A Nation of Racist Dwarfs

You know, when it comes to vintage 2002 Axis of Evil, I'm not very worried about Iraq (which will be some decades pulling itself back together) or Iran (which has its hands full attempting to ward of freedom of expression in its own backyard, and which will someday be a very good ally and partner for the U.S.A., if it can avoid falling into the bottomless well of religious fundamentalism—but if you think about it, they ushered in the modern age of Islamic craziness, and they just might lead the way out).

No, the one that freaks me out is North Korea. And here's a good look at why:

All of us who scrutinize North Korean affairs are preoccupied with one question. Do these slaves really love their chains? The conundrum has several obscene corollaries. [...] But race arrogance and nationalist hysteria are powerful cements for the most odious systems, as Europeans and Americans have good reason to remember. Even in South Korea there are those who feel the Kim Jong-il regime, under which they themselves could not live for a single day, to be somehow more "authentically" Korean.

Here are the two most shattering facts about North Korea. First, when viewed by satellite photography at night, it is an area of unrelieved darkness. Barely a scintilla of light is visible even in the capital city. (See this famous photograph.) Second, a North Korean is on average six inches shorter than a South Korean. You may care to imagine how much surplus value has been wrung out of such a slave, and for how long, in order to feed and sustain the militarized crime family that completely owns both the country and its people.

But this is what proves Myers right. Unlike previous racist dictatorships, the North Korean one has actually succeeded in producing a sort of new species. Starving and stunted dwarves, living in the dark, kept in perpetual ignorance and fear, brainwashed into the hatred of others, regimented and coerced and inculcated with a death cult: This horror show is in our future, and is so ghastly that our own darling leaders dare not face it and can only peep through their fingers at what is coming.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v...citygrikf0.jpg

You know what? Nvm.

North Koreans today are on average smaller than Koreans at any other point in time in the 20th Century, including the pre-colonial period. The pre-colonial period was a time when Korea was an economically primitive, literally feudal, backwater, a plaything of Japan and Russia, and totally incapable of feeding all of its people. That is the extent to which North Korea has failed its people.

North Korea is a unique place. A Stalinist cult of personality has been pushed to the very extreme, so that certain aspects of Juche border on the religious (E.g. The Juche Calendar starts at the time of the Great Leader's conception, Kim Il Sung is the eternal President, Kim Jong Il can allegedly stop time etc.). There is no doubt that for at least some North Koreans, particularly the less well educated, the devotion felt towards Kim Jong Il is very real. Combined with extreme militarisation, obscene ultra-nationalism (The struggle for independence from Japan has not ended in North Korea), and a externally solid political establishment, this leads to the prospects of internal chaos bringing about the downfall of the regime in the short term being negligible.

That said, North Korea has weaknesses. Despite the ultra-nationalism, North Korea is dependant on Chinese support, and China has strong trade links with South Korea. It remains to be seen which Korea they value more highly. Militarily, it is a nation that possesses Soviet technology from the Eighties and earlier, meaning that South Korea's albeit smaller army could probably hold off the North Koreans pretty easily. It's nuclear weapons could produce a blast as powerful as Little Boy; a weapon that was at the forefront of nuclear thinking sixty five years ago. Although a detonation in Seoul would be a disaster, its nowhere near as dangerous as the Soviet Union's missile stocks. And succession to Kim Jong Il is a big unknown. KJL was groomed for decades to be the successor, but his son has only been groomed for about six months, and it seems likely that KJL will die in the near future.

Attempts at economic reform verge on farce. When tentative steps were made in the Nineties, the concept of profit was literally unknown in North Korea. Periodic attempts to revalue the currency to punish black market capitalists are almost funny. If anyone wants to know more about the economy of North Korea, pm me, as I've just done an essay on development in North Korea.

But I don't think North Korea is the threat everyone imagines it to be. Despite the labels of "crazy" and "Axis of Evil", North Korea has acted amazingly intelligently to preserve it's economic system and the ruling clique surrounding it (Although obviously, not so good at protecting North Koreans). By developing nuclear weapons, it can always threaten to use them, and thus demand resources such as grain and fertiliser from the rest of the world. If it actually used them (it?), it would be wiped off the face of the Earth faster than you could say "hot dog".

If nothing else was going on, a short sharp invasion would be the best long term option. It would need to be able to destroy all the North Korean artillery aimed, especially at Seoul. The army might be fanatical, but it would quickly seize up as the logistics failed. Most likely it would quickly go underground, literally, and await the invasion. Then the trouble would truely start as there would be a high liklihood of no surrender. It might be better to let the North implode, and slowly roll north as there ceases to be a country in any meaningful sense.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

No, the one that freaks me out is North Korea.

---

A horrific place. If one didn't know better, one would think it was thought up by a 1985 idealistic sixteen year old, writing for a school essay contest to warn of the dangers of totalitarianism, nationalist hysteria, militarism, deceit and siege mentality.
The country is almost a parody.

Besides, state totalitarianism is sooo 20th century. Failed states is where it's at nowadays, for brutal infringements of human rights.

I saw a documentary some time ago, based on testimonies of the few who ever managed to escape the camps, including camp guards. It was harrowing. Very disturbing, things I did not want to know existed, and of which I shall not speak.

At the very least, it showed that North Koreans are not mindless slaves yet, but quite capable of independent thought in their abuse, torture, humiliation, and a 'creative sadism' that was most reminiscent of the Japanese in WWII.

Quote:

---

If nothing else was going on, a short sharp invasion would be the best long term option. It would need to be able to destroy all the North Korean artillery aimed, especially at Seoul. The army might be fanatical, but it would quickly seize up as the logistics failed. Most likely it would quickly go underground, literally, and await the invasion. Then the trouble would truely start as there would be a high liklihood of no surrender. It might be better to let the North implode, and slowly roll north as there ceases to be a country in any meaningful sense.

---

hello mercenaries one for xbox.

Ah the north koreans are a difficult to understand conundrum, a problem with no easy situation. we cant starve them to death (well all of them) thanks to the chinese. Well maybe the chinese will become sick of them one day.

