Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Oh? Were we at war with Cuba and the Soviet Union when we blockaded Cuba?

Nope. So we can do the same thing here.

We were, actually, and it was a very dangerous situation that got damn close to outright WWIII. It's often considered either an excellent example of statesmanship or sheer blind miraculous luck that we didn't explode into full-scale war over the Cuban Missile Crisis.

I wouldn't want a repeat of the CMC. JFK was a considerably more level-headed person than Trump; imagine the reaction if one of our ships was rammed by a Chinese warship!

I can't seem to find anywhere that War was actually declared during the Cuban Missile Crisis. There was armed conflict during the Bay of Pigs, but it wasn't actually an official war.

The US didn't declare war in the Vietnam War either.

I suppose it's just a Vietnam Police Action then.

Doesn't matter anyway. We are actually at war with North Korea, so a blockade is fully legal anyway. If anybody actually cares.

Just as an FYI, a blockade is internationally recognized as an act of war.

The Cuban Missile Crisis came absurdly close to triggering a nuclear holocaust, and in fact has Kennedy's military advisors had their way that's exactly what woulf have occurred. The blockade of Cuba was organized under the pretenses of a "Quarantine" that did not block everything but was only interdicting offensive weapons systems, they were not blocking food and other items, but were intent on inspecting every vessel.

That said, with a long land border with China, unless China was on board, a naval blockade wouldnt do much. However, currently China is the primary enforcer of most NK sanctions, they wont let NK fall as long as US forces remain, but they are willing to play ball in some situations.

Vaktathi, we are still legally at war.

Everybody remembers the wisely worded declaration of war of course.

Edit: since we never declares war and are acting on a UN resolution, couldn't the UN just pass a resolution telling us to get out? (Not that it would ever pass)

 d-usa wrote:
Everybody remembers the wisely worded declaration of war of course.

Edit: since we never declares war and are acting on a UN resolution, couldn't the UN just pass a resolution telling us to get out? (Not that it would ever pass)

Umm Korean war is on pause..
It never ended. It's just. Muktindecade cease fire.

Both sides could scarily restart without new declarations or same legal steps as new.
There was meant to a peace agreement but that never happened.

 jhe90 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Everybody remembers the wisely worded declaration of war of course.

Edit: since we never declares war and are acting on a UN resolution, couldn't the UN just pass a resolution telling us to get out? (Not that it would ever pass)

Umm Korean war is on pause..
It never ended. It's just. Muktindecade cease fire.

Both sides could scarily restart without new declarations or same legal steps as new.
There was meant to a peace agreement but that never happened.

So like I said; since we never declared war and are there because the UN passed a resolution, could the UN pass another resolution to revoke the prior authorization and tell us to pack up?

Again, our seat and veto on the security council makes it a very unlikely scenario.

NK is a really difficult Topic and there really is no easy solution to this feth.

The Problem is that the People of NK are not only heavily indoctrinated by their government but also have no way of learning about the rest of the world. They only know what they've been allowed to know about the world which isnt much. There is no Internet or travelling or international TV for them. Every bit of Information is controlled by the government. The majority of citizens would never understand that getting rid of that absurd Regime would be just for their own good. They'd fight rigorously against the "capitalists".

I have, and I'm so sorry to say that, no hope for the citizens of North Korea. If the Kim regime goes to war they will too. And they will die by the millions for that stupid fat fethboy. There will be no peaceful way to solve this. If the conflict escalates NK will have to be eradicated. The brainwashed cattle will never be able to open their minds for the rest of the world. They will fight and die for nothing and the survivors will have no place in this world. I hope i'm wrong tho.

I'm not sure if calling people "brainwashed cattle" is a good thing to do, regardless of the situation.

Furthermore, there is a thriving black market, there are the SK propaganda speakers blaring at least something not controlled by NK's party line into the country and there are a few people crossing every now and then. And we all know gossip and rumours spread.

I think the risk of a C&C RA2 Yuri Style mob of desperate people brainwashed enough to go completely against self-preservation is not that likely.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 feeder wrote:
Also consider we are starving tens of millions of people to death because we are tired of hearing the same empty bluster we have been hearing for 70+ years from this government.

