous.   They can not be reasoned with and do not operate logically and they can only be stopped by starving them out or blowing them up.  Let's see what China can do.  Maybe they will get the guy assassinated but I guarantee that China would do nothing if they weren't threatened as well.

BTW, saw the admission of error up there and won't use that one again.  Been there and done that, none of us are perfect.    

19 minutes ago, SNR said:

Embarrassed. Huh.

So N Korea is now an ally? Syria is now an ally?

Also try telling all the bombing victims throughout the Middle East that. Just because a leader or leaders are bullied or bought doesn't mean the population is.

Yes, you should be embarrassed because it was a very stupid post to make.  Factually incorrect in a BIG way.  Even this post is ignorant beyond comprehension and the fact you don't know why embarrasses you further but hey bud, you want to keep making yourself look stupid go right ahead,  I enjoy pointing it out and always stand back when an enemy is defeating himself. 

(Want to know why it is a very dumb post?  Here is a hint, legally, the UN is still at war with N. Korea  and we never bombed Syria until now)

Edited April 24, 2017 by Merc14

[Bama13]

2 minutes ago, SNR said:

Chop and choose that's all I'm saying. The same as the UK government. There's been more than a few conflicts they haven't got involved in. And all of these wars are on others doorsteps not yours/ours. 

Are you saying that the US should not have been involved in the Korean War? That the US should only become involved in wars on their doorstep?