I somehow doubt an invasion would work - the people love their leader so much that they would be willing to die for him in droves. At the end of it there would only be a handful of Koreans left to enjoy the new, free North Korea.

That map is creepy indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CountArach

I somehow doubt an invasion would work - the people love their leader so much that they would be willing to die for him in droves. At the end of it there would only be a handful of Koreans left to enjoy the new, free North Korea.

---

But as opposed to starvaton year on year, those that came afterwards would have a massively improved quality of life.

The transition is mostlikely going to be painful however it occurs.

~:smoking:

south korea collectively shudders every time it thinks of the cost of re-integrating that nation of racist dwarves to its north.

Quote:

---

North Koreans, particularly the less well educated, the devotion felt towards Kim Jong Il is very real.

---

A program I saw a while back was about a foreign eye doctor who came to the north to treat people going blind from disease. A female journalist and camera crew was led about town to interview prospective patients and others. I didn't see any believable devotion to the Dear Leader in the parroted pantomime on display. More like absolute pants wetting fear of getting their lines wrong, slip of the lip or not being enthusiastic enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

That map is creepy indeed.

---

Bet they get some great views of the stars at night though!

With North Korea it's only a matter of time and what China does when Kim Jong Il finally kicks the oxygen habit. If China isn't willing to support his successor, then the North will implode and we'll probably get a united Korea sooner rather than later. If they do support his successor then things will likely drag on much as they are with very little change to the status quo.

I imagine China finds its satellite rather useful, and worth the cost of supporting; collapse would probably cause them some difficulties in the surrounding areas at a time when China has enough internal changes taking place.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

south korea collectively shudders every time it thinks of the cost of re-integrating that nation of racist dwarves to its north.

---

What of the cost of maintaing the world's seventh largest army?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

I imagine China finds its satellite rather useful, and worth the cost of supporting; collapse would probably cause them some difficulties in the surrounding areas at a time when China has enough internal changes taking place.

~:smoking:

---

There are now far greater economic links between China and South Korea (That have taken decades to set up) than than there ever were between China and the DPRK, so it's hardly a source of economic wealth. It is entirely possible that if China has to bite the bullet that it would go for South Korea rather than the North if the North's destruction was imminent.

If it was a case of either or, then possibly.

But North Korea is great for providing things for International Affairs to get all worked up about - and then request Chinese mediation, whilst China is then able to do what it wants, be it deals with African nations or building bases on Shri Lanka.

~:smoking:

You will most likely see the North Puppetted by China or under China's sphere and influence.

Then you will see economical reform which parrots what happened in China and see the rise of North Korea as an economical power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

What of the cost of maintaing the world's seventh largest army?

---

pah, by cost they are not even in the top ten according to SIPRI, and their defence expenditure is only 2.7% of GDP (we should be so lucky!), which is hardly a drag on their economy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_expenditures

Furunculus, those numbers are deceptive. North Korea's real military expenditure is estimated at a mind boggling 27%-32% of national income. Edit: wait, you are talking about South Korea.

Considering that even lunatic theocratic-military regimes limit defense expediture to around ten percent, North Korea is really completely off the scale. North Korea is completely militarised, mobilised. It is run by the logic of the military and a siege mentality.

http://www.koreafocus.or.kr/design2/...roup_id=102740

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

If it was a case of either or, then possibly.

---

That's the problem, it isn't. Yet.

China likes to have all the trappings of great power status (Puppet regimes, the "right" to obliterate Taiwan etc.) without any of the responsibilities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

You will most likely see the North Puppetted by China or under China's sphere and influence.

---

That is already the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

Then you will see economical reform which parrots what happened in China and see the rise of North Korea as an economical power.

---

That has been attempted, and the results have been pitiful. As I mentioned earlier, the concept of profit is unknown in North Korea. North Korea sees no need to undertake economic reform when it can just blackmail the world for food, fertiliser etc. All that matters is the survival of the North Korean state and the political structures within it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Considering that even lunatic theocratic-military regimes limit defense expediture to around ten percent, North Korea is really completely off the scale. North Korea is completely militarised, mobilised. It is run by the logic of the military and a siege mentality.

http://www.koreafocus.or.kr/design2/...roup_id=102740

---

It needs to. It knows very well that if it reduced its spending and militarisation to a conventional level, that South Korea would flatten the North. North Korea is not Opposite Land where Kim Jong Il is a gleeful sadist inflicting suffering on Koreans in the name of Korean nationalism, he's doing it to maintain his power. It has worked for the past twenty years, and it might work for the next twenty years.

The picture is apparently famous, but I'd never seen it. Capitalism versus communism incapsulated in one image. Interesting read, Lemur.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

The picture is apparently famous, but I'd never seen it. Capitalism versus communism incapsulated in one image. Interesting read, Lemur.

---

It is a famous picturem, and you're pretty much correct. But I wonder when the picture was taken, as up until about 1991, North Koreans weren't that much worse off than their Southern cosuins.

Anyone in the UK see the documentary on BBC4 last night? 3 Danish guys, 2 of whom were teenagers born in Korea but with family ties to the North. One of the guys had cerebral-palsy, apparentely handicapped children in North Korea don't like long after birth.

It was weird, if not exploitative. But interesting to see something inside the state.

They were mostly karted around elite cultural schools but also participated in a "Peace March/demonstration" which was frankly as close as I hope I ever get to seeing orwell's "Daily Hate" sessions.

One of the things visitors to North Korea notice is the total absence of any people with disabilities. :no:

hmmm, shades of romanian orphanages methinks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

One of the things visitors to North Korea notice is the total absence of any people with disabilities. :no:

---

Considering visitors to North Korea are carefully shepherded around and what they see is carefully controlled that perhaps isn't so surprising, just because they aren't seen doesn't mean they aren't there. Although it is of course possible they are taken away and killed/left to die, it isn't the only, or even most likely, possibility.

You don't need centralised herding of disabled people to make them invisible. All you need is a culture where disability is shameful and embarrassing. I don't know if that's the case in North Korea, just saying.

