
Why Do North Koreans Hate Us? One Reason - uyoakaoma
https://theintercept.com/2017/05/03/why-do-north-koreans-hate-us-one-reason-they-remember-the-korean-war/
======
djsumdog
Years ago I remember watching was was supposedly leaked anti-west propaganda
from the DPRK. Weather it's really made/displayed in North Korea is a subject
of debate, but you can find such videos around the Internet.

What was interesting is that a lot of what they describe is the video are
valid criticisms of the west: our obsession with celebrity, our materialism,
et cetera.

Of course the DPRK is still a slave state, with terrible suppression of any
deviating political beliefs and labour camps producing the minimum resources
for the nation to survive.

It's interesting though, that a little bit of the truth mixed in with a lot of
lies, can keep so much control. And What we don't realise in the west is that
the same system is in place. Before it was "fake news," it was just called
"news," and the majority of our networks sprinkle in blatant falsehoods with
many truths.

It's like Final Fantasy 7 where Rufus says his father tried to control the
world with money, but that took too much effort so he was just going to use
fear.

In the west, we're not in slave states and many countries have high standards
of living and a relative high freedom of protest and expression. It gives
people the illusion they are free when their governments will simply support
their richest demographic and go to wear despite the will of the people.

~~~
mpfundstein
+1 for FF VII reference

------
andreasley
I found the following interview with two north koreans who escaped very
insightful and touching:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyqUw0WYwoc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyqUw0WYwoc)

------
douche
Truman wouldn't let MacArthur win the war, and so we've had this shit sandwich
in our laps for the last sixty years.

~~~
krapp
MacArthur was batshit insane and wanted to use nukes:

    
    
        "Of all the campaigns of my life, 20 major ones to be exact, [Korea was] 
        the one I felt most sure of was the one I was deprived of waging. I 
        could have won the war in Korea in a maximum of 10 days.... I would 
        have dropped between 30 and 50 atomic bombs on his air bases and other 
        depots strung across the neck of Manchuria.... It was my plan as our 
        amphibious forces moved south to spread behind us—from the Sea of Japan 
        to the Yellow Sea—a belt of radioactive cobalt. 
     
        It could have been spread from wagons, carts, trucks and planes.... 
        For at least 60 years there could have been no land invasion of 
        Korea from the north. The enemy could not have marched across that 
        radiated belt.[0]"
    

The only nation to ever use nuclear weapons in warfare then normalizing their
use would have created a far worse fate for the US than not winning the war in
Korea decisively.

[0][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_Truman%27s_relief_of...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_Truman%27s_relief_of_General_Douglas_MacArthur#Nuclear_weapons)

~~~
valuearb
There is a reasonable argument that the use of nukes would haven saved
millions of lives, like it did in Japan.

Ulysses S Grant was criticized for the heavy losses his armies took and
inflicted, but he ended a stalemated war that was killing hundreds of
thousands of people a year.

~~~
krapp
There is also a reasonable argument that the use of nukes would have
demonstrated the US, being the only power to ever use nuclear weapons in
combat until that point and having thus proven willing to continue doing so
indiscriminately, to be a much greater threat to the world than the Axis
powers were, or the Communist powers at the time.

~~~
valuearb
That some might not understand is a poor reason to sentence half the world to
slavery and death. Many of the peaceniks of the 50s grew to regret their
positions when they found out what was really going on behind the iron
curtain.

Remember when Bertrand Russell was advocating a pre-emptive nuclear war to
ensure it would be the last nuclear war?

------
valuearb
Summary: War is still heck and water is still wet. Author would have preferred
millions to die in re-education camps instead of combat.

------
mythrwy
So that's where we are. And the US did terrible things. It shameful and it
should never do those type of things again.

But the conflict should have been finished rather than being left to fester
for decades. The society could have been rebuild and almost certainly would
have prospered.

So now we have a problem. I don't think Kim can be left alone, he simply is
too dangerous. Talks and negotiations and sanctions haven't worked. I doubt
they are likely to in the future. I believe he will simply continue to acquire
destructive technology affecting the balance of power in the region and
possibly the world and at one point may well use it as he continually
threatens to do.

I am pretty anti war. Extremely anti-colonialism. But in the case of NK I
think the situation needs solving and soon. I believe they should be disarmed,
by force if necessary and I'd support this even though I support almost no
other US military adventures. It's a shame we let it get to this point but we
did somehow. I say this as an American with American and allies interest in
mind. I suppose there are other perspectives.

~~~
krapp
>I'd support this even though I support almost no other US military
adventures.

Two problems - China and Russia, both allies of North Korea, and both nuclear
powers.

Neither particularly _likes_ North Korea, but they like American military
power in Asia much less.

~~~
mythrwy
Ya well, like I say, it is a mess. But Kim can't be left to continue.
Regardless of how Russia and China feel about the situation.

And I'm pretty sure neither will embrace the final solution and cause their
own demise in defense of Kim.

Sooner is better than later in this case. The ideal time was 60 years ago.

