Is North Korea's Leader losing it?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Missile test as a new US admin kicks in (note, the new administration's tone toward NK has been far more confrontational). Is this petulance or pressure?

Assassination of half-brother. Sounds just a bit like the old middle-eastern 'kill all siblings who are of course rivals' behavior a la the Parthian empire...

Execution of government officials -- by anti-aircraft cannon -- for "enraging" the leader. Stalin and Mao just had threats eliminated, is this kind of picky overkill more petulance than policy?

Recall that R.G.H. Siu wrote that "cruelty is the tantrum of frustrated power." [emphasis added]


Though I must note that Un's behavior does at least make Donald Trump appear "presidential" by comparison -- something the Donald has not been doing much on his own....

[Montmorency]

Recall that R.G.H. Siu wrote that "cruelty is the tantrum of frustrated power." [emphasis added]

Or since I brought up Arendt in the other thread:

Violence appears where power is in jeopardy, but left to its own course it ends in power's disappearance.

Supreme Leader's relative propensity to execute the disfavored has been a subject of discussion for a few years.

A simple explanation is that there are genuine power struggles in the midst of a relatively-young rule and the impending fruition of the nuclear armament card against the backdrop of increasing global uncertainty/instability. Or KJU is just a crazy/evil fool, whatever.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I just kept thinking...anti-aircraft gun?!!??

executing opposition is an old historical tactic, granted, but both Stalin and the PRC were pretty simple about it. one round behind the ear (and bill the family for the round if we're talking China). The overkill thing smacks of a lack of stability on some level.

[Husar]

Well, the missile test is warranted given US aggression and the need to take care of their national interests. Remember that he is responsible only for his own citizens, he can do whatever he wants with those of the US as long as it is in NK's national interests.

The execution of the half brother is most likely foreign aggression, the assumption that it was an inside job by his own brother is just silly and fake news unless there is 100% proof.

The execution is rather merciful, especially compared to the US for example, where people who get executed are often in terrible pain for a comparatively long time. A very humane move on the part of KJU. Even more so when we consider that executions in general and executions by gunpowder weapons are favoured by some in the US to save taxpayer money whereas noone in NK complains about the cost of the use of large caliber rounds of a more sophisticated design such as AA rounds or mortar rounds.

That people spread all this anti-korean hate-propaganda about the Great Leader who wants to Make Korea Great Again is mind-boggling, you can't always assume the worst. That's called a bias.

[Greyblades]

Someone on TWC was commenting on the merthod of assassination, that using such a deadly chemical in such a haphazard manner was uncharacteristically sloppy for the koreans and that it was a minor miracle noone else died with him.

[Beskar]

Someone on TWC was commenting on the merthod of assassination, that using such a deadly chemical in such a haphazard manner was uncharacteristically sloppy for the koreans and that it was a minor miracle noone else died with him.

It is commented that it required the mixing to actually occur on his face as well, using non-fatal binary agents (VX2), as it would have killed the attacks too in the process of them delivering it.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Well, the missile test is warranted given US aggression and the need to take care of their national interests. Remember that he is responsible only for his own citizens, he can do whatever he wants with those of the US as long as it is in NK's national interests.

The execution of the half brother is most likely foreign aggression, the assumption that it was an inside job by his own brother is just silly and fake news unless there is 100% proof.

The execution is rather merciful, especially compared to the US for example, where people who get executed are often in terrible pain for a comparatively long time. A very humane move on the part of KJU. Even more so when we consider that executions in general and executions by gunpowder weapons are favoured by some in the US to save taxpayer money whereas noone in NK complains about the cost of the use of large caliber rounds of a more sophisticated design such as AA rounds or mortar rounds.

That people spread all this anti-korean hate-propaganda about the Great Leader who wants to Make Korea Great Again is mind-boggling, you can't always assume the worst. That's called a bias.

Merciful in its brevity mayhap. And I always thought the firing squad was the briefest and most appropriate execution choice for the USA (though I believe we should not execute our citizens for crimes. Removing the threat to the population is a must, but killing is not needed to accomplish that). The only state to use that method was Utah.

[Tuuvi]

Merciful in its brevity mayhap. And I always thought the firing squad was the briefest and most appropriate execution choice for the USA (though I believe we should not execute our citizens for crimes. Removing the threat to the population is a must, but killing is not needed to accomplish that). The only state to use that method was Utah.

Going off on a tangent but I've been thinking about this lately and I agree. I'm against the death penalty as well but if we're going to have it I'd prefer firing squad over lethal injection, there's just something about medicalizing the act of execution that is more disturbing to me than execution itself.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Or since I brought up Arendt in the other thread:



Supreme Leader's relative propensity to execute the disfavored has been a subject of discussion for a few years.

A simple explanation is that there are genuine power struggles in the midst of a relatively-young rule and the impending fruition of the nuclear armament card against the backdrop of increasing global uncertainty/instability. Or KJU is just a crazy/evil fool, whatever.

Although us civilians will not know the details, it is possible that South Korea's multi-layered missile defense system is so far ahead of North Korea's ballistics program that top officials are re-thinking the strategy to pursue nuclear weapons.

The whole idea of nukes is the ability to wipe out your enemy. If you have them but can't even effectively use them it just makes you a target. When it comes down to it, China would rather eat up the country and the millions of poor NK's rather than have SK/US forces on their border.

[Montmorency]

Well, the threat itself is paramount. Even if ROK has the most effective anti-nuclear shield in the world (to China's chagrin?), it doesn't reduce incentives for North Korea's regime to progress in its nuclear program.