I don't know if it's even that. Guy Delisle mentions this to his "guide" in his book Pyongyang, and is given the reply that "There are none... We're a very homogenous nation. All North Koreans are born strong, intelligent and healthy."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myrddraal

You don't need centralised herding of disabled people to make them invisible. All you need is a culture where disability is shameful and embarrassing. I don't know if that's the case in North Korea, just saying.

---

True, but it doesn't bode well for the care or respect they are given. The handicapped guy in the above documentary was quite disturbed that people were nice to him, whilst sensing their disgust and revulsion.

Quote:

---

Considering that even lunatic theocratic-military regimes limit defense expediture to around ten percent, North Korea is really completely off the scale. North Korea is completely militarised, mobilised. It is run by the logic of the military and a siege mentality.

---

Very ineffectively of course.

The extent the North Koreans have been "militarized" is frankly, ridiculous. Their highways are designed wide enough for bombers to land on.

But their actual forces are terribly antiquated and poorly led and run. Their navy is total ****, seemingly incapable of cleaning after themselves.

Kim-Jong Il is a flipping idiot he could be so powerful as he can basically dictate his peoples culture and ideas but he squanders that ability through i dont know, stupidity, paranoia? Either way thanks to IL a potentially powerful communist nation is instead one of the poorest and one of the best examples for the failure of communism

by the way alh_p what is that avatar called i got this one for a game but i really wanna switch now and yours looks awesome.

Potential? North Korea was only powerful with Soviet subsidies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

What of the cost of maintaing the world's seventh largest army?

There are now far greater economic links between China and South Korea (That have taken decades to set up) than than there ever were between China and the DPRK, so it's hardly a source of economic wealth. It is entirely possible that if China has to bite the bullet that it would go for South Korea rather than the North if the North's destruction was imminent.

---

Honestly, given how expensive the annexation of Eastern Germany was, I doubt unifying North Korea will be an easy process. Especially since Eastern Germany was arguably the jewel of the eastern block, while North Korea is a dire poor ultra militarized country that only survives thanks to foreign help.

Eastern Germany was integrated in 1990, and it is still nowadays way poorer than Western Germany. Now, take the case of South and North Korea, with the South being probably 50 times wealthier, and you get the idea.

Honestly, I think this is a problem that will have to be solved either by North Koreans themselves or by China. Though I don't believe the whole "North Koreans worship KJI as a God and will happily die for him", I still think any military intervention is doomed to fail, without China's support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

It is a famous picturem, and you're pretty much correct. But I wonder when the picture was taken, as up until about 1991, North Koreans weren't that much worse off than their Southern cosuins.

---

Hmm. I know they were about equal about the time of the Korean war, but I believe they've been diverging ever since, and that by 1991 a difference would be apparent.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

One of the things visitors to North Korea notice is the total absence of any people with disabilities. :no:

---

Well, for instance, in Russia, we are still more mediaeval about it, or at least more so than in US. In US I see mentally disabled people everywhere, in school, in public places, or even working in jobs - low-level jobs of course, but even those jobs are a huge accommodation for those unfortunate fellows. The business that employ them are clearly losing money, and it does not take a genius to recognise that most people are uncomfortable around mentally disabled persons. Yet I still see those persons.

In Russia, it is more private. Such people are often kept in mental institutions or cared for inside the family's home. To send them to school would be unimaginable - although part of that is because Russian schools (or at least the city schools -I know not of how it is in the countryside) are ruthlessly tough and accommodating even for the normal kids. Still, Americans are very open about this, and it shows many things about the national character in general. I would think the socialising is good for the disabled people, although I am not sure whether sending them off to elementary or middle school is a good idea - I have seen those kids being taken advantage of and bullied too much to still think of it in positive terms.

It is difficult for me to say if the American approach is correct regarding kids, but I can without a doubt say that the society in general is more progressive, as mentally disabled people are accepted in the adult world, or at least officially. You do not see that in Russia. Not that there is a negative outlook on such unfortunate cases - we are not eugenicists, but no one is willing to put up with disabled people 'on the loose' as they told Dorothea Dix... We are not that far advanced yet.


North Korea can have similar situation to Russia - or hell, they likely have it much worse, as I doubt any nationality would care about the disabled when the healthy folk were starving and dying everywhere.

From this book; it says South Korea had the world's second fastest growing economy from 1960 to 1990. So they likely left North Korea behind at least by the 1960s.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Korea had the world's second fastest growing economy from 1960 to 1990. So they likely left North Korea behind at least by the 1960s.

---

:laugh4::laugh4:

This is why I dislike statistics, they can be mentioned without context. Japan was ahead of Korea, and in 1990 the bubble burst. They still have yet to recover. Of course, the Japanese economy is still the second-largest, but Korea could have easily been harder, theoretically speaking. Growth means nothing without the current total GDP. But, another of course would be that South Korea is certainly light-years ahead of DPRK, economically speaking.

Still, from the analyses I read, DPRK would squash South Korea if it ever came down to just them two, with no outside interference. Even with their outdated equipment, North Korea is still formidable. When the scales of balance were more even in the Korean war, DPRK captured nearly all but a small beachead of SK, smashing US, NATO and SK forces. Of course, then it was the Allies' turn, and they captured so much territory of DPRK that in some places, they were on Chinese soil...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

:laugh4::laugh4:

This is why I dislike statistics, they can be mentioned without context. Japan was ahead of Korea, and in 1990 the bubble burst. They still have yet to recover. Of course, the Japanese economy is still the second-largest, but Korea could have easily been harder, theoretically speaking. Growth means nothing without the current total GDP. But, another of course would be that South Korea is certainly light-years ahead of DPRK, economically speaking.

Still, from the analyses I read, DPRK would squash South Korea if it ever came down to just them two, with no outside interference. Even with their outdated equipment, North Korea is still formidable. When the scales of balance were more even in the Korean war, DPRK captured nearly all but a small beachead of SK, smashing US, NATO and SK forces. Of course, then it was the Allies' turn, and they captured so much territory of DPRK that in some places, they were on Chinese soil...

---

i am willing to put money on the fact the NK would not come even close to squashing SK now, or any time in the 21st century.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

i am willing to put money on the fact the NK would not come even close to squashing SK now, or any time in the 21st century.