We're not starving anybody. It's the North Korean regime which is doing that. We are not responsible for this even if we blockade the country, that is 100% on the Kim regime. They're the ones refusing to stop the suffering for their pride and power.

We would be the ones meddling with their sovereignity.

How you think US would deal with other countries using power to demand replacement of US goverment with their choosing? Not well I think.

Whole thing is US wanting to be world leader. US doesn't approve you, you go.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 feeder wrote:

We are still creating a massive humanitarian crisis because, after 70 years of empty threats *this* time Kim might do something.

Chance which is near zero. Certainly far lower than US which actually has track record of first strike invasions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
The other issue with totally isolating them is:

From whom? For how long? Till what happens?

Because I can tell you they do a lot of business with Iran, Pakistan, and friends. Food is not a high-tech item. Food is something those countries can provide.

We're not "cutting him off till they starve and revolt" we're "driving him to want to trade functioning nuclear weapons and material for food."

Are you assuming we'd just let ships continue to go to North Korea? No, we'd be blockading them.

So good old piracy and robbing of foreign soveregn country vessels. Why am I not surprised.

Hopefully you realize this would result in massive sanctions against USA from other countries. Invading foreign country or robbing their vessels messing with their sovereignity would be pretty damn sure way to get sanctions against US. US is all about sanctions over Russia over the east europe situation and here US would be doing worse even more blatantly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Morkphoiz wrote:
NK is a really difficult Topic and there really is no easy solution to this feth.

The Problem is that the People of NK are not only heavily indoctrinated by their government but also have no way of learning about the rest of the world. They only know what they've been allowed to know about the world which isnt much. There is no Internet or travelling or international TV for them. Every bit of Information is controlled by the government. The majority of citizens would never understand that getting rid of that absurd Regime would be just for their own good. They'd fight rigorously against the "capitalists".

I have, and I'm so sorry to say that, no hope for the citizens of North Korea. If the Kim regime goes to war they will too. And they will die by the millions for that stupid fat fethboy. There will be no peaceful way to solve this. If the conflict escalates NK will have to be eradicated. The brainwashed cattle will never be able to open their minds for the rest of the world. They will fight and die for nothing and the survivors will have no place in this world. I hope i'm wrong tho.

Well situation isn't going to change in a hurry but nothing is permanent so things are going to change eventually. Now it's just matter of US not deciding to sacrifice hundreds of thousands if not more plus trillions of dollars worth of money to get rid of yet another leader they disagree with.

Morkphoiz wrote:
NK is a really difficult Topic and there really is no easy solution to this feth.

The Problem is that the People of NK are not only heavily indoctrinated by their government but also have no way of learning about the rest of the world. They only know what they've been allowed to know about the world which isnt much. There is no Internet or travelling or international TV for them. Every bit of Information is controlled by the government. The majority of citizens would never understand that getting rid of that absurd Regime would be just for their own good. They'd fight rigorously against the "capitalists".

I have, and I'm so sorry to say that, no hope for the citizens of North Korea. If the Kim regime goes to war they will too. And they will die by the millions for that stupid fat fethboy. There will be no peaceful way to solve this. If the conflict escalates NK will have to be eradicated. The brainwashed cattle will never be able to open their minds for the rest of the world. They will fight and die for nothing and the survivors will have no place in this world. I hope i'm wrong tho.

Do you really not expect to get mocked for posting like this? At any point while advocating for the wholesale murder of every last North Korean you could simply have decided to stop typing and use your browser to go somewhere else.

Sorry if this has already been covered, but I heard on the radio this morning that China has a new reason to be concerned with NK. It seems the mountain that the North Koreans have been testing their nukes in is in danger of collapsing, leaking out radiation that would reach into China.

We should start bombing NK with money bombs. Big bushels of $1 to $100 bills. We could get several allied countries to start dropping their own currency as well. That would destablize the regime faster than anything else.

Of course, this plan is incredibly foolish and stupid.

tneva82 wrote:

Hopefully you realize this would result in massive sanctions against USA from other countries. Invading foreign country or robbing their vessels messing with their sovereignity would be pretty damn sure way to get sanctions against US. US is all about sanctions over Russia over the east europe situation and here US would be doing worse even more blatantly.

No it wouldn't. First off because we are actually at War with them and have been since 1950. So it's perfectly legal in every sense.

And no, this would not be worse than the Ukraine situation. Russia destabilizing and invading Ukraine is far worse than the US dealing with a country we've been at war with for 67 years.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Easy E wrote:
We should start bombing NK with money bombs. Big bushels of $1 to $100 bills. We could get several allied countries to start dropping their own currency as well. That would destablize the regime faster than anything else.

Of course, this plan is incredibly foolish and stupid.

And it wouldn't do anything. Dropping foreign currency into a closed country where it's worthless(except as toilet paper) isn't going to do anything to destabilize their regime.

The US is not technically at war with NK. South Korea is, but the US is not, and the US is there under the auspices of UN peacekeeping action, the United States congress has never voted, passed, and declared a state of war between the United States of America and North Korea. We are there to protect and assist South Korea, not because we are at formal war with North Korea.

More to the point, the war has been over from a practical standpoint and frozen in tense but largely stable stable ceasefire for a lifetime.

Russia has refused to stop oil shipments to NK. On top of china refusing to embargo NK. So much for that allies nonsense.

 Frazzled wrote:
Russia has refused to stop oil shipments to NK. On top of china refusing to embargo NK. So much for that allies nonsense.

China is not going to completely embargo NK, they arent going to let the NK regime collapse as long as US forces are present on the Korean peninsula, especially with the prospect of a large scale humanitarian disaster and hundreds of thousands or a couple million North Koreans attempting to flee to China if the regime does collapse. Anyone expecting otherwise is being naieve.

However, China has also backed sanctions in the past and has executed probably some of the most painful sanctions on NK of late, including turning back most coal imports that are NK's biggest source of foreign currency.

Russia is mostly just trolling at this point.

Considering trade between China and NK increased in he last year, including coal, any arguments that they are supporting sanctions or doing anything besides using NK are a distraction from their trade imbalance is,at best, specious.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
So basically back out of the region and let China expand into the countries? With the expanding they've been doing in the South China Sea, I could easily see them subjugating the Korean peninsula, and we'd see the Asian continent equivalent of the USSR. That would be the only good "out"?

I don't think China has ever expressed any indication of desire to invade and subjugate Korea. Only time China ever tried that was more than 2000 years ago in 100 BC, and even then their colonies only occupied a part of Korea.
China doesn't really have need for territorial expansion. As long as it is not an area they have historical claims to (like with the South China Sea) I don't think we will have to be fearing Chinese invasions. And even then, a China-controlled North Korea would probably be an improvement over the current situation...

China doesn't have any need for territorial expansion?

No disrespect Iron captain, but have you ever heard of Tibet?

Annexed by the Qing, far removed from the Maoists that currently rule China. It has been a Chinese territory ever since, apart from a short interlude in the early 20th century when the Qing collapsed and China entered a period of anarchy and war that lasted until the Maoists defeated all rival factions and established control over most of the Qing dynasty's former territory including Tibet, giving rise to the modern-day Chinese state.

Saying China might invade Korea because they once invaded Tibet is like saying England might try to invade and annex France because some English king once upon a time annexed Scotland.
Just because a previous government centuries ago engaged in territorial expansion does not mean the current, modern-day government wants more territorial expansion. Every modern country has engaged in conquest and annexation in the past. By your logic, because of those past territorial expansions, now all countries in the world would want to invade Korea?

Wait, are you defending the invasion and annexation of Tibet?

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Russia has refused to stop oil shipments to NK. On top of china refusing to embargo NK. So much for that allies nonsense.

China is not going to completely embargo NK, they arent going to let the NK regime collapse as long as US forces are present on the Korean peninsula, especially with the prospect of a large scale humanitarian disaster and hundreds of thousands or a couple million North Koreans attempting to flee to China if the regime does collapse. Anyone expecting otherwise is being naieve.

However, China has also backed sanctions in the past and has executed probably some of the most painful sanctions on NK of late, including turning back most coal imports that are NK's biggest source of foreign currency.

Russia is mostly just trolling at this point.

To be fair I don't think the western world should hope that NK collpases either. Suppose that did happen. If anything recent is to go by the ability of large nations to stop countries going into free fall after a regime collapse is wishful thinking. Therefore a regime collapse may see internal fights between people who try and take over and it probably will be a bloody struggle. That requires weapons and hence money. If you happened to be sitting on the nuke technology then there will be 'factions' out there that would happily pay a lot for whoever is holding on to it at the time. In essence a destabilised NK is likely to result in nukes being placed on the open market and the risks that then involves.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Easy E wrote:
We should start bombing NK with money bombs. Big bushels of $1 to $100 bills. We could get several allied countries to start dropping their own currency as well. That would destablize the regime faster than anything else.

Of course, this plan is incredibly foolish and stupid.

GreyTemplar wrote: And it wouldn't do anything. Dropping foreign currency into a closed country where it's worthless(except as toilet paper) isn't going to do anything to destabilize their regime.

Great, nothing to lose by trying it then.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Russia has refused to stop oil shipments to NK. On top of china refusing to embargo NK. So much for that allies nonsense.

China is not going to completely embargo NK, they arent going to let the NK regime collapse as long as US forces are present on the Korean peninsula, especially with the prospect of a large scale humanitarian disaster and hundreds of thousands or a couple million North Koreans attempting to flee to China if the regime does collapse. Anyone expecting otherwise is being naieve.

However, China has also backed sanctions in the past and has executed probably some of the most painful sanctions on NK of late, including turning back most coal imports that are NK's biggest source of foreign currency.

Russia is mostly just trolling at this point.

To be fair I don't think the western world should hope that NK collpases either. Suppose that did happen. If anything recent is to go by the ability of large nations to stop countries going into free fall after a regime collapse is wishful thinking. Therefore a regime collapse may see internal fights between people who try and take over and it probably will be a bloody struggle. That requires weapons and hence money. If you happened to be sitting on the nuke technology then there will be 'factions' out there that would happily pay a lot for whoever is holding on to it at the time. In essence a destabilised NK is likely to result in nukes being placed on the open market and the risks that then involves.

Which the US will buy up at insane prices, and therefore fund that faction onto victory!

Fraz, I hate to point this out to you but you've been chasing your tail in this thread.

There's no leaving Korea. There's no Ignoring Korea. There are no easy, simple answers in Korea, but there may just be a war there yet again.


I'd like to get into a debate with Iron Captain about Tibet, but that's an argument for another thread, and I think it's tangentially related to his justifications over Crimea, but that's a whole 'nother barrel of fish.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
He's not going to stay in power long if he keeps blasting missiles over Japan.

And he's going to lose power and end up dead if he rolls over and meekly accepts a nuclear disarmament deal. So Kim plays this constant game of brinkmanship. And what you keep on ignoring is that brinkmanship can quickly go to a place no-one intended in the first place.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
If China truly put their foot down and locked down the border with North Korea, the regime would fold fairly fast due to internal problems.

China has turned the tap off on the oil pipeline off before, you know. NK didn't fold. The military has large stockpiles of gas, and between social pressure, government rationing and just letting people go without and freeze through winter, NK absorbed the loss. When negotiations were reached, no-one felt the loss of oil weakened NK's position at all.

The NK economy is fragile. But this idea that China or the US could just choose to collapse the country economically tomorrow is nonsense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Sure. They'll say that is what is happening. But their people aren't going to listen to them when they're starving. And we're not talking everybody in the country isn't getting enough food. We're talking nobody in the country will have any food at all except in whatever bunker Kim hides in.

Right now NK exports food. A couple of times in the past when they had massive crop failures they needed food imports, but most years they export a lot of fish and other foodstuffs, and the only food imported is grain. They're not going to starve if China and the US stops trade, unless that also coincides with another crop failure.

Even then, the last time the crops failed and negotiations over the provision of food dragged out, people were starving and the regime still didn't collapse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 d-usa wrote:
And this is called trying to have it both ways.

Great pick up. Nicely done.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Oh? Were we at war with Cuba and the Soviet Union when we blockaded Cuba?

Nope. So we can do the same thing here.

The US avoided war only by making sure the action they took against Cuba was explicitly not a blockade, because a blockade is an act of war. So instead the US put in place a quarantine that still allowed ships in to Cuba, as long as the US was first able to inspect them and seize any offensive weaponry.

The US already has a quarantine in place with Cuba, claiming the right to stop any nuclear materials entering the country. Shifting to a blockade, stopping any goods, would be an act of war.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I wouldn't want a repeat of the CMC. JFK was a considerably more level-headed person than Trump; imagine the reaction if one of our ships was rammed by a Chinese warship!

And remember, however level headed JFK may or may not have been, he never backed down and didn't stop the event. Kruschev was the guy who backed down, stopped the brinkmanship and avoided nuclear war. And it cost him his the premiershipwithin a year.

And if Kim backs down, he doesn't just lose his job, he gets killed, and probably most of his family as well. So its unlikely that he will back down.

How the rest of us deal with that is a question that no-one has anything approaching a decent answer.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
That said, with a long land border with China, unless China was on board, a naval blockade wouldnt do much. However, currently China is the primary enforcer of most NK sanctions, they wont let NK fall as long as US forces remain, but they are willing to play ball in some situations.

Mostly China is uninterested ramping up escalation with no endgame in sight. Which is a pretty reasonable position to hold, to be honest.

In the past, when the US has brought forward a deal that reasonably balances the concerns of all sides, then China has been willing to cut off supplies to force North Korea to the table. The same is almost certainly true now. Only issue is the US is floundering on the issue, and not only aren't close to any kind of deal, they don't seem sure how to actually even start on that process. This is in part due to the failings of, you know, the thing we can't mention on dakka, but also because this is a nightmare of a problem with no clear way forward.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
So basically back out of the region and let China expand into the countries? With the expanding they've been doing in the South China Sea, I could easily see them subjugating the Korean peninsula, and we'd see the Asian continent equivalent of the USSR. That would be the only good "out"?

I don't think China has ever expressed any indication of desire to invade and subjugate Korea. Only time China ever tried that was more than 2000 years ago in 100 BC, and even then their colonies only occupied a part of Korea.
China doesn't really have need for territorial expansion. As long as it is not an area they have historical claims to (like with the South China Sea) I don't think we will have to be fearing Chinese invasions. And even then, a China-controlled North Korea would probably be an improvement over the current situation...

China doesn't have any need for territorial expansion?

No disrespect Iron captain, but have you ever heard of Tibet?

Annexed by the Qing, far removed from the Maoists that currently rule China. It has been a Chinese territory ever since, apart from a short interlude in the early 20th century when the Qing collapsed and China entered a period of anarchy and war that lasted until the Maoists defeated all rival factions and established control over most of the Qing dynasty's former territory including Tibet, giving rise to the modern-day Chinese state.

Saying China might invade Korea because they once invaded Tibet is like saying England might try to invade and annex France because some English king once upon a time annexed Scotland.
Just because a previous government centuries ago engaged in territorial expansion does not mean the current, modern-day government wants more territorial expansion. Every modern country has engaged in conquest and annexation in the past. By your logic, because of those past territorial expansions, now all countries in the world would want to invade Korea?

Wait, are you defending the invasion and annexation of Tibet?

No, I am simply stating the factual situation. Tibet was part of China, rebelled against Chinese authority and China put the rebellion down when it finally could spare the manpower.
Personally, I would like to see a free Tibet if that is what the people of Tibet want, as I believe that when a people want to be independent or join a different state, and these people are a large majority in a certain area, then that area should be allowed to secede if they do things in a peaceful manner.
Should you want to discuss this matter further, please PM me, I don't think the mods will like this thread being derailed.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Fraz, I hate to point this out to you but you've been chasing your tail in this thread.

There's no leaving Korea. There's no Ignoring Korea. There are no easy, simple answers in Korea, but there may just be a war there yet again.


I'd like to get into a debate with Iron Captain about Tibet, but that's an argument for another thread, and I think it's tangentially related to his justifications over Crimea, but that's a whole 'nother barrel of fish.

Related to Crimea? To be honest, I wasn't thinking about Crimea at all when I wrote that. I only tried to present the factual situation regarding Tibet. Anyways, if you want to continue the conversation, feel free to PM me. Or maybe we could start a Tibet thread if there is enough interest.

As to North Korea, I agree there are no easy answers. I think it is important that we do not corner them (people get very dangerous when cornered) and keep open dialogue. Reducing tensions and avoiding war of any kind should be the main priority I feel.

 Grey Templar wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Hopefully you realize this would result in massive sanctions against USA from other countries. Invading foreign country or robbing their vessels messing with their sovereignity would be pretty damn sure way to get sanctions against US. US is all about sanctions over Russia over the east europe situation and here US would be doing worse even more blatantly.

No it wouldn't. First off because we are actually at War with them and have been since 1950. So it's perfectly legal in every sense.

And no, this would not be worse than the Ukraine situation. Russia destabilizing and invading Ukraine is far worse than the US dealing with a country we've been at war with for 67 years.

No you aren't and you would be invading foreign country vessels and stealing them(china etc who). Hardly legal. And would result in war with china.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Fraz, I hate to point this out to you but you've been chasing your tail in this thread.

There's no leaving Korea. There's no Ignoring Korea. There are no easy, simple answers in Korea, but there may just be a war there yet again.


I'd like to get into a debate with Iron Captain about Tibet, but that's an argument for another thread, and I think it's tangentially related to his justifications over Crimea, but that's a whole 'nother barrel of fish.

Nah unless Trump goes nuts(well okay that's likely) and Us's checks against idiots like him fail there won't be war. Odds are bigger Kim is flattened by a meteorite.

tneva82 wrote:

Whole thing is US wanting to be world leader. US doesn't approve you, you go.


So good old piracy and robbing of foreign soveregn country vessels. Why am I not surprised.

Hopefully you realize this would result in massive sanctions against USA from other countries. Invading foreign country or robbing their vessels messing with their sovereignity would be pretty damn sure way to get sanctions against US. US is all about sanctions over Russia over the east europe situation and here US would be doing worse even more blatantly.

Piracy by it's definition must be carried out by a non-state actor. And no one is going to sanction the USA at this point in history for basically anything because we are still the beating heart of the world economy.

What exactly do you think the world at large would do if we walked nukes down the entire northern half of the Korean peninsula? Would China cripple their own economy to spite us? Or would Europe stop shipping us automobile parts, liquor and furniture? I think we'd survive.

 Bromsy wrote:

Piracy by it's definition must be carried out by a non-state actor.

Tell that to William Kidd. or Sir Francis Drake. or the Dey of Algiers. or any number of Somali warlords who's armies are financed by piracy and have pretensions of rule.

Hell, if you want to get American, I might draw your eye toward the infamous CSS Alabama.

The only definition of pirate that holds any water is the first one. Hostis humani generis. 'Enemy of Mankind'

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Bromsy wrote:

Piracy by it's definition must be carried out by a non-state actor.

Tell that to William Kidd. or Sir Francis Drake. or the Dey of Algiers. or any number of Somali warlords who's armies are financed by piracy and have pretensions of rule.

Hell, if you want to get American, I might draw your eye toward the infamous CSS Alabama.

The only definition of pirate that holds any water is the first one. Hostis humani generis. 'Enemy of Mankind'

Privateers are not pirates. That's why there is a different word for it.

Also, some of the folks you brought up are just straight up non- state actors... so I would 'tell that to them'.

 Witzkatz wrote:
I'm not sure if calling people "brainwashed cattle" is a good thing to do, regardless of the situation.

Furthermore, there is a thriving black market, there are the SK propaganda speakers blaring at least something not controlled by NK's party line into the country and there are a few people crossing every now and then. And we all know gossip and rumours spread.

I think the risk of a C&C RA2 Yuri Style mob of desperate people brainwashed enough to go completely against self-preservation is not that likely.

It isnt a good thing to do. Drastic situations require drastic words. This is not about the US wanting to get rid of another Country they are not okay with. This is about ending one of the worst crimes one can do to People. I feel for the North koreans. The Kim Regime is still a thing not because he's a wise leader doing good for his People but because they are preventing the People from learning about the world outside of NK. This one of the worst crimes I can think of. What would you do If you found out everything you ever learned about the world was a lie? I think the People would either refuse to believe it or be completely destroyed by the truth.

Of course theres a black market and of course there are some individuals who manage to flee the country but that does still leave about 25 Million People trusting in their god-emperor. What is going on there is evil and it needs to end sooner than later because the way the Regime set it up it could go on like this for a very Long time because the citizens of NK have no way of knowing it better!

I dont know. Maybe carpet bomb the Country with Pictures of the world and some sort of "we are not your enemies" illustrations? Many of the People of nk cant even read. It'd be very difficult to educate them.

 Bromsy wrote:
Piracy by it's definition must be carried out by a non-state actor.

See this is where dakka just really pisses me off. tneva82's claim that it'd be piracy is completely wrong, but then you are also wrong when you claim it doesn't fit the definition of piracy. There's nothing in the definition of piracy that limits it to non-state actors. Maybe you got confused by the presence of privateers and thought that all state and semii-state actors were privateers and therefore couldn't be pirates? Even if that were true, 'oh they're not pirates, they're privateers' would be an absurd position to argue.

I mean, why even go there? It's so easy to just point out that piracy has a primary motive of profit, from capturing boats and cargo. So it involves actively taking to the water and hunting down boats to capture. In contract a blockade is about preventing the movement of goods in to another country, it is not motivated by the desire to capture goods and boats, and so it is not piracy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Morkphoiz wrote:
It isnt a good thing to do. Drastic situations require drastic words. This is not about the US wanting to get rid of another Country they are not okay with. This is about ending one of the worst crimes one can do to People. I feel for the North koreans. The Kim Regime is still a thing not because he's a wise leader doing good for his People but because they are preventing the People from learning about the world outside of NK. This one of the worst crimes I can think of. What would you do If you found out everything you ever learned about the world was a lie? I think the People would either refuse to believe it or be completely destroyed by the truth.

Dude, it was just explained to you that they're not hopelessly brainwashed people who believe absolutely in dear leader. This is a story repeated by NK refugees, by SK aid workers who've worked there, and by Chinese traders (official and non-official).

Probably the biggest misconception about NK other than Kim being totally crazy is that the country is completely isolated. The border with China is nothing like the border with SK, with China there is a constant flow of goods, people and information. Alongside the official trade there is a vast blackmarket. And in the last couple of decades what's been trafficked has really changed, bootleg SK media is still there, but now there's a huge market in cell phones that let NKs talk to their SK family. And the NK government is slowly giving up this battle on information control, years ago a mobile phone or USB might have netted 3 years in a detention camp, now it's likely to receive a threat of punishment that is never followed up on, simply because authorities are realising they can't imprison the huge share of the population with these kinds of devices.

 sebster wrote:

See this is where dakka just really pisses me off. tneva82's claim that it'd be piracy is completely wrong, but then you are also wrong when you claim it doesn't fit the definition of piracy. There's nothing in the definition of piracy that limits it to non-state actors. Maybe you got confused by the presence of privateers and thought that all state and semii-state actors were privateers and therefore couldn't be pirates? Even if that were true, 'oh they're not pirates, they're privateers' would be an absurd position to argue.

Article 15 of the Geneva Convention of the High Seas and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea both define piracy as an act carried out by a private ship.

"Piracy consists of any of the following acts:

"Any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft (or) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any state;
"Any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;
"Any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described (above)"

Sorry that that really pisses you off for whatever reason, but it's hardly an 'absurd' position for me to argue.