Slashdot Mirror

North Korea's ire against the U.S. isn't based on paranoia. It's based on propaganda. Any repressive system generates extreme discontent within its population, which eventually leads to uprising and revolution. Unless you can present the people with an external bogeyman that they can fear and hate instead of their oppressive overload. North Korea has chosen the U.S. to be that bogeyman. They teach their grade schoolers to want to attack Americans for crying out loud. Please, educate yourself on what actually goes on in North Korea before you believe their claims of victimhood.

The ironic thing to me is that this describes the United States as well. Just reverse the names, and the paragraph still works. We don't demonize North Korea in our text books, but the rest is pretty accurate.

We've known for decades that North Korea was a cancer in the socio-political fabric of the world. If it had been excised early on, we wouldn't be having this problem today. But instead we did nothing, taking the pacifist approach and hoping the problem would go away by itself. Well, it hasn't, and now it has nukes.

You think McArthur should have been allowed to go all the way to the Chinese border? You think the US would have prevailed in a war with China? I think you need to read up on the history if you think the US has taken a pacifist approach to North Korea. We killed 600,000 civilians there. "Hoping the problem would go away by itself" does not at all describe the US actions since. We have been active on the peninsula since the armistice, and would probably be in a better position if we had honored our own commitments after the 1994 framework was established.

Fear of an American preemptive strike is exactly what motivated NK to develop their nukes in the first place.

Maybe someday America will learn that you don't convince your adversary to stop being paranoid by threatening to attack them.

You grossly misunderstand North Korea. The U.S. has had the capability to launch a preemptive strike against North Korea unchallenged for over 65 years and hasn't done so. There isn't much else it can/could have done to assuage North Korea's fears and convince it that it wasn't going to attack (at least not without opening up South Korea to another North Korean attack - North Korea's two top goals are to drive the U.S. out of the peninsula, and to reunify it, by violent means if necessary).

Even the U.S. troops stationed in South Korea (about 37,000) aren't sufficient in number to represent any meaningful offensive fighting force if the U.S. did decide to launch a preemptive strike(North Korea has just shy of 1 million active military personnel). The U.S. troops there know it too. They call themselves "speed bumps." Their sole purpose is, in the event of a North Korean invasion, to be overrun and killed, so that the U.S. has an excuse to immediately get involved in a second Korean War without having to go through the UN like the first time (which only succeeded because the USSR was boycotting the UN that week)..

North Korea's ire against the U.S. isn't based on paranoia. It's based on propaganda. Any repressive system generates extreme discontent within its population, which eventually leads to uprising and revolution. Unless you can present the people with an external bogeyman that they can fear and hate instead of their oppressive overload. North Korea has chosen the U.S. to be that bogeyman. They teach their grade schoolers to want to attack Americans for crying out loud. Please, educate yourself on what actually goes on in North Korea before you believe their claims of victimhood.

In a way, North Korea is a test for what the world's future will be like. You attribute the lack of a violent confrontation with North Korea for 65 years to the effectiveness of a pacifist approach to them. My hunch is that it's more because North Korea simply didn't have the capability to strike outside of its borders effectively. The nukes aren't going to end with North Korea. On the contrary, this is just the beginning. First it'll be rogue nation-states getting nukes. Then rogue organizations. Then rogue individuals. You're not going to be able to appease them all by being pacifist. At some point, one of them is going to be sufficiently offended or self-deluded to actually use those nukes.

The world needs to come up with some effective strategy for dealing with the proliferation of nukes. I honestly don't know what the best approach is (if it were simple, we would've already done it). I'm extremely troubled by Trump's aggressive attitude towards North Korea, but I can kinda see his point. We've known for decades that North Korea was a cancer in the socio-political fabric of the world. If it had been excised early on, we wouldn't be having this problem today. But instead we did nothing, taking the pacifist approach and hoping the problem would go away by itself. Well, it hasn't, and now it has nukes. And like I said, this isn't just about North Korea. This is just the beginning. Next it'll be rogue organizations with nukes, then rogue individuals with nukes. I really hope we can establish some effective way to deal with them, or we're doomed. We're going to look back at the time when terrorists brought down airliners with a bomb as the good old days.

if you put a tax on them that is used exclusively to remove the CO2 byproduct from the air. Sure, it would be cheaper just to use electricity but if you really gotta have it, you can pay for it. Now we just need to build a hundred thousand of these machines. This is in line with "there is no free lunch" that insensitive clods love to tout on other issues.

Phasing fossil fuels out is not an impossible task but we need to slow and then halt the tragedy-of-the-commons that is happening every day that we do nothing.

Floating, falling
Sweet intoxication
Touch me, trust me
Savor each sensation
Let the dream begin
Let your darker side give in
To the power of the music that I write
The power of the music of the night

http://all-that-is-interesting...

That is a map of the worlds population density.
Before we start 3/4 of the world is ocean
and roughly 70% of the rest is barely populated.

So when you say most of the world is overrun, you must be projecting where you live on to everywhere you have never been.

Point of proof:
http://all-that-is-interesting...

So it's reinventing quantum physics: it's fuzzy until you look at it more carefully. P.S. don't look at cats.

He's not kidding. I looked at my cat through VR glasses and saw this.

Umm.

Coast to coast in america you are looking at a little over 2000 miles. You expect full fiber coverage over a landmass that even Mc Donalds can't spread their brand over. Note the big bubbles - that's one store serving a gigantic area

http://all-that-is-interesting...

In the midwest - Illinois, there are still areas that can't get dsl - let alone cable. They are restricted to speeds of 56k or less - some resort to satellite with the FUP hobble.

Fiber is going to take many years to roll out in populous states, let alone the states like Nevada or Idaho. We're a bit larger and less populated than countries in europe per capita.

So, Google is wrongly going after floating balloons since it's going to be incredibly expensive to fiber all of the united states. Unfortunately, google is going to continue to cause harm since they sold out.

If houses are code, I think I found Perl.

Get the children read Calvin and Hobbes. Then, trying breaking the reality gently to them. Example : http://all-that-is-interesting.com/post/499738698/calvin-and-hobbes-on-war/