
New Sanctions Imposed on North Korea as it Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack - cpeterso
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/08/world/asia/north-korea-warns-of-pre-emptive-nuclear-attack.html
======
JoeAltmaier
Wow. More juvenile posturing, or the beginning of the end for North Korea?
Depends on whether anyone takes them seriously. And with a growing nuclear
capability, they can't be taken not-seriously. This is suicide for them.

~~~
ihuman
I agree. What I don't understand is why they are doing this. They have nothing
to gain, and everything to lose.

~~~
benjoffe
A rational North Korean state would not engage in nuclear war in just about
any scenario as it would mean almost certain destruction for itself in
response. To help persuade their enemies not to invade they try to appear as
_irrational_ as possible.

There's an interesting segment in this psychology lecture about irrationality
that seems related:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5IrSEIPdwk#t=44m36s>

    
    
        There is some advantage to being irrational, to having a temper.
        Because if you have a temper and you're known to be irrational, people
        are forced, by dint of your irrationality, to treat you better. Who am
        I going to take from? The person who's extremely reasonable or the
        person who has a hair-trigger temper? Well, I'm going to pick on a
        reasonable person because the unreasonable person might do unreasonable
        things. And this is faintly paradoxical, but often to be irrational, or
        at least to have a reputation for mild irrationality, gives you an
        edge.

~~~
adventured
I don't believe there's any advantage to being irrational or having a temper.
Sooner or later someone is going to call your bluff. If you initiate violence,
you might get your ass kicked by someone stronger. If you flip out
irrationally, they can simply laugh at you as you flail about, or begin
ignoring you / avoiding you.

When someone calls your bluff, it's game over. Everything changes from that
point forward. Either you can never act that way again, because people will
know it's a bluff, or you freak out and do something terrible and then one way
or another will be dealt with (police called, go to jail, get put on ignore,
get an ass kicking, get nuked to complete annihilation, whatever).

The tragedy here is that America has subsidized North Korea's behavior and
ability to exist. We're partially responsible for their regime thinking it can
keep doing this, and naturally their threats have to escalate. Their bluff
should have been called a very long time ago. It's like taking in someone
bullying you, clothing him, feeding him, etc.

~~~
scarmig
Do you or any of your family members live in Seoul?

~~~
adventured
I'm not connecting the point between that question and my position on whether
being irrational or having a temper is advantageous.

If you were just asking to be nice, I have a few old friends in South Korea
(in the military, teaching, and local) but no family.

------
saosebastiao
DRPK's military is still stuck in the 1950's.

Our military got caught with its pants down when going up against a military
that was trained in the hills of Afghanistan in the 1980's...and responded by
combining its perfected 1950's style warfare with a 2010's style drone
warfare, and fairly quickly learned its lesson with the 1980's style warfare.

I can't imagine what it would be like to go up against a military that has
skipped 2 generations ahead of yours. North Korea either truly has no clue
what they are up against, or they are just trying to get more aid money again.

~~~
adventured
Isn't the case that the US obliterated the Taliban's _military_ forces (not
their ability to wage a guerrilla war) using a rather clever special forces +
bombing + northern alliance approach?

I don't think we got caught with our pants down at all. Guerrilla war in
Afghanistan always has to be assumed. I personally don't know anybody that
thought a prolonged occupation of Afghanistan was going to go well, and I'm
talking about laypersons. The powers that be might have thought they could
handle it, but that's not the same as getting caught with your pants down.

I'd argue the US got caught with its pants down radically more so in Iraq than
Afghanistan (specifically post the initial invasion).

------
rthomas6
It's funny how North Korea's open threats against South Korea and the US are
met with basically rolling of eyes, while veiled threats from Iran against
Israel and the US are met with massive fear and warmongering.

~~~
adventured
It's a concern about Iran's (their leadership's) willingness to commit suicide
to destroy Israel. And particularly about the belief in self-fulfilling
prophecies in religious doctrine (whether Christianity, Islam, or Judaism).
Communists don't generally believe in an afterlife, and I would argue also
aren't viewed as being as likely to be suicide bombers. It is thus Iran
presents a different kind of fear: namely that the world is afraid they're
willing to die to kill their enemy; that Iran is actually crazier than North
Korea, despite the bluffing on North Korea's part.

~~~
cpeterso
In what ways is Iran's leadership more "willing to commit suicide" than North
Korea's leadership? We know North Korea has nuclear weapons and they have
directly threatened to use them against the US. We don't _know_ Iran has
nuclear weapons and, AFAIK, they have not threatened the US. Iran has
threatened Israel, but Iran is responding to actual military strikes from
Israel. Also, Iran has shown for the decades that they (most likely) won't act
on their threats.

------
enginous
Interesting how the New York Times covers this more as a threat than a
political move.

The New York Times: "North Korea Warns of Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack"

BBC News: "North Korea ramps up nuclear rhetoric as UN vote looms"
(<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21695887>)

~~~
adventured
Easier to trivialize when you're not the one being threatened with nuclear
attack I think.

------
duiker101
Will someone excuse my excessive ignorance and be so kind to explain me why
the DPRK is so pissed with the US? Thanks

~~~
pm90
The main reason is that the US essentially fought the Korean War for South
Korea against the North, and still maintains many active military bases and
thousands of troops in South Korea, especially one right in the middle of
Seoul. Any attempt to invade the South would mean war with the US, thus one of
the longstanding demands of the DPRK has been that the US remove all its
troops from the country.

