• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Is North Korea a bogeyman or a legitimate threat?

Status
Not open for further replies.

genjiZERO

Member
So this image was in the Washington Post. To me, it looks like Kim Jung-un is sitting in front of painfully antiquated technology. Now I know the technology to send and guide rather destructive missiles does not need to be very sophisticated, but the fact that Best Korea is using technology most likely to be at least several generations behind makes me wonder how much of a threat they really are.

So my questions are: what do you think about this picture (and the other in the link)? Do you think North Korea is really a threat? Perhaps they are just a bogeyman the US/S.Korean/Japanese governments use to rev up their war machines? Perhaps it's less nefarious and said governments use the threat of North Korea to vie for position with China? Perhaps they really don't know what North Korea's capabilities really are?

edit: By "threat" I don't just mean the US, I mean any potential target - US, S. Korea, Japan or even China.

Also, you all know "bogeyman" is a more correct spelling than "boogeyman" right?

FNyqehr.jpg
 
They are a threat for starting a potentially big war. Harming the US? Not so much most likely, but they could hurt South Korea and if they start a war it can grow into something big.
 
I remember taking the ball out of those mouses and rolling it down the corridors for fun as a kid.

Sure Kim Jong Number Un takes the ball out of those mouses and eats it to ensure he retainssupreme control of the computer at all times.
 
North Korea is a real country with real weapons that could really do real damage to real people in South East Asia. If left long enough, it could do real damage to CONUS, too, as it miniaturizes its warheads and continues to improve its rockets. Their strategy of constant brinksmanship is distressing, and their treatment of the citizenry is completely unacceptable. North Korea is sort of the gold standard for justifiable armed intervention, but things are complicated now because of the nuclear issue. Even if they weren't there, the price that the South Koreans might have to pay, both in terms of lives lost and money spent could be very heavy.
 
My girlfriend just finished reading Nothing to Envy, a non-fiction book about a few North Koreans who eventually found their way out (who did and didn't want to leave initially). It's pretty much a modern-day holocaust in terms of the horror of the situation and we're kind of just sitting on our hands here. Even if they're not a threat to North America or Europe, shouldn't we have some sort of obligation here? Definitely a book to check out if you're interested in this.
Bogeyman?

I didn't know North Korea was so bad at golf.
British spelling.
 
If you're South Korea they're the insane kid who you could beat in a fight, but, might just pull out a gun and shoot you at any time.
 
They are a boogeyman that will be a threat if left alone for long enough.
My personal opinion is that anyone who flexes on us should get flexed back on.

If I was president I'd be talking shit back so bad. "Come on mothafucka swing then! You talkin all that shit nigga step up and pop off, what's crackin!?"

I'd be a pretty immature president.
 
Saying they are a boobeyman is giving them too much credit. They so far haven't gone through with ANY of their threats, and their tech is so bad that I doubt any of their missiles will reach the coast of California (though my paranoid friend thinks they have missiles that can reach Washington DC for some reason). They are underpowered and underdeveloped. They are a frightened mouse trying to stand up to the cat (rest of the world) with empty words.
 
I think they are a legit threat to world peace that needs to be dealt with by the world as a whole. We can't afford to let rogue nations exist in 2013
 
If anyone wants to justify to themselves putting an end to batcrazy dictators this is a good quote from Karl Popper:

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. – In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper
 
They are a threat, but only in the sense that they could cause serious casualties in South Korea in the first hours of a conflict.

That's the really terrible thing about this whole situation - the US would wipe them out in a matter of days, but not without Seoul being the target of heavy artillery fire.
 
Saying they are a boobeyman is giving them too much credit. They so far haven't gone through with ANY of their threats, and their tech is so bad that I doubt any of their missiles will reach the coast of California (though my paranoid friend thinks they have missiles that can reach Washington DC for some reason). They are underpowered and underdeveloped. They are a frightened mouse trying to stand up to the cat (rest of the world) with empty words.

By definition a bogeyman is "an imaginary evil spirit, referred to typically to frighten children". Metaphorically it's used by a government to describe a hostile group or nation that is far weaker than they actually are described so said government can enact their own pro-war policies. So I think it's fair to describe them that way. But they may not be, so that's really my question.