---

Hmm, why do you say so? South Korea has no military tradition, their forces are unimaginable and average, in terms of leadership. Maybe even worse - from what I have read, they are not good, but whether they are average or actually bad, I do not know. In conventional, full-blown modern warfare, everything gets destroyed fast - an Abrams tank has an average life of two weeks, for instance, according to How to Make War by the renowned Dunningan.

Quantity has a quality of its own, especially when the South Koreans, while well endowed with their K1 tanks - Abrams copies with some modifications - are not much good in using what they have. They are not the top-notch US Marines who assaulted Iraq. They are also on the defensive, and that is not how the tanks should be employed - I hope to God they will not try what the Egyptians tried with Israelis in this regard...

I would not put my money on anyone as a matter of fact. But yes, the ROK is getting closer to a victory with each year - DPRK cannot sustain itself very well, not with its economic situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

:laugh4::laugh4:

This is why I dislike statistics, they can be mentioned without context. Japan was ahead of Korea, and in 1990 the bubble burst. They still have yet to recover. Of course, the Japanese economy is still the second-largest, but Korea could have easily been harder, theoretically speaking. Growth means nothing without the current total GDP. But, another of course would be that South Korea is certainly light-years ahead of DPRK, economically speaking.

Still, from the analyses I read, DPRK would squash South Korea if it ever came down to just them two, with no outside interference. Even with their outdated equipment, North Korea is still formidable. When the scales of balance were more even in the Korean war, DPRK captured nearly all but a small beachead of SK, smashing US, NATO and SK forces. Of course, then it was the Allies' turn, and they captured so much territory of DPRK that in some places, they were on Chinese soil...

---

:inquisitive:

The North Korean army outnumbered the South Korean forces by more than 2-1 at the start of the Korean war. And there weren't significant US forces in Korea before the start of the war.

What would happen if the US wasn't there now? I don't know, but every year that passes means North Korea gets weaker.

In terms of economies, I got a bunch of data from http://www.ggdc.net/ that said S Korea was ahead of N Korea in terms of GDP per capita from 1960 onwards.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

The North Korean army outnumbered the South Korean forces by more than 2-1 at the start of the Korean war.

---

Not that much different now, even worse, technically, but ROK has the distinct technological advantage - a thousand K1s is going to be a tough nut to crack...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

And there weren't significant US forces in Korea before the start of the war.

---

Hmm, that is a good question. I remember reading 'substantial forces', but how substantial - I do not know. It would be interesting if someone could find out - so far, I have no luck searching on the Internet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

I don't know, but every year that passes means North Korea gets weaker.

---

Certainly true - I noted this in my previous as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

In terms of economies, I got a bunch of data from http://www.ggdc.net/ that said S Korea was ahead of N Korea in terms of GDP per capita from 1960 onwards.

---

I did not say I doubted that ROK was ahead of DPRK. That is obvious - and I stated so myself. I just could not resist a laugh due to the possibility of misrepresenting that statistic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

Hmm, why do you say so? South Korea has no military tradition, their forces are unimaginable and average, in terms of leadership. Maybe even worse - from what I have read, they are not good, but whether they are average or actually bad, I do not know. In conventional, full-blown modern warfare, everything gets destroyed fast - an Abrams tank has an average life of two weeks, for instance, according to How to Make War by the renowned Dunningan.

Quantity has a quality of its own, especially when the South Koreans, while well endowed with their K1 tanks - Abrams copies with some modifications - are not much good in using what they have. They are not the top-notch US Marines who assaulted Iraq. They are also on the defensive, and that is not how the tanks should be employed - I hope to God they will not try what the Egyptians tried with Israelis in this regard...

I would not put my money on anyone as a matter of fact. But yes, the ROK is getting closer to a victory with each year - DPRK cannot sustain itself very well, not with its economic situation.

---

consulting my copy of the 2008 Strategic Balance from the IISS tels me otherwise.

NK has a population of 22 million peasants, versus SK which includes 46 million of the most technologically advanced people on the planet.

NK has 3,500 tanks, none of them newer than T59 vintage, where as SK has 1,000 MI A2 class tanks (in addition to 1,300 others which SK probably wouldn't even bring out of reserve)

NK has 950,00 army personnel versus SK with 630,000

and SK has spent the last 40 years training with the latest american strategic doctrine, and just spent the last two years massively boosting defence spending in anticipation of taking over strategic command of South Korean defence.

against those odds NK is going to get slaughtered!

those K1 tanks are going to have at LEAST a 10-1 advantage against any NK armoured units that venture across the border.

Seaul would get absolutely hammered for about 24 hours before the SK airforce and antiquated NK logistics made the artillary fall silent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meneldil

Eastern Germany was integrated in 1990, and it is still nowadays way poorer than Western Germany. Now, take the case of South and North Korea, with the South being probably 50 times wealthier, and you get the idea.

---

It's way beyond that now. I don't know the exact number, but it was about 57 in the early 2000's. The fact that North Korea doesn't use GDP as a statistic of wealth/growth complicates matters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Hmm. I know they were about equal about the time of the Korean war, but I believe they've been diverging ever since, and that by 1991 a difference would be apparent.

CR

---

Northern Korea was already more industrialised than the south, as it has more natural resources than the rice fields of the south. Growth rates in North Korea just after the Korean War were phenomenal (IIRC, it was over 45% in one three year period), and outstripped the South's later performance. Meanwhile, the South failed to industrialise seriously until the 60's, and incomes probably reached equal levels in the 70's. After that, the South roared ahead, leaving the DPRK in the dust. Still, living standards remained similar until about 1988.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

From this book; it says South Korea had the world's second fastest growing economy from 1960 to 1990. So they likely left North Korea behind at least by the 1960s.
CR

---

As I mentioned in my first post, I have recently written a twelve page essay on a comparison between the economies of North and South Korea since 1953 (Which I could email anyone, if were they interested). On the next page it mentions that the North grew faster than the South in that time period.

But of course, that's not really relevant today.

Quote:

---

The North Korean army outnumbered the South Korean forces by more than 2-1 at the start of the Korean war. And there weren't significant US forces in Korea before the start of the war.

