View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
gregoriomills
Joined: 02 Mar 2009 Location: Busan, Korea
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 3:40 pm Post subject: Jumping ship because of NK?? |
|
|
I never even thought of it until my co-teacher suggested it today when I brought up the NK stuff on our awkward ride to school this morning. I kinda joked about how worried my family was, and she thought about it for couple minutes and then said, "Oh, you should leave, and come back after a week or two, when things calm down. Your family must be so worried!" She's clearly more worried about my family worrying about me than she is for my actual safety, but nonetheless....
Is anyone actually considering going home before all this stuff weathers over? I expect the overwhelming response to this to be "no", but to say the least it would be a very easy way to break a contract without losing face. "I was worried there was going to be a nuclear war" is a little easier to swallow for a future emplyer than "I hated my job and ran on my contract in the middle of the night." Hell, if I was in a miserable situation, I would even use it, especially after 6 months. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Adjumas Cheekbones
Joined: 26 May 2009 Location: director's pocket
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's too late. The bombs have already been dropped. One can be found in my schools toilet, the toilet normally resembles a scene from 'hostel' but yesterday looked like ground zero following a healthy log-size deposit in the pan from one of our little angels. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Adventurer

Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Brother Gregorio, you should not worry about a nuclear threat.
North Korea would lose everything in such a fight. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
oskinny1

Joined: 10 Nov 2006 Location: Right behind you!
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 6:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Adventurer wrote: |
Brother Gregorio, you should not worry about a nuclear threat.
North Korea would lose everything in such a fight. |
And I don't think KJI cares if he loses everything.
I remember watching a documentary about Robert McNamara and he was talking with Castro long after the Cuban Missile Crisis was over. Castro said he wanted and tried to fire the missiles knowing full well that Cuba would have been wiped off the map.
Not everyone thinks about self preservation. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
RufusW
Joined: 14 Jun 2008 Location: Busan
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
oskinny1 wrote: |
I remember watching a documentary about Robert McNamara and he was talking with Castro long after the Cuban Missile Crisis was over. Castro said he wanted and tried to fire the missiles knowing full well that Cuba would have been wiped off the map. |
'Fog of War'? They were Russian nukes.
If NK ever started gearing up for a nuke attack the US and everyone else would know about it via spy satellites. The silos would get destroyed before anything was even launched. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
oskinny1

Joined: 10 Nov 2006 Location: Right behind you!
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RufusW wrote: |
'Fog of War'? They were Russian nukes.
|
And N. Korea's missiles are Russian made as well. My point still stands. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Yu_Bum_suk