Also, the US helps the South Korea military (and previously, its economy). I
believe there is a clause in the constitution where in the case of a full
scale war, a US general will assume command of all the military forces of the
South

~~~
xhrpost
Interesting. Here's a quick copy I found on Wikipedia: "A still functioning UN
Command is technically the top of the chain of command of all forces in South
Korea, including the US forces and the entire South Korean military – if a
sudden escalation of war between North and South Korea were to occur the
United States would assume control of the South Korean armed forces in all
military and paramilitary moves. However, in September 2006, the Presidents of
the United States and the Republic of Korea agreed that South Korea should
assume the lead for its own defense. In early 2007, the U.S. Secretary of
Defense and ROK Minister of National Defense determined that South Korea will
assume wartime operational control of its forces on December 1, 2015. U.S.
Forces Korea will transform into a new joint-warfighting command,
provisionally described as Korea Command (KORCOM)."

------
lifeisstillgood
I used to live next door to a rather cool and beautiful Japanese woman, and
the only time I _ever_ saw her rattled was when N Korea first tested in 2006.
She was genuinely scared her country would be attacked the next day.

North Korea should scare everyone. NK's only ally, China, has clearly stood
alongside _everyone else in the fricking world_ and proposed sanctions. That
is like USA cutting off Isreal's aid - its huge.

(Although they may have given them the damn bombs in the first place)

No one is going to lob nuclear bombs back, but right now, any freighter
leaving Pyongyang is going to be searched very very throughly. And I would
move out of Seoul for a few days.

------
zubentok
And nobody cares because there is no oil or other goods to harvest in North
Korea.

~~~
pyre
If they had those resources, they would just have stronger ties with China.
They have long had the ability to rain destruction down on Seoul, South Korea
(a heavily populated city with strong ties in the West, and increasingly ties
with China, AFAIK) in the event of aggression against them. None of the Middle
East countries have such a situation (that I know of).

------
arbuge
Your monthly dose of brinkmanship from the DPRK.

------
pilooch
There's this counter-intuitive trend that when the heritage of a dictatorial
seat goes to a young one, everyone awaits for reforms, whereas the regime
tends to rapidly increase its aggressive behavior. The same happened in Syria
when Bachar got his seat. I'd be interested in listing other examples,
typically in less recent history.

~~~
mseebach
Well, I guess it still counts as recent history, but Gorbachev and the August
1991 coup in the Soviet Union - for an example of what happens when you try to
be a reformer.

I really don't think it's counter-intuitive? Even a dictator doesn't rule
alone, so when there's a change of power, the new ruler needs to assure his
immediate subordinates that their loyalty will not go unrewarded and that he's
not going to be a reformer and throw them and their fiefdoms under the bus.

If you're a regime big-wig in North Korea you're not dumb enough that you
don't know that you're in the wrong - or, at least, that there is absolutely
no way you and your family is going to survive having to explain yourself to
the public.

So if your boss decides to put the country on the path to more freedom, you
have the option of seeking asylum for your and your family in one of the few
countries in the world that will take you, and live the rest of your life (a)
in fear of angry underlings out for your life (b) in a lot less comfort than
you're used to - or to stage a coup, kill your boss and assume power to
"protect the revolution against corrupting, imperialist US influences".

------
tawgx
The only comfort in their maniacal prison system state is that they make funny
propaganda videos (the one with "we are the world" should totally get an SNL
cover). Other than that it's a complete human tragedy. Let's hope for a Korean
spring soon..

------
raverbashing
I think the relevant players (I mean, not the UN and their 'strong-worded
letters') have decided it's time to call the bluff

Doing a Nuclear test is one thing, mounting it on a rocket and sending it far
away is another.

I think they decided to stop this before it gets ugly.

~~~
swatkat
Off-topic: <http://xkcd.com/859/> :)

~~~
raverbashing
Thank FSM I don't program in lisp :)

------
dutchbrit
I've been wondering all day how this will end, and especially if anything will
happen on/before the 11th of March when North Korea will apparently cancel
cease-fire if the South don't stop doing drills.

~~~
netrus
It's just another layer of threat. Nothing substantial will happen in NK, they
know the can only lose. My best guess is that it's all propaganda aimed at the
people in NK to secure the future of the elite.

~~~
dutchbrit
Well, they do have a huge army(
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Peoples_Army> ), things could get quite
messy. They might not do anything, except threaten others. But sometimes
others react to threats...

------
sidcool
Does Pyongyang have no PR?

~~~
mseebach
This is their PR. You wrongly assume you're the target for their PR-moves.

------
LatvjuAvs
I like these sanctions, the one aimed at Iraq starting from 1990's. Really
helped for everyone living there. Who would not love a dying child from hunger
on his arms, it is like a Easter present.

~~~
freehunter
There's a pretty easy way for the government to avoid situations like that. If
your people are at the mercy of foreign governments in order to survive, it
really is in your best interest to not continuously piss them off.

~~~
chiph
The DPRK has been taught over the years that if they rattle their sabers and
then back down, they get foreign aid. As far as they're concerned, it's a
winning strategy.

Is it a sane strategy? Decidedly not -- one day the foreign aid won't come, or
it won't be enough, and their only option is to escalate. When they become a
credible & real threat (which they are very quickly becoming), other nations
will have no choice but to act out of self-preservation.