---

Plus, the South Koreans had no heavy armour/artillery, whilst the Northerners had the latest Soviet tanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

consulting my copy of the 2008 Strategic Balance from the IISS tels me otherwise.

NK has a population of 22 million peasants, versus SK which includes 46 million of the most technologically advanced people on the planet.

NK has 3,500 tanks, none of them newer than T59 vintage, where as SK has 1,000 MI A2 class tanks (in addition to 1,300 others which SK probably wouldn't even bring out of reserve)

NK has 950,00 army personnel versus SK with 630,000

and SK has spent the last 40 years training with the latest american strategic doctrine, and just spent the last two years massively boosting defence spending in anticipation of taking over strategic command of South Korean defence.

against those odds NK is going to get slaughtered!

those K1 tanks are going to have at LEAST a 10-1 advantage against any NK armoured units that venture across the border.

---

All this is true, which is why I quieted down after my first post here, after I did a quick statistics-check on the Internet. I will have to dig out those analysis and see what the authors have to say...

But yes, you are correct, and from what you say - which is exactly the same I read as well, it does seem that DPRK is in for a likely defeat.

I can swear you beat me here, but I am still wondering why the authors I read thought so differently. Probably the date. The stuff I read was from early nineties, sometimes even late eighties... ROK did not have K1, back then, since K1 was developed in '88 I believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

All this is true, which is why I quieted down after my first post here, after I did a quick statistics-check on the Internet. I will have to dig out those analysis and see what the authors have to say...

But yes, you are correct, and from what you say - which is exactly the same I read as well, it does seem that DPRK is in for a likely defeat.

I can swear you beat me here, but I am still wondering why the authors I read thought so differently. Probably the date. The stuff I read was from early nineties, sometimes even late eighties... ROK did not have K1, back then, since K1 was developed in '88 I believe.

---

to give you an idea of the shear level of force overmatch take a look at tank kills in the gulf war:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Challenger_1

The challenger 1, which is now inferior to to south korean tanks scored a 300:0 kill ratio against iraqi armoured vehicles, which is not a bad comparison against north korean armoury.

decent main-guns and advanced fire-control means that 'western' tanks can be killing T59's at a range of 5.1km, wheras the NK's would have to close to within 2km to even have a chance of hitting a barn, and even then it would likely do little damage to a modern 'western' tank.

and it takes a surprisingly long time for a tank to clear that 3.1km kill-zone!

ah the tank isnt even the most deciding factor.

Its the airforce in my opinion and possibly the navy. The s. koreans support roles are so superior to the n. koreans that the numerical advantage of the n. koreans wouldnt even matter in the end.

I just want to point out from an earlier post in thread you have, AP, while I am reluctant because you withdrew your arguement. However, if both sides had no foreign support the s. koreans would have the advantage. Can you imagine a N. Korea not propped up by China. The US could leave S. Korea alone and they would function well enough, The N. koreans, not so much.


What authors have you read? I have read a lot of military theory and thought that S. Korea's military dominance was commonly accepted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

to give you an idea of the shear level of force overmatch take a look at tank kills in the gulf war:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Challenger_1

The challenger 1, which is now inferior to to south korean tanks scored a 300:0 kill ratio against iraqi armoured vehicles, which is not a bad comparison against north korean armoury.

decent main-guns and advanced fire-control means that 'western' tanks can be killing T59's at a range of 5.1km, wheras the NK's would have to close to within 2km to even have a chance of hitting a barn, and even then it would likely do little damage to a modern 'western' tank.

and it takes a surprisingly long time for a tank to clear that 3.1km kill-zone!

---

Yes, but now you are going where I do not like. Tactics, tactics, tactics. The Wermacht beat the best tanks in the world with their Panzer I, II, some IIIs and a load of captured Czech tanks. Of course, DPRK is no Wermacht - the two could not be farther, but the Invasion of Iraq was not a balanced war, even if the Iraqis had very large numerical superiority. Individual arms analyses strike me as sort of immature, although I know this is not true in your case, especially since you are wholly correct.

Look, I conceded to you, but... Argh, I have to go, I will finish this later. Anyhow, it was very stupid of me to rush into this thread with outdated info, and I was crushed by you :bow:.


EDIT: Shoot, Centurion is here too. Like I said, I will be back in half and hour or so, but I have to go now. :yes:

The DPRK isn't all it's hyped up to be...

Food for thought. The DPRK is not an opaque monolith of Big Brother proportions. On the contrary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AP

Still, from the analyses I read, DPRK would squash South Korea if it ever came down to just them two, with no outside interference. Even with their outdated equipment, North Korea is still formidable. When the scales of balance were more even in the Korean war, DPRK captured nearly all but a small beachead of SK, smashing US, NATO and SK forces. Of course, then it was the Allies' turn, and they captured so much territory of DPRK that in some places, they were on Chinese soil...

---

Dude, read up on your military affairs for God's sake. That's 50 years ago and the current KPA is a rusting shell with shortages growing out of every armpit. The ROK military is, pound-for-pound, the best in all of Asia. Full stop. The KPA's worse off than the 2003 Iraqi military, and we all saw what happened to that when it got faced with a well-oiled military machine at full steam. Stop dreaming.

Eagerly waiting your return *rubs hands together*

well the wehrmacht won with their mucnhkin tanks because of strategy. The french and british did not know how to properly place their tanks and when their lines were broken through it was because of overwhelming numbers of panzers which crushed their superior tanks through better strategy, training, and vetrean panzer crews.

It is rather shocking the allies didn't expect this kind of assault after witnessing the proxy war in Spain.

Recommended reading- Hitlers War by Harry Turtledove. Great Alternate Reality novel. So what if it didnt actually happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Centurion1

Recommended reading- Hitlers War by Harry Turtledove. Great Alternate Reality novel. So what if it didnt actually happen.

---

You read Turtledove?? He is my absolute favourite!! As much as he wrote, I have read every single one of his short stories and novels, save for the hardcore fantasy. But Hitler's War is a recent book, so I have not read it yet. I have read The Man with the Iron Heart though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Wizard

The DPRK isn't all it's hyped up to be...

