North Korea issues air raid alert, orders military to stand ready

[DDR]

The tension continues in the Korean Peninsula:

http://rt.com/news/north-korea-air-raid-alert-568/


North Korea has issued an air raid alert on Thursday and ordered its military to stand ready, the country’s state media reported.

The alert was issued at 9:32 am local time (00:32 am GMT) with military units and civilians told to take cover, Korean Central Television said.

A news report by South Korea’s Yonhap news agency suggested that the warning appears to be a part of a military drill, though this has not been confirmed by Pyongyang.

The alert comes amid growing tensions on the Korean Peninsula and ongoing saber-rattling that followed the UN Security Council's imposition of strict sanctions on Pyongyang over its third underground nuclear test in February.

On Monday, the US said that every military resource at its disposal, including its nuclear arsenal, would be available to South Korea in the event of a confrontation with the North.

Earlier in March, Pyongyang threatened all-out nuclear war with the US and South Korea after the two countries began joint military drills on the Korean Peninsula. The North also nullified the 1953 armistice that ended the Korean War, claiming the drills were preparations for an invasion.

[DDR]

And right now it's getting hotter:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/21/us-korea-north-attack-idUSBRE92K02W20130321


(Reuters) - North Korea's supreme military command said on Thursday its "precision attack" weapons have U.S. navy bases in Guam and Okinawa in their sights and will attack them if it is provoked.

"The United States is advised not to forget that our precision target tools have within their range the Anderson Air Force base on Guam where the B-52 takes off, as well as the Japanese mainland where nuclear powered submarines are deployed and the navy bases on Okinawa," the North Korean command spokesman was quoted by KCNA news agency.

North Korea earlier made a threat to stage a nuclear attack on the United States, something that is well outside of its current military capacity, although the U.S. Pacific bases are in range of its medium range missiles.

The North has responded angrily to reports that the United States has flown B-52 bomber sorties over the Korean peninsula as part of the annual military drills with South Korean forces.

[Os Cangaceiros]

*yawn*

shit or get off the toilet, North Korea.

[ВАЛТЕР]

I know it is just sabre-rattling and the usual N. Korean rhetoric because if they truly were readying for an attack, they wouldn't sit there and announce to the US and S. Koreans exactly what bases they will strike, what weapons they have at their disposal and whatnot. Any military commander knows that keeping these things secret is basic operational security.

Telling your enemy what bases you will strike and with what is like telling the opposing football team your entire game-plan.

[kashkin]

I know it is just sabre-rattling and the usual N. Korean rhetoric because if they truly were readying for an attack, they wouldn't sit there and announce to the US and S. Koreans exactly what bases they will strike, what weapons they have at their disposal and whatnot. Any military commander knows that keeping these things secret is basic operational security.

Telling your enemy what bases you will strike and with what is like telling the opposing football team your entire game-plan.

Indeed, but that is what I find so weird. Surely the North Koreans must know that South Korea and America won't take this seriously, for the reasons you mentioned above, but then why even bother? If North Korea doesn't do anything, then it doesn't matter, and if they do South Korea and America know what North Korean plans are.

[ВАЛТЕР]

Indeed, but that is what I find so weird. Surely the North Koreans must know that South Korea and America won't take this seriously, for the reasons you mentioned above, but then why even bother? If North Korea doesn't do anything, then it doesn't matter, and if they do South Korea and America know what North Korean plans are.

It could be some (rather silly) disinformation scheme. To try and force the US and S. Koreans to move their military assets out of fear of a potential strike.

[garrus]

North Korea earlier made a threat to stage a nuclear attack on the United States

Don't mistake this for flame bait, but shouldn't nuclear weapon attacks (threats or not) , a means of war devastating to civilians, be off the table for a self proclaimed socialist state?
Even if it's just "mentioning" it.

[Willin']

the glorious leader needs to prove him self.

[Orange Juche]

Don't mistake this for flame bait, but shouldn't nuclear weapon attacks (threats or not) , a means of war devastating to civilians, be off the table for a self proclaimed socialist state?
Even if it's just "mentioning" it.