Joined: 25 Dec 2004
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 7:47 pm Post subject: Re: Jumping ship because of NK?? |
|
|
gregoriomills wrote: |
I never even thought of it until my co-teacher suggested it today when I brought up the NK stuff on our awkward ride to school this morning. I kinda joked about how worried my family was, and she thought about it for couple minutes and then said, "Oh, you should leave, and come back after a week or two, when things calm down. Your family must be so worried!" She's clearly more worried about my family worrying about me than she is for my actual safety, but nonetheless....
Is anyone actually considering going home before all this stuff weathers over? I expect the overwhelming response to this to be "no", but to say the least it would be a very easy way to break a contract without losing face. "I was worried there was going to be a nuclear war" is a little easier to swallow for a future emplyer than "I hated my job and ran on my contract in the middle of the night." Hell, if I was in a miserable situation, I would even use it, especially after 6 months. |
It's not a big enough risk to warrrent the risk of getting quarantined for swine flu upon arriving back. But who knows, with a sypathetic principal it could be your ticket to an extra week's holiday in the middle of the term. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
gangwonbound
Joined: 27 Apr 2009
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RufusW wrote: |
oskinny1 wrote: |
I remember watching a documentary about Robert McNamara and he was talking with Castro long after the Cuban Missile Crisis was over. Castro said he wanted and tried to fire the missiles knowing full well that Cuba would have been wiped off the map. |
'Fog of War'? They were Russian nukes.
If NK ever started gearing up for a nuke attack the US and everyone else would know about it via spy satellites. The silos would get destroyed before anything was even launched. |
NK dont have the capability to launch nukes yet |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
billietea
Joined: 03 May 2009 Location: South Korea
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This has come from a family discussion on the matter of NK. It was helpful for me and I hope helpful for you. I wouldn't presume to tell you what to do but here are my observations and thoughts for you to consider:
1. Uninformed people always panic in a crisis whether it's real or not and
they always imagine the worst.
2. All governments lie and you cannot rely on what they tell the public.
3. When people panic for whatever reason, governments always seek to
convince the people that they ( their government ) is doing "something"
to protect them whether it's reasonable or effective - doesn't matter - as long as they put on a good show to make the people think they are doing "something."
4.When the people perceive a crisis or threat, whether it is real or not, they lose their minds and the Premier or President becomes the "protective father" and they look to him or her to "protect " them from all danger by doing or "appearing"to be doing "something." It's called the "Daddy" or "Father" syndrome.
5. So much of this sort of thing is reminiscent of the story about Chicken Little who felt a nut fall from a tree and hit her head. She perceived a disaster ahead and went around telling everyone "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" ( or perhaps a more modern version would be "Jesus is coming. Jesus is coming. Repent before it's too late" !!! ).
6. The other side of this rediculous coin is what Rudyard Kipling wrote in his poem "If" - it goes "
If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs .............. "
And that's what you have to do when all about you appear to be losing their heads.
Now let's look at some other factors:
1. The "Dear Leader" in North Korea had a stroke not too long ago and this nuclear experimentation may in part be put on just to show he is tough and in charge in spite of a stroke.
2. The Korean premier who was trying to negotiate reasonably with North Korea just committed suicie, and that has unnerved the people.
3. The current premier in South Korea is a "hard liner" - just the opposite of the premier who killed himself. That probably has the North Koreans stirred up.
4. North Korea does not have any deployable nuclear weapons nor the capacity to deliver them. Their recent rocket launches are primarily for show at this point. They haven't got the capacity yet to attach a nuclear warhead and deliver it.
5. Unlike 1951 when North Korea invaded South Korea, they now would not have the backing of China as they did then. If you remember, the Chinese sent thousands of their troops into South Korea to help the North. This country is now too closely allied economically and diplomatically with China and they are not going to destroy that relationship.
6. Furthermore, the Chinese most assuredly regard any attempt by North Korea to attack the South as dangerous and a threat to them as well. They would do their best to discourage any such thing. There is no Mao Tse Tung to back them up this time.
7. The military in North Korea knows that if they ever attacked the South, especially if they ever tried to do it nuclear, they would be toast. The USA and other nations would blast them out of existence. This would be an invitation to national suicide for them.
8. The North Koreans, having watched what's been happening on the world stage,know very well that if they have nuclear weapons, we and other nations would never invade them. This is, believe it or not, a protection for them from nations like the U.S. who have this inflated idea that they should overthrow legitimate governments and impose their kind of "democracy." They know full well that if Sadam Hussein had actually had nuclear weapons, this country would never have invaded Iraq because to do so would have meant Sadam would have fought back nuclear.
9. The United States has not followed through on their agrements with North Korea. Back when Clinton was President we talked to them and we had an agreement with them that we would send them some reactors ( I forget the exact term and type ) in response to their promise not to pursue nuclear activity. Then Bush came into office and this agreement was never followed through by his administration so the North Koreans are thinking the Americans are liars and can't be trusted to keep their word.
10. North Korea wants recognition and attention as a real entity from the rest of the world and that's what they're getting with these nuclear underground tests.
11. The Obama administration will undoubtedlly approach this problem in a much more sensible waiy than the Bushies. As Winston Churchill once said: "It is better to jaw-jaw than to war-war."
So there you are - that's enough food for your thoughts. I predict that there will be a great deal of fluster and bluster, sanctions, and lots of talk-talk over all this and no renewal of any war.
Having said all this, I cannot be responsible for what someone who is crazy might do - and the "Dear Leader" is a crazy ego maniac with a Napoleanic syndrome. He is short - and to make himself appear taller, he wears elevator shoes and a hair style that makes his hair stick up instead of lay down. But remember, his military is not going to cooperate with any orders from him that is going to get North Korea and them obliterated from existence. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Komichi

Joined: 19 Jul 2006 Location: Piano Street, Seoul
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 8:30 pm Post subject: Hm |
|
|
I hope there are enough dissenters within the regime to successfully oppose Kim Jong-Il should he actually decide to go for broke. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
b-class rambler
Joined: 25 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
billietea wrote: |
9. The United States has not followed through on their agrements with North Korea. Back when Clinton was President we talked to them and we had an agreement with them that we would send them some reactors ( I forget the exact term and type ) in response to their promise not to pursue nuclear activity. Then Bush came into office and this agreement was never followed through by his administration so the North Koreans are thinking the Americans are liars and can't be trusted to keep their word.
|
It was a Light Water Reactor that was promised, with heavy fuel oil delivered in the meantime until the reactor was on line to compensate the North Koreans for the loss of electricity producing capacity casused by shutting down Yongbyeon. This LWR kind of reactor was supposed to, on the one hand, help them deal with their chronic electricity supply problems and, on the other hand, enable them to do that without using a reactor like Yongbyeon which would leave a by-product of weapons grade radioactive material.
What you said above is largely true but it's not all the Bush administration's fault that that deal got wrecked from the American side. The Clinton administration that made that agreement really dragged their feet on implementing it. The agreement was that the LWR reactor would be operative by 2002. When Bush came in it was already way behind schedule. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bassexpander
Joined: 13 Sep 2007 Location: Someplace you'd rather be.
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
billietea wrote: |
9. The United States has not followed through on their agrements with North Korea. Back when Clinton was President we talked to them and we had an agreement with them that we would send them some reactors ( I forget the exact term and type ) in response to their promise not to pursue nuclear activity. Then Bush came into office and this agreement was never followed through by his administration so the North Koreans are thinking the Americans are liars and can't be trusted to keep their word. |
Nice try passing the buck on Bushie. You are completely wrong on that. Bill Clinton's group royally F-ed it up beforehand, and you can thank lame-duck Jimmy Carter for brokering a peace deal that kept Clinton from bombing NK 10 years ago. Now they have nukes.
NK admitted, in October 2002, that it was going for WMDs through uranium enrichment after US uncovered evidence of the fact. This was in violation of the Agreed Framework. NK believes in intimidation to get concessions. Apparently NK was trying to threaten with uranium enrichment to get further concessions.
There has always been suspicion that NK had enough plutonium for perhaps 1 or 2 bombs even before Clinton took office. The 5mw reactor was shut down for 70 to 100 days in '89, it is believed fuel rods were removed at this time (NK stated that it removed only 80 defective fuel rods at the time). NK initiated the failure of the AF and badly misplayed its hand.
Thanks for the peace, Mr. Carter! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
b-class rambler
Joined: 25 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
bassexpander wrote: |
NK admitted, in October 2002, that it was going for WMDs through uranium enrichment after US uncovered evidence of the fact. |
That's what Bush's envoy, James Kelly, claimed. But the North Koreans were always adamant that they had made no such admission at all and that he had misinterpreted what was said. They insisted they had said that they retain the sovereign right to a uranium enrichment program, not that they actually had one. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
kiknkorea

Joined: 16 May 2008
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 9:19 pm Post subject: Re: Hm |
|
|
Komichi wrote: |
I hope there are enough dissenters within the regime to successfully oppose Kim Jong-Il should he actually decide to go for broke. |
One would hope so, but I'm not so sure. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
RufusW
Joined: 14 Jun 2008 Location: Busan
|
Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
oskinny1 wrote: |
I remember watching a documentary about Robert McNamara and he was talking with Castro long after the Cuban Missile Crisis was over. Castro said he wanted and tried to fire the missiles knowing full well that Cuba would have been wiped off the map. |
Quote: |
...during that conference, I asked President Castro three questions:
1. Were you aware the nuclear war- heads were in Cuba?
2. If so, would you have recommended their use?
3. If the nuclear weapons had been used, what would have been the outcome for Cuba?
He replied:
Now, we started from the assumption that if there was an invasion of Cuba, nuclear war would erupt. We were certain of that ... we would be forced to pay the price, that we would disappear.... Would I have been ready to use nuclear weapons? Yes, I would have agreed to the use of nuclear weapons.� |
http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2002_11/cubanmissile
So he would have used them if attacked, much like NK would. But using nukes as a first strike is essentially suicide. If there's a chain of command with at least a few rational people in it you can presume they're not going to send them off and start their assured destruction.
Funny film about unintended nuclear war - Dr.Strangelove (of course!)
A rather disturbing drama - Fail Safe (2000). |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|