China might prefer annexation to Korean reunification in a least-worst case (debatable given projected medium-term costs to Korea), but there isn't really any internationally-grounded justification that China can use to do it other than 'peace-keeping' in stead of a UN action. Do they then maintain the occupation by manufacturing or fomenting violent North Korean resistance?

[Greyblades]

You mean they cant pull another tibet?

[LittleGrizzly]

TBH of the various standard execution methods I have heard of being shot would probably be my first choice. Of the widely used ones, if making love to beautiful women is an option then probably that one.

I think lethal injection is horrific, the electric chair is barbaric and hanging is pretty disturbing as well, of the American ones? (am I missing any) it is only shooting I think of as somewhat humane.

[Beskar]

You mean they cant pull another tibet?

or another Crimea from Putin's playbook.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Well, the threat itself is paramount. Even if ROK has the most effective anti-nuclear shield in the world (to China's chagrin?), it doesn't reduce incentives for North Korea's regime to progress in its nuclear program.

How so? It raises the stakes of international conduct drastically.
It's one thing to hear NK talk about destroying Seoul when all they have is 40+ year old artillery (and perhaps whatever old equipment China has sold them since then).

The regime is close to a black hole of information, coupled that with the fact that you simply cannot have a mad man with nukes. If you have no intel on their inner workings then how long will the current international order remain as we all guess whether the Kim family remains in power for another year? I just don't feel as if either the US or China is willing to tolerate such uncertainty.

China might prefer annexation to Korean reunification in a least-worst case (debatable given projected medium-term costs to Korea), but there isn't really any internationally-grounded justification that China can use to do it other than 'peace-keeping' in stead of a UN action. Do they then maintain the occupation by manufacturing or fomenting violent North Korean resistance?

Does the Chinese government really care that much about having to manufacture a "just cause"?

[Husar]

How so? It raises the stakes of international conduct drastically.
It's one thing to hear NK talk about destroying Seoul when all they have is 40+ year old artillery (and perhaps whatever old equipment China has sold them since then).

You know that 40 year old guns firing projectiles with high explosive material are just about as deadly at the point of impact as modern guns firing the same amount of high explosive material? And North Korea supposedly has very, very large amounts of artllery. Not to forget that there was/is already artillery that can fire small nuclear warheads... (not that NK has them...yet)
I'm not even sure all their artillery is that old or from China anyway, they seem to produce quite a few versions of their own.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean...orce#Artillery

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-n...ar-2013-4?IR=T

North Korea experts Victor Cha and David Kang posted on the website of Foreign Policy magazine late last month that the North can fire 500,000 rounds of artillery on Seoul in the first hour of a conflict.

They are unlikely to win a conflict as the article further mentions, but they can cause a whole lot of casualties right away.
It would however be a very big mess at the very least and result in the deaths of probably millions of people.
A missile defense system alone does not make a country safe. There are very modern systems that can defend against mortar or artillery rounds and so on, but they have a short range and can probably not defend a country against this much artillery anyway.

I see little gain in anyone starting a conflict with North Korea no that they have nuclear weapons anyway.
Any solution of the conflict will have to be in agreement with their regime, come from an internal revoution or is likely to become very, very deadly for many people in the vicinity and in range of their missiles and artillery.

As for KJU being a crazy mandman, I'm not so sure. There were those rumors about him wanting to slowly open up the country and apparently they weren't so wrong.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ore-shows-how/

But North Korea is very tentatively toying with some capitalist ideas, setting up about 20 special economic zones around the country, allowing farmers to keep and sell more of their produce, and tolerating more nascent activity in the jangmadang, or local markets, around the country.

I assume one has to separate the military grandstanding from the actual direction the country is taking. It is even possible that KJU does want to open up the country but others oppose him and need to be disposed of because he'll look weak to other potential opponents otherwise. I mean their entire leadership is probably a fascist snake pit where the smallest sign of weakness would make someone else crush him and take over...

I'd not expect a peaceful change to happen overnight either way. Just look at China and how it developed from Mao until now. It is still nowhere near a Norway, but maybe it needs time. Perhaps it will turn into a desert before it really changes, but uhm, yeah...

[Montmorency]

How so? It raises the stakes of international conduct drastically.
It's one thing to hear NK talk about destroying Seoul when all they have is 40+ year old artillery (and perhaps whatever old equipment China has sold them since then).

The regime is close to a black hole of information, coupled that with the fact that you simply cannot have a mad man with nukes. If you have no intel on their inner workings then how long will the current international order remain as we all guess whether the Kim family remains in power for another year? I just don't feel as if either the US or China is willing to tolerate such uncertainty.

Why? The fact of the matter is that, after Clinton called off the air strikes in 1994 or thereabouts the North's nuclear program has become increasingly dispersed, increasingly shielded, and increasingly more difficult to neutralize without ground intervention.

At this point, let's say the program is still not complete (for the purpose of a viable weapon or system). Right now, it is likely already impossible to set back their efforts by more than a few months, even with all-out aerial attacks throughout the country.

Once they demonstrably have viable weapons, it will become meaningless. Deterrence will be the only option left short of a major Asian land war.

Whatever happens with the North Korean government right now, they are firmly in the advantage. They bought their time.

Does the Chinese government really care that much about having to manufacture a "just cause"?

They would if it undermines the logic they use to defend their interests in the South China Sea and Central Asia. China's leadership isn't careless, at least not in how they approach international relations and construct its rhetoric.