ElectricBlue187 said:
I think they are a legit threat to world peace that needs to be dealt with by the world as a whole. We can't afford to let rogue nations exist in 2013

That's an interesting point, so regardless of if they are actually a threat, the fact that they are out of conformity with "normal" international diplomacy means that they should be "dealt" with (knowing "dealt" can mean a bunch of different things)?
 
here's the thing. people in power tends to like to stay in power.

regardless of how crazy he is, the dude in NK would like to remain in power, but life is good for him. ppl worship him.

he's not gonna risk losing that power by attacking US or US interest. he knows what happened to Sadam Hussein.
 
Legit threat as far as a missile strike goes.

They are not going to invade any countries or pose a direct threat to the US, but they can definitely strike our allies in the area including South Korea, Japan, Taiwan -- which are all countries with which we have strong trade and economic relations with so it would be a big impact on our economy if that region were to be destabilized.

Behind the scenes, the force that keeps it all in check, really, is China because South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan also happen to be major economic and trade partners of China.

However, as long as we have faith that China can keep the Kim regime in check, a North Korean strike is a legit threat, but one that doesn't have a high probability of occurring.
 
People in this thread seem to be ignoring (or unaware of?) the fact that millions of people are being killed or starved by the North Korea government.

Or are we only concerned with what's a threat to us?
 
That's an interesting point, so regardless of if they are actually a threat, the fact that they are out of conformity with "normal" international diplomacy means that they should be "dealt" with (knowing "dealt" can mean a bunch of different things)?

I don't think there's a question of whether or not they are a threat. Their government is openly hostile to South Korea, Japan and the United States and has attacked south koreans on numerous occasions. The fact that they now have nuclear capability and perhaps nuclear missile capability increases the seriousness of their threats to a degree that I feel is unconscionable to regional interests. Dealing with the regime in NK doesn't necessarily mean ground invasion but something needs to be done with all the regional players involved.
 
People in this thread seem to be ignoring (or unaware of?) the fact that millions of people are being killed or starved by the North Korea government.

Or are we only concerned with what's a threat to us?

No, obviously that is extremely important, and perhaps the most important thing, but that's a different conversation (I'd be willing to have). I framed the question in the form of a "threat" because of the picture.
 
People in this thread seem to be ignoring (or unaware of?) the fact that millions of people are being killed or starved by the North Korea government.

Or are we only concerned with what's a threat to us?

we are only concerned with what's a threat to us. if you care so much about them, there's a bunch more of that in Africa and Southeast asia
 
I bet they're playing Missile Command.

Anyway, they can shell the shit out of South Korea. I'm way more concerned with that, than I am with them trying to hit US bases in Japan or the Pacific.

They have the mature weapons ready to hit SK for starters.
 
North Korea is a real country with real weapons that could really do real damage to real people in South East Asia. If left long enough, it could do real damage to CONUS, too, as it miniaturizes its warheads and continues to improve its rockets. Their strategy of constant brinksmanship is distressing, and their treatment of the citizenry is completely unacceptable. North Korea is sort of the gold standard for justifiable armed intervention, but things are complicated now because of the nuclear issue. Even if they weren't there, the price that the South Koreans might have to pay, both in terms of lives lost and money spent could be very heavy.

I end up saying this in most North Korea threads but as a humanitarian issue what "reportedly" goes on in North Korea in regards to labour camps, will one day be regarded as one of the great human tragedies. Concentration camps are the closest example given reports from people who have managed to escape. Those who are "fortunate" to not be sent there are impoverished, especially in more rural areas. Given you can be sent to these camps for being the family, or knowing the person who commited a crime and desperation forces honest people to steal and survive there is no security.

It is such a shitty shitty situation with no end in sight.
 
North Korea is linked to China, so a threat to NK is a threat to China itself


I end up saying this in most North Korea threads but as a humanitarian issue what "reportedly" goes on in North Korea in regards to labour camps, will one day be regarded as one of the great human tragedies. Concentration camps are the closest example given reports from people who have managed to escape. Those who are "fortunate" to not be sent there are impoverished, especially in more rural areas. Given you can be sent to these camps for being the family, or knowing the person who commited a crime and desperation forces honest people to steal and survive there is no security.

It is such a shitty shitty situation with no end in sight.

yep i agree with you, even if they're not a threat, we're just standing still on the tragedies of this nation.

Even if this midgets with oversized military uniforms and big hats are funny as hell to watch.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom