Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 374 | 375 | 376 | 377 | 378 | 379 | 380 | 381 | 382 | 383 | 384 | 385 | 386 | 387 | 388 | 389 | 390 | 391 | 392 | 393 | 394 | ... | 1287

gzt

gzt
11677 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1773133 1-May-2017 07:32
Send private message quote this post

Frankv: I think Germany is a good example. East/West Germany only reunited after the collapse of the Communist bloc, despite it being the hope of ordinary people since 1945.

It is not a good example at all. East Germany was very much a client state of the Soviet Union. North Korea on the other hand had an independent outlook long prior to the dissolution of the Soviet bloc and easily survived it. Like it or not, the ideology of Juche (approximately 'self reliance') is not just wallpaper.

frankv
3939 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1773229 1-May-2017 09:50
Send private message quote this post

gzt:
Frankv: I think Germany is a good example. East/West Germany only reunited after the collapse of the Communist bloc, despite it being the hope of ordinary people since 1945.

It is not a good example at all. East Germany was very much a client state of the Soviet Union. North Korea on the other hand had an independent outlook long prior to the dissolution of the Soviet bloc and easily survived it. Like it or not, the ideology of Juche (approximately 'self reliance') is not just wallpaper.

 

I wasn't meaning in the sense of being externally supported, and demonstrating the irrelevance of the hopes of the ordinary people.

 

Communism (as in a single party government elected by the people) is just window dressing... it's now clearly a nepotist dictatorship. Possibly they might have done better to be less independent, and become a true vassal state of China or the USSR.

 

Rather, what I meant was that it is costing NK more and more economically (and therefore, in hardship for its people) to maintain its posture of independence and self reliance. Each year the situation gets worse as they fall further behind their competitors/enemies technologically. To make matters worse, it has surely cost a large chunk of NK's resources to develop nuclear weapons and missile systems, with questionable strategic benefit. 

 

 


 
 
 
 


Fred99
11140 posts

Uber Geek


  #1773434 1-May-2017 13:04
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

 

Im pretty much out of this thread as its anti US sentiment and/or anti Trump sentiment (despite that Trump is totally and fully irrelevant) rather than the global view of all interested party nations. Id be very happy to see the US pull out 100% so you can see where the dust settles. And that will make the NK issue seem puny.

 

 

Trump is "totally and fully irrelevant" only in exactly the same way KJU is "totally and fully irrelevant" to DPRK's position - which hasn't fundamentally changed since KJU assumed power - just a continuation of what they've always done, with more blabber and weird hair.

 

You're seriously deluded if you think that the US position on ROK is primarily one of benevolence toward the people of both Koreas.  It (ROK) is a strategic stronghold for the USA, and they'll do whatever is needed to stay where they are.

 

That is a barrier to future peace - regardless of what you think - and if you're going to have a hissy fit and run away from discussion citing "anti-american sentiment", that changes nothing.

 

I don't believe that the US or PRC want to see a "united" Korea, they might both rather want to see a KJU under control and less threatening, than either of them stepping back and making concessions which could lead to eventual unification.

 

 

 

 


tdgeek
21525 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1773449 1-May-2017 13:38
Send private message quote this post

Fred99:

 

tdgeek:

 

Im pretty much out of this thread as its anti US sentiment and/or anti Trump sentiment (despite that Trump is totally and fully irrelevant) rather than the global view of all interested party nations. Id be very happy to see the US pull out 100% so you can see where the dust settles. And that will make the NK issue seem puny.

 

 

Trump is "totally and fully irrelevant" only in exactly the same way KJU is "totally and fully irrelevant" to DPRK's position - which hasn't fundamentally changed since KJU assumed power - just a continuation of what they've always done, with more blabber and weird hair.

 

You're seriously deluded if you think that the US position on ROK is primarily one of benevolence toward the people of both Koreas.  It (ROK) is a strategic stronghold for the USA, and they'll do whatever is needed to stay where they are.

 

That is a barrier to future peace - regardless of what you think - and if you're going to have a hissy fit and run away from discussion citing "anti-american sentiment", that changes nothing.

 

I don't believe that the US or PRC want to see a "united" Korea, they might both rather want to see a KJU under control and less threatening, than either of them stepping back and making concessions which could lead to eventual unification.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your constant name calling when some do not agree with you is tiresome. No better than Trump to be honest. Maybe posts that don't agree with you are fake.

 

UN's have been there since about 1955 ,Trump , weeks, yes, he is not relevant, as he has not done anything Trump-like, yet. I dont expect him to do that either, so yes, irrelevant.

 

I have no idea where you get the idea that I see the US presence as for the good of the people in the two Koreas, thats absurd. They protect their ally, and more so, keep balance in SEA for US strategic reasons. Off course it is predominantly for US reasons.

 

As to hissy fit, wow, ok. We have all said our points over and over, there is little reason to go on and on, which is fine. Perhaps hissy fit could describe you anger when you blame call dissenters to your views? Its a discussion as you mentioned, remember that. 

 

Your last point. I partly agree. US may want a one Korea run by SK, and therefore minus KJU, thats makes sense. If SK is tiring of the US, the US may prefer that still as its less KJU, they will remain in SEA in Japan and the Philippines, peace all round. PRC doesnt I feel, as that makes for a potentially greater US presence in SEA. Unification has to be minus KJU and his antics. Give his people a break. But Its hard to see him going, or becoming part of a one Korea. His policy for NK is a gulf away from SK, although who knows, maybe if he can pull his head in, the US can respond, there might one day be a window.

 

Perhaps there is one day, no need for concessions from PRC or the US, just KJU. His concession is merely to back off his military stance, then everyone wins. You would think there has to be a desire for peace for him and his people, but as I have mentioned, I see him as a dictator, he wants that more than his people being looked after, thats been the trend to date. If he disappeared, I would fully expect a lot of good progress to be made in short order, to A) unify Korea, and B), to reduce any need for a KJU version 2 to pop up and get support.

 

On a humorous note, Trump said this today re NK failed missiles.

 

"I'd rather not discuss it," he said. "But perhaps they're just not very good missiles. But eventually, he'll have good missiles."

 

He added: "And if that happens, we can't allow it to happen."

 

 


frankv
3939 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1773512 1-May-2017 14:25
Send private message quote this post

Fred99:

 

Trump is "totally and fully irrelevant" only in exactly the same way KJU is "totally and fully irrelevant" to DPRK's position - which hasn't fundamentally changed since KJU assumed power - just a continuation of what they've always done, with more blabber and weird hair.

 

 

Whilst it's good that this discussion is somewhat back on-topic now, I disagree.

 

Trump might or might not be exactly the same as KJU, but his situation is completely different from KJU's, because the USA's power structures are completely different from DPRK's. Trump has been unable to make his changes (wall, Muslim ban, etc) *because* there is a judiciary that will stand up to him.

 

 

You're seriously deluded if you think that the US position on ROK is primarily one of benevolence toward the people of both Koreas.  It (ROK) is a strategic stronghold for the USA, and they'll do whatever is needed to stay where they are.

 

 

Of course the US position on Korea (and the rest of the world) is based entirely on self-interest. That's the case for every country in the world.

 

 

I don't believe that the US or PRC want to see a "united" Korea, they might both rather want to see a KJU under control and less threatening, than either of them stepping back and making concessions which could lead to eventual unification.

 

 

I think you're wrong, in the sense that both the USA and PRC want to see a united Korea only on their own terms.... a united Korea under US control would be nice for the US; a united Korea under Chinese control would be great for China. For each of them, though, it's better to have Korea divided than to have the other side get what they want.

 

 


Fred99
11140 posts

Uber Geek


  #1773544 1-May-2017 15:01
Send private message quote this post

frankv:

 

Fred99:

 

 

 

I don't believe that the US or PRC want to see a "united" Korea, they might both rather want to see a KJU under control and less threatening, than either of them stepping back and making concessions which could lead to eventual unification.

 

 

I think you're wrong, in the sense that both the USA and PRC want to see a united Korea only on their own terms.... a united Korea under US control would be nice for the US; a united Korea under Chinese control would be great for China. For each of them, though, it's better to have Korea divided than to have the other side get what they want.

 

 

 

 

Aren't we saying the same thing there? By "under control", I mean stable / less insane - not under the control of either US or PRC.

 

BTW, Trump has been bleating about the judiciary and constitution hindering "progress" (in his opinion - IOW "getting his own way"). Priebus is on record now with a claim that the administration wants to change libel laws, which would require abolishing or amending the 1st Amendment.

 

Trump's fascination with / admiration for strong-man leaders and the far right shows where he's at, Duterte, Putin, Geert Wilders, Le Pen etc. Also continuous verbal attacks on the free press.

 

I believe that Noam Chomsky stated  "The Republican Party Has Become the Most Dangerous Organization in World History".

 

 


gzt

gzt
11677 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1773825 1-May-2017 20:24
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

gzt:
frankv:

 

gzt: 

It is easily possible that Korea in future will politically unify and retain both government systems. 

 

I can't imagine any unification of Korea except by the complete and total collapse of one or other of the current regimes.

 

It is hard for us to imagine. Yet it has been the hope of ordinary people in South and North Korea for a long time now. It is possible. China for instance created the 'One Country, Two Systems' doctrine. Hong Kong and Macau are still conventional 'capitalist' economies. North South Korea unification would look a lot different to the above doctrine because no one side will absorb the other. It would be a very slow process of increasing links. Both sides have put significant thought into unification. In addition DPRK recently removed communism from it's constitutional documents. Not a huge change but that's one less political barrier to unification.

 

HKG and Macau were leased to the British, for 100 years. One Nation, Two Systems, not One Country. The leases expired, Macau 10 years or so later, and returned to China. These were not created by China, they were more inherited by China as HKG and Macau were already running. A material difference. They are autonomous, but they seek mainland China's approval.

 

Removed Communism? Thats BS. China is communist, but acts as capitalist, thats ok. DPRK is communist, end of story. They should remove Democratic that would make more sense. Take DPRK with a grain of salt. Rogue.

 

NK, which is governed by one person, cannot unify. Unless he is happy to step down, or is happy to seek votes from the full Korean population. That wont happen either.

 

You seem to have positive and good thoughts about the prospects, and it would be great if it can happen, but it cannot while NK is a dictatorship. 

 

Really interesting New York Times article today:

 

 

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/30/world/asia/north-korea-economy-marketplace.html

 

Scores of marketplaces have opened in cities across the country since the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, took power five years ago. A growing class of merchants and entrepreneurs is thriving under the protection of ruling party officials.

 

At least 40 percent of the population in North Korea is now engaged in some form of private enterprise, a level comparable to that of Hungary and Poland shortly after the fall of the Soviet bloc, the director of South Korea’s intelligence service, Lee Byung-ho, told lawmakers in a closed-door briefing in February.

 
 
 
 


tdgeek
21525 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1773836 1-May-2017 20:39
Send private message quote this post

gzt:
tdgeek:

 

gzt:
frankv:

 

gzt: 

It is easily possible that Korea in future will politically unify and retain both government systems. 

 

I can't imagine any unification of Korea except by the complete and total collapse of one or other of the current regimes.

 

It is hard for us to imagine. Yet it has been the hope of ordinary people in South and North Korea for a long time now. It is possible. China for instance created the 'One Country, Two Systems' doctrine. Hong Kong and Macau are still conventional 'capitalist' economies. North South Korea unification would look a lot different to the above doctrine because no one side will absorb the other. It would be a very slow process of increasing links. Both sides have put significant thought into unification. In addition DPRK recently removed communism from it's constitutional documents. Not a huge change but that's one less political barrier to unification.

 

HKG and Macau were leased to the British, for 100 years. One Nation, Two Systems, not One Country. The leases expired, Macau 10 years or so later, and returned to China. These were not created by China, they were more inherited by China as HKG and Macau were already running. A material difference. They are autonomous, but they seek mainland China's approval.

 

Removed Communism? Thats BS. China is communist, but acts as capitalist, thats ok. DPRK is communist, end of story. They should remove Democratic that would make more sense. Take DPRK with a grain of salt. Rogue.

 

NK, which is governed by one person, cannot unify. Unless he is happy to step down, or is happy to seek votes from the full Korean population. That wont happen either.

 

You seem to have positive and good thoughts about the prospects, and it would be great if it can happen, but it cannot while NK is a dictatorship. 

 

Really interesting New York Times article today: https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/30/world/asia/north-korea-economy-marketplace.html
Scores of marketplaces have opened in cities across the country since the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, took power five years ago. A growing class of merchants and entrepreneurs is thriving under the protection of ruling party officials.
At least 40 percent of the population in North Korea is now engaged in some form of private enterprise, a level comparable to that of Hungary and Poland shortly after the fall of the Soviet bloc, the director of South Korea’s intelligence service, Lee Byung-ho, told lawmakers in a closed-door briefing in February.

 

It is interesting. And while not trying to rain on your parade, the comments through the article show how much opportunity there is, if KJU let it happen. His goal is economic  management and a nuclear arsenal to combat US invasion. Forget the US, stop being a dick, be peaceful, the world is out there, and for his people. The problem though is oil. As in cashflow. Cashflow is the oil of a business and the economy. There is only so much cash if the economy is rigid. If he lightened up and focussed on the people and not the US, there is less risk of people exiting, if they are genuinely happy, rather than forced to comply and survive. It could be a very very easy transition to a good economy, and happy populous, if he let go two or three tads. Make up with PRC, be good, thats keeps the US at arms length and more. Not hard.


Fred99
11140 posts

Uber Geek


  #1773982 2-May-2017 07:31
Send private message quote this post

So Trump has suggested he's open to having a meeting with KJU "under the right circumstances", which presumably means "not in Pyongyang".

 

This should happen.  If Trump gets naming rights to that hotel tower in Pyongyang and opens a golf course (KJU likes golf apparently) - and if KJU could announce to his people that through tough negotiation he'd forced concessions from the POTUS who was now his and the people of DPRK's BFF.

 

I'm part serious on that, both are unconventional and somewhat random, conventional wasn't working, there's nothing to lose.


tdgeek
21525 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1773986 2-May-2017 07:45
Send private message quote this post

Fred99:

 

So Trump has suggested he's open to having a meeting with KJU "under the right circumstances", which presumably means "not in Pyongyang".

 

This should happen.  If Trump gets naming rights to that hotel tower in Pyongyang and opens a golf course (KJU likes golf apparently) - and if KJU could announce to his people that through tough negotiation he'd forced concessions from the POTUS who was now his and the people of DPRK's BFF.

 

I'm part serious on that, both are unconventional and somewhat random, conventional wasn't working, there's nothing to lose.

 

 

I tend to agree, conventional isn't working, each wants the other to back down first. Even concessions aren't really a concession. No one needs to give DPRK anything, as what is happening is restrictions, not concessions. If DPRK stops its missiles and nuclear and US stops its responses, then the anti concessions, i.e. sanctions,  can be removed, everyones a winner. Perhaps this can be a last attempt to trust DPRK promises to stop its arms race. If they do, many doors open.


MikeB4
15555 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user


  #1773992 2-May-2017 07:52
Send private message quote this post

Not talking does not solve issues. A big problem with politics is that the participants never talk with each other they talk at each other.

tdgeek
21525 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1773997 2-May-2017 08:02
Send private message quote this post

MikeB4: Not talking does not solve issues. A big problem with politics is that the participants never talk with each other they talk at each other.

 

Talking, or at least, agreeing has failed miserably at the DPRK end. But instead of "do this and we will restrict you", it maybe needs to be "you need to stop believing in a US invasion, then we can hammer out both us backing off. We have no desire to invade, you have Russia and PRC on your side, nothing to fear"


Fred99
11140 posts

Uber Geek


  #1774009 2-May-2017 08:32
Send private message quote this post

Failure of past negotiations and pulling out of agreements by DPRK has been at times on very trivial grounds.  In one case they were upset over $25 million cash frozen in a bank account due to sanctions, another case they wanted help from Russia or the US  to "launch a weather satellite" and spat the dummy when told no. I wonder about that - what the problem would have been, presumably the "weather satellite" would have been giving them real-time hi res images of the ROK/DPRK border, but I assume that if you were going to to launch the satellite, you'd have a very good idea of what the payload would be, and in any case the US could take a satellite out with an ASAT if and when needed, subject to international law / treaty.

 

End result is DPRK built their own launch vehicle, launched a satellite last year, and have a multi-stage system that doubles as an ICBM and could reach the USA.  Probably unreliable, and probably not capable of delivering a nuclear warhead as the DPRK probably haven't miniaturised their weapons yet, but they probably can in future.  


dafman
3377 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  #1774022 2-May-2017 08:58
Send private message quote this post

"The Reign of Idots." Link here


MikeB4
15555 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user


  #1774032 2-May-2017 09:23
Send private message quote this post

There is a fact of war that overwhelms all others. All participants believe they are right, however, they over look one very important aspect...........it's bollocks.


1 | ... | 374 | 375 | 376 | 377 | 378 | 379 | 380 | 381 | 382 | 383 | 384 | 385 | 386 | 387 | 388 | 389 | 390 | 391 | 392 | 393 | 394 | ... | 1287
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic





News »

Huawei launches IdeaHub Pro in New Zealand
Posted 27-Oct-2020 16:41


Southland-based IT specialist providing virtual services worldwide
Posted 27-Oct-2020 15:55


NASA discovers water on sunlit surface of Moon
Posted 27-Oct-2020 08:30


Huawei introduces new features to Petal Search, Maps and Docs
Posted 26-Oct-2020 18:05


Nokia selected by NASA to build first ever cellular network on the Moon
Posted 21-Oct-2020 08:34


Nanoleaf enhances lighting line with launch of Triangles and Mini Triangles
Posted 17-Oct-2020 20:18


Synology unveils DS16211+
Posted 17-Oct-2020 20:12


Ingram Micro introduces FootfallCam to New Zealand channel
Posted 17-Oct-2020 20:06


Dropbox adopts Virtual First working policy
Posted 17-Oct-2020 19:47


OPPO announces Reno4 Series 5G line-up in NZ
Posted 16-Oct-2020 08:52


Microsoft Highway to a Hundred expands to Asia Pacific
Posted 14-Oct-2020 09:34


Spark turns on 5G in Auckland
Posted 14-Oct-2020 09:29


AMD Launches AMD Ryzen 5000 Series Desktop Processors
Posted 9-Oct-2020 10:13


Teletrac Navman launches integrated multi-camera solution for transport and logistics industry
Posted 8-Oct-2020 10:57


Farmside hits 10,000 RBI customers
Posted 7-Oct-2020 15:32









Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.