Yeah, but Kim Jong-Un is a Juchebag :lol:

[DROSL]

Kim Jung Un is a joke, he must go. He no longer support his grand father's objective of reaching economic autonomy. He's gone mad.

[Orange Juche]

Kim Jung Un is a joke, he must go. He no longer support his grand father's objective of reaching economic autonomy. He's gone mad.

Huh? His grandfather was a joke.

[conmharáin]

A lot of what's wrong with North Korea comes from its bending to pressures from sanctions and Western military posturing. That the D.P.R.K. is making a display is really all that they have left to do. The Songun policy exists because imperialists deliberately keep the Northern government on high alert, which is exhausting and expensive. The method of sanctioning North Korea and maintaining a threatening military presence in that part of the world is siege laid to force North Korea to open up to Western economic exploitation. That Kim is being treated like some kind of megalomaniac is ridiculous, the notorious excesses of the family notwithstanding.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Huh? His grandfather was a joke.

His grand father was actually a major leader in the korean resistance to japanese imperialism on the peninsula and northern china.


as for 'announcing targets' theres something different about obvious strategic targets, and announcing the next few hours of your plans for your first cross border operations.

just sayin.

[Os Cangaceiros]

His grand father was actually a major leader in the korean resistance to japanese imperialism on the peninsula and northern china.

Yeah how many battles did he fight in again, according to DPRK propaganda? Something like 100,000? :lol:

[Rusty Shackleford]

Yeah how many battles did he fight in again, according to DPRK propaganda? Something like 100,000? :lol:

The DPRK may exaggerate things, its no secret, but he and the communists were quite popular across the peninsula after the war

[conmharáin]

I'm a little concerned by this weird tendency to treat the D.P.R.K. as the villain of a situation which it's pitted against the United States, the foremost imperialist power on the planet.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I'm a little concerned by this weird tendency to treat the D.P.R.K. as the villain of a situation which it's pitted against the United States, the foremost imperialist power on the planet.

Yes the conflict on the Korean peninsula and the actions of the USA have contributed to the present situation in the DPRK, but honestly a big part of the reason why the DPRK is so shitty is because of some of the policy measures taken by the DPRK's leadership. In the words of Bruce Cumings, who some DPRK apologists have cited approvingly here in the past:


Cumings writes in his book North Korea (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea): The Hermit Kingdom, "I have no sympathy for the North, which is the author of most of its own troubles," but alludes to the "significant responsibility that all Americans share for the garrison state that emerged on the ashes of our truly terrible destruction of the North half a century ago."

Also, the stupid bellicose posturing makes them look like a petulant child on the world stage.

[p0is0n]

Yeah, but Kim Jong-Un is a Juchebag :lol:
hahahahhahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hah a million labor credits to you


on topic:
does anyone think this situation is capable with fair chances to escalate into a full blown war on the korean peninsula? i imagine this is mostly saber rattling, although i'm fairly sure i remember the north shelling some south korean island, i'm fairly sure that would constitute as an act of war... perhaps one day they'll step too far?

[conmharáin]

Yes the conflict on the Korean peninsula and the actions of the USA have contributed to the present situation in the DPRK, but honestly a big part of the reason why the DPRK is so shitty is because of some of the policy measures taken by the DPRK's leadership. In the words of Bruce Cumings, who some DPRK apologists have cited approvingly here in the past...

Which are those and what could've been done differently?


Also, the stupid bellicose posturing makes them look like a petulant child on the world stage.

Maybe according to some imperialistic chauvinism they seem like a "petulant child," but it's really only for their lack of any real threat to anyone anywhere.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Which are those and what could've been done differently?

I don't know, maybe songun for one? Or juche before that? Or just generally the state-sponsored leadership cult that was actively fostered by the regime? The DPRK's allocation of food and imports from China? The DPRK's use of camps and torture? Were all of these things inevitable? No, I don't think so, and furthermore I'd argue that many of the DPRK's policy decisions were made in accordance with the self-interest of the upper levels of the DPRK's state and military, not out of some desperate measures which were purely out of conditions foisted upon them.