Food for thought. The DPRK is not an opaque monolith of Big Brother proportions. On the contrary.



Dude, read up on your military affairs for God's sake. That's 50 years ago and the current KPA is a rusting shell with shortages growing out of every armpit. The ROK military is, pound-for-pound, the best in all of Asia. Full stop. The KPA's worse off than the 2003 Iraqi military, and we all saw what happened to that when it got faced with a well-oiled military machine at full steam. Stop dreaming.

---

Yeah, I know, read all my other posts here. I conceded the debate.

This has to be my worst (and only, AFAIK, or so I hope) fiasco in the Backroom. I jumped into this thread armed with late 80's and ealry 90's knowledge. You see, I do not trust anything having to do with the military on the Internet, so all my knowledge on modern warfare comes from books. The deep strategic analysis books I can download on the Internet or get in the library are rather outdated or about older times, even if they are newer. They suited me well, and I chose the more reliable authors, instead of gobbling up just anything. This approach is alright for a history student like me, but it serves me poorly in the knowledge of news.

As you can see here, this type of knowledge was an embarrassment in this situation. EDIT: but no, the stuff is not fifty years old. The books I read were no older than 25 years old.

EDIT:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

NK has a population of 22 million peasants, versus SK which includes 46 million of the most technologically advanced people on the planet.

---

Sorry, as much as you are correct, I cannot resist to make a snipe at this particular point. :laugh4:

Yeah, I bet playing Starcraft like a shameless geek and being devout Christians really helped the South Koreans militarily :laugh4:. I mean, technological advancement correlates pretty nicely with how soft a nation is. And here is some different food for thought: the weaker North Koreans starved in the catastrophic famines of the 90s. If anything, the citizens of DPRK are one of the toughest, wiliest survivalists in the world, especially since unlike so many other countries, aid to North Korea, while significant, is proportionally minuscule compared to all the other poverty-stricken nations.Three-fifths of the countries in the word receive some aid from one another, but North Korea is left the most short-handed in terms of helpers.

ROK soldiers will complain if they do not get three full meals a day or a laptop when not on active duty. A North Korean will be very thankful for one full OECD-style meal a day with little else needed but some warm clothing during the winter or for sleeping with. This may be a slight exaggeration, but not far. Of course, DPRK is still likely to lose, but do not deride their citizens, for they are one tough folk.

While technologically advanced population is useful on the 'home front', South Korea is too small and has too much too close to the un-DMZ line - Seoul and Incheon spring to mind immediately, and they alone carry around around 35-60% of ROK's industries. That will get destroyed quickly. And with the numerous more tunnels under the so-called DMZ, much industrial capacity will be disrupted and shelled/bombed -out. At least Busan and Daegu (I am not sure how the city is in terms of industry though) is safe, but who knows what the DPRK's navy and air force is capable of, even if it is suicidal. DPRK knows it has to pound Seoul, Busan, and Incheon quickly, because that is most of ROK, speaking economically.

Yeah i really liked man with an iron heart very good novel. obvious parallels to Iraq.

I want to call upon one point. N. Korean soldiers will have far less initiative and much worse training than the s. koreans. This makes up for a natural survival instinct which is debatable.

Compare it to say Germany v. Russia WW2. The russians mostly won because Germany overextended themselves, numbers, late technological advancement, and underestimation of Russian winters and Russian determination. Thanks to Stalins purges in the 30's the Russian generals left were complete idiots while the Germans were well trained experienced leaders of men. Honestly, the S. Koreans have more war time experience than do the n. korean counterparts if not at least because of numerous UN actions. I also believe they are in the middle east but do not quote me on that i could very well be wrong and im too lazy to look it up.

As to the DPRK navy and air force if you want to call it that....... laughable. The S. Koreans have some form of the F series fighter. (probably comparable to f-15 or 16) true not the F-22 super hornet or the new JSF but nothing to sneeze at. The North in comparison probably has vietnam era migs. And once again the s. koreans have superior training and experience. And when your in a highly advanced jet fighter training is everything as my dad likes to say. Well that and good eyesight.

Their navy is even worse. I've heard my Dad make jokes about how once when doing flyovers in the Pacific (he flew s-3 a subhunter) his squadron encountered a korean fighting ship....... he had to do a second fly by because he thought it was just a rusted out civilian ship. And since this was the 1980's cold war era i doubt the situation has improved.

Yah, I know the Koreans have a joke of a Navy/Air Force, and that is why I said their attacks would have to be suicidal. But they can try.

But an F-series fighter? 'F' stands for 'fighter'... 'Fighter' series 'fighter? :tongue: 'F' fighters go back to the forties, if not before... 'F' fighter is what the F-86 Sabre was, the one that famously fought MIG-15s in the last Korean War...

And please do not go to Germany vs. USSR... 'Complete idiots'? Read up Glantz - he is the prime Western authority of the Eastern Front...

Alomost all of America's fighters are designated F. Yeah so oops my bad but what i am saying is they probably use an F-15 or 16 which is very advanced and no nation would be ashamed to fly. I believe the Israelis use f-16 and we know all about their air force dont we.

The NK's might be able to pound Seoul etc. flat -- they certainly are in range -- but that assumes that the tubes live long enough to fire the required number of shots. I'd assume radar tracking of the inbound shells and a little reverse ballistics calculation would reveal the locations for counter-battery fire and airstrikes. With a likely air superiority and good fire control on their own arty, the SK's should be able to curtail the worst of such an attack quickly.

NK has lots of armor, but the SK's have been trained on better tanks using the classic "shoot and scoot" defensive doctrine. That's how we trained the 1st AD to help defend the Fulda Gap and we were expecting odds of way more than 3.5 to one. Between that and the relatively limited amounts of open terrain, I do not think a NK breakthrough likely.

The problem with NK is "the line." I'm not exactly sure where that line is on the map (I hope to heavens our G2 people do, but after the WMD's of Iraq, I am always a little skeptical), but heading North of that line buys you a heap of tank armies with "made in china" labels on them.

I have so many good articles on china military strength because of my dads occupation but they are mostly naval. Chinese tanks are highly overrated though and the vast majority are antiquated and cannot stand against superior s. korean tanks. The thing i would worry about is if the chinese start selling a capable air force to the North. Thier new mig could rival a US f-22. Not that they would ever sell that plane.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

Yeah, I bet playing Starcraft like a shameless geek and being devout Christians really helped the South Koreans militarily :laugh4:. I mean, technological advancement correlates pretty nicely with how soft a nation is. And here is some different food for thought: the weaker North Koreans starved in the catastrophic famines of the 90s. If anything, the citizens of DPRK are one of the toughest, wiliest survivalists in the world, especially since unlike so many other countries, aid to North Korea, while significant, is proportionally minuscule compared to all the other poverty-stricken nations..

---

The strongest? The famine in North Korea was not caused primarily by a lack of food. Statistics from Famine in North Korea: Markets Aid and Reform by Stephen Haggard et al show that the amount of food produced in North Korea Never dropped below the minimum human need. The problem was in the distribution of the food, which I explain in greater depth in my essay. To sum it up, the farmers hid their food in the barns, resulting in food not entering the "Public Distribution System", and when it did, it was distributed to the soldiers first. This meant that the middle classes and industrial workers in the cities starved, whilst the farmers in the countryside did OK. It's the only famine in history where that phenomenon has been recorded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

While technologically advanced population is useful on the 'home front', South Korea is too small and has too much too close to the un-DMZ line - Seoul and Incheon spring to mind immediately, and they alone carry around around 35-60% of ROK's industries. That will get destroyed quickly. And with the numerous more tunnels under the so-called DMZ, much industrial capacity will be disrupted and shelled/bombed -out. At least Busan and Daegu (I am not sure how the city is in terms of industry though) is safe, but who knows what the DPRK's navy and air force is capable of, even if it is suicidal. DPRK knows it has to pound Seoul, Busan, and Incheon quickly, because that is most of ROK, speaking economically.

---

Busan and Daegu have most of the rest, as the political elites in South Korea mostly hailed from that region (As most of the other elites in South Korea were either killed or de-elitised by the DPRK), and thus put most of their investment into that region.

Quote:

---

The problem with NK is "the line." I'm not exactly sure where that line is on the map (I hope to heavens our G2 people do, but after the WMD's of Iraq, I am always a little skeptical), but heading North of that line buys you a heap of tank armies with "made in china" labels on them.

---

Well, Mao Zedong decided to intervene in Korea the moment the UN crossed the 38th Parallel, so I'm guessing it's a pretty close line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

The strongest? The famine in North Korea was not caused primarily by a lack of food. Statistics from Famine in North Korea: Markets Aid and Reform by Stephen Haggard et al show that the amount of food produced in North Korea Never dropped below the minimum human need. The problem was in the distribution of the food, which I explain in greater depth in my essay. To sum it up, the farmers hid their food in the barns, resulting in food not entering the "Public Distribution System", and when it did, it was distributed to the soldiers first. This meant that the middle classes and industrial workers in the cities starved, whilst the farmers in the countryside did OK. It's the only famine in history where that phenomenon has been recorded.

---

Still the strongest, with the exception of those who could use their high(er) position, quite obviously. Farmers are stronger than the city-dwellers, and tougher. Then, in the cities, the strongest survived, albeit the exception I already mentioned. Simple. Albeit another exception that women require less sustenance, but that is evened out by men's tougher physique and the fact that women will then give birth to children, which replenishes the population and evens out the ratio (more boys born, which may be counteracted by the fact that more girls are born to lower BMI women, making the ratio even - but this is very, very recent knowledge).

All generalisations, but that is what one has to do when counting demographics. In any case, it is common evolutionary (both very short and long) sense that such stresses root out the weaker species. Cold logic, but I cannot see why the sickly and disabled children/adults would not die first in the North Korean famines. Same goes for the elderly, who should have died en masse - I doubt even the Eastern filial piety saved them when things sunk to such a semi-Darwinian jungle.

Which brings me to another point that while the rich Japan is already greying, it will do so even more. ROK following a similar, but less intense trend. The low life expectancy and the famines mean a younger population, as evidenced by all poverty-stricken nations of the world. DPRK does not conform to this birth trend as well, but well enough compared to First World, IIRC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

All generalisations, but that is what one has to do when counting demographics. In any case, it is common evolutionary (both very short and long) sense that such stresses root out the weaker species. Cold logic, but I cannot see why the sickly and disabled children/adults would not die first in the North Korean famines. Same goes for the elderly, who should have died en masse - I doubt even the Eastern filial piety saved them when things sunk to such a semi-Darwinian jungle.
.

---

given that the title of this thread is: "A Nation of Racist Dwarfs" we can see that an evolutionary cull is clearly under way, though i am not sure how it is to prove beneficial to the fighting prowess of NK............?

Dwarfs or Dwarves?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

Dwarfs or Dwarves?

---

You know, either would be correct, but the latter is a bit more archaic.

Since Tolkien Dwarves has come to be used more frequently with fantasy dwarf races. Dwarfs is still the term associated with dwarfism.

given their penchant for tunnelling underneath other peoples countries the tolkien route does not seem totally inappropriate, although i don't agree that they are particularly stout and doughty warriors a-la my beloved Gimli, son of Gloin. :D

Kimli-sung?

they are not physically superior. they are smaller and wekaer. as well they are most likely stupider as well on average. They live in a communist governemnt where there is no concept while s. korea is a cut throat captitalist society. i put my money on the ROK

Since they are commies, we could call them Red Dwarfs. :idea2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Centurion1

they are not physically superior. they are smaller and wekaer. as well they are most likely stupider as well on average. They live in a communist governemnt where there is no concept while s. korea is a cut throat captitalist society. i put my money on the ROK

---

Yes, but they are tougher. They are perhaps the hardiest folk on Earth. That is my point. You see the difference, right?

Not that it will help them win the war of course - the Japanese, for instance, relied on courage to win their land engagements n WWII, which cost them dearly - they lost to first the Russians, which they invaded (Khalhin-Gol) and then mainly to the Americans in land combat on Pacific islands (although the Aussies turned them back quite well too), and finally the Russians again in the invasion of Manchuria. Lesson: tech+tactics>courage, but the point stands.

How does one quantify toughness?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

How does one quantify toughness?

---

Surviving through great adversity? Being able to subsist on a bare minimum? Be content with what others view as extreme-self denial? That is what I qualify as toughness. Tough as in a survivor, as an exceedingly hardy person, not tough as in Chuck Norris/Schwarzenegger/really macho. That is strong/manly in my internal dictionary. The two pairs of words (tough/hardy and strong/manly) overlap, but far from always in the definitions I presented them as.

Maybe AP is right, and the NKs are growing into a tougher, shorter, more subterranean race. In which case, we appear to have taken the first step toward Morlock/Eloi speciation. It was just a matter of time.

https://img693.imageshack.us/img693/246/redneckv.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

How does one quantify toughness?

---

College is not good for Strikey.
Me I know tough when I see it.

I'm surprised nobody reacted to my link. It kinda goes against all the usual "zomg totalitarian dictatorship controlling every aspect of North Korean life/all North Koreans are brainwashed zealots who will fight to death" stuff you usually hear about the place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AP

Yes, but they are tougher. They are perhaps the hardiest folk on Earth. That is my point. You see the difference, right?

---

Nothing tough about starving, scared-to-death people.

I read it, but I couldn't reply as my internet was playing up yesterday. I'd read it before though, but its a good read. Ofc North Korea isn't some Orwellian super state, but it's the closest thing on Earth to one.

Check out these http://www.nautilus.org/DPRKBriefing...omy/index.html

My point, and the point of that author, is that it doesn't have the resources or the ability anymore to be an Orwellian nightmare in the first place.

Not that this means North Koreans are better off or anything, mind you. It just means it's a lot easier to remove and/or engineer the collapse of the regime than normally assumed in the press and amongst the general public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Wizard

I'm surprised nobody reacted to my link.

---

On principle I don't read anything longer than one page. Unless it has pictures. Short attention span and stuff.


Here's a quick overview of your article, hopefully more conducive to debate:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Quote:

---

North Korea's evolution


LOS ANGELES — Don't call it a Stalinist state anymore; don't even think of it any longer as a pint-sized former Soviet Union. All around the world, the times are changing, and nowhere is the change more quiet but also irrevocable than in the one place where you thought change had all but been outlawed if not imprisoned: North Korea.


This is the astonishing and almost unbelievable picture painted by one of the world's most incisive and informed experts on the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. The master painter is Andrei Lankov, and his cliché-shattering portrait of the land of Kim Jong Il is to be found in the inaugural edition of "Asia Policy."


Lankov is a senior lecturer from the prestigious Australian National University, now on leave at Kookmin University in Seoul, capital of South Korea. "Asia Policy," published by The National Bureau of Asian Research in Seattle, sports a board of editorial advisers — from Stanford University's Richard Armacost to UC San Diego's Susan Shirk — that reads like a virtual Who's Who in the field of Asian policy scholarship. If Lankov's groundbreaking essay is remotely suggestive of the high standards to be expected from this new journal, then "Asia Policy" has a good chance of becoming required reading across the country and perhaps elsewhere in the world.


Lankov writes colorfully but carefully to create a sense of North Korea as being one of the most dynamically changing states on the face of the Earth. He writes of the country's youth from the best-connected families sporting "mod" haircuts and dressing like any other street-savvy South Korean kid. He describes the stream more like a flood of steady if technically illegal videotapes of South Korean soap operas and pop music making their way northward (generally through China); of the proliferation of mobile phones; of the enormous popularity of South Korean goods of all kinds; and of the rise of female North Korean entrepreneurs, whether working in the country's growing service industries or peddling their sexual favors to "newly rich and corrupt minor officials."


Lankov notes that the rise of the private entrepreneur was a survival necessity in the aftermath of the series of devastating famines in the '90s and the evaporation of Soviet aid after communism collapsed in Russia. The emerging economy is a trade-driven, feral struggle to live: "Those who could not trade are long dead," he quotes a North Korean source as saying, "and now we are only left with survivors hanging around."


The well-regarded Australian scholar adds: "These market operators now boast large fortunes of several hundreds of thousands of dollars. While such sums are still well below the fortunes attained bycadres-turned-capitalists in China and the former USSR, they are still unimaginably large by North Korean standards, and especially by the standards of a Stalinist state with its emphasis on income equality."


The policy implication of Lankov's explosive essay is obvious. Economic exchanges are opening up North Korea as never before, and so more such exchanges will only accelerate the further opening up of this otherwise miserable nation, bringing it closer to more normal integration into the world economic system and perhaps even closer to some kind of co-federation with the capitalistic South.
One last quote: "Such exchanges should be encouraged, as they expose North Koreans to the wider world and show them the prosperity and freedom they are deprived of at home. The privileged North Koreans who are allowed to travel overseas and interact with foreigners inside the country are increasingly dissatisfied with their government. Such determination in the USSR eventually produced Gorbachev."


Let me go the final mile: North Korea, if his analysis is correct, can no longer stand as it is. Regime change needs not to be produced by sudden military action but by continual, patient, steady economic interaction. Collapse and oblivion of the current regime is the only way out for the North Koreans.
In time — in a year, in five, but not much longer than that — surely the end will come. Koreans, by nature, are survivors. This includes those in the North, especially. They cannot possibly hope to survive in the old way. So some kind of irretrievable evolution and perhaps even revolution — is in the destiny of North Korea. God knows the people there deserve a break.
UCLA professor Tom Plate, a member of the Pacific Council on International Policy, is a veteran U.S. journalist

---

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...4_plate10.html

I've bolded a sentence that amused me. The editorial is now nearly four years old...:beam:
(And yes, yes, those are Plate's words, not Plankov's)

shhh Louis let us cling to our outdated views of N. Korea it is almost all we have left.

I heard a story on the radio a couple of years ago. Apparently Kim Jong-Il' oldest son was the heir-apparent until he tried to get out of the country...to go to Japan...in order to:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

visit Disneyland

:laugh:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Jong-nam#2001_incident

^ heehee i remember tat story and then checking to make sure i was reading the wsj and not the national enquirer.