Maybe according to some imperialistic chauvinism they seem like a "petulant child," but it's really only for their lack of any real threat to anyone anywhere.

The USA could (and probably would) turn the DPRK into a parking lot if it were attacked. The DPRK leadership knows this, making their threats all the more empty.

[DROSL]

still, he was better. North Korea is completely dillusional they are no longer even communists. It is just a military dictatorship plain and simple.

[DROSL]

Yes and his son invented the hamburger and was born on an unicorn under a rainbow.

[conmharáin]

I don't know, maybe songun for one?

The "military first" policy? Given the U.S. military presence in the region, including provocative demonstrations and war games, the Northern military is always on high alert. This is a tactic of siege; the U.S. is trying to sap them of energy and resources by keeping the North's military in a constant, exhaustive, and expensive state of urgency.


Or juche before that?

The "self-reliance" policy? North Korea is the most heavily sanctioned state in the world and modern history. Who were they going to trade with after the collapse of the Eastern Bloc? Would you have had them succumb to pressures to open their country to foreign capitalists?


Or just generally the state-sponsored leadership cult that was actively fostered by the regime? The DPRK's allocation of food and imports from China? The DPRK's use of camps and torture? Were all of these things inevitable? No, I don't think so, and furthermore I'd argue that many of the DPRK's policy decisions were made in accordance with the self-interest of the upper levels of the DPRK's state and military, not out of some desperate measures which were purely out of conditions foisted upon them.

All military rule suffers a dearth of democracy as a rule. The infuriating thing, though, is that the imperialist powers are ultimately responsible for the form of the country's government. No state that exists is separate from capitalism, and the bile I see being poured onto a small, weakling nation does not address the causes of the problems facing North Korea. It is absolutely true that a powerful cult of personality exists, that concentration camps and torture are the government's modus operandi for preventing dissent. But what conclusions can we draw from this on a historical scale? What can we learn about the nature of human society other than "some people are just shitheads and they happen to get into power?"


The USA could (and probably would) turn the DPRK into a parking lot if it were attacked. The DPRK leadership knows this, making their threats all the more empty.

They have some destructive capability. If they didn't, it'd be a lot by now.

[Os Cangaceiros]

The "military first" policy? Given the U.S. military presence in the region, including provocative demonstrations and war games, the Northern military is always on high alert. This is a tactic of siege; the U.S. is trying to sap them of energy and resources by keeping the North's military in a constant, exhaustive, and expensive state of urgency.



The "self-reliance" policy? North Korea is the most heavily sanctioned state in the world and modern history. Who were they going to trade with after the collapse of the Eastern Bloc? Would you have had them succumb to pressures to open their country to foreign capitalists?

For one, the DPRK does have a pretty powerful trading partner in China, which basically keeps the DPRK on life support for it's own geopolitical interests. Seeing as how the DPRK's population isn't very large, at only 24 million, they could easily support their people if it were a priority for them to do so, rather than subject them to the forms of extreme rural deprivation that exist in the DPRK. I don't buy this crap about the siege at all; there is a sizable anti-American trade bloc that would gladly supply the DPRK with food and resources, and it's not like the DPRK doesn't have anything to barter with, being as rich in natural resources as it is.

As far as succumbing to foreign capitalists, they've pretty much done that. They brag on the internet now about how subservient their workforce is, which they now pimp out to nations like China. :rolleyes:


All military rule suffers a dearth of democracy as a rule. The infuriating thing, though, is that the imperialist powers are ultimately responsible for the form of the country's government. No state that exists is separate from capitalism, and the bile I see being poured onto a small, weakling nation does not address the causes of the problems facing North Korea. It is absolutely true that a powerful cult of personality exists, that concentration camps and torture are the government's modus operandi for preventing dissent. But what conclusions can we draw from this on a historical scale? What can we learn about the nature of human society other than "some people are just shitheads and they happen to get into power?"

Right. No nation is seperate from capitalism, including the DPRK, vassal state of China, one of the largest capitalist nations on earth. What I conclude is that class society exerts itself through force the world over, and the only difference is in scale & intensity of that force...in the DPRK it just happens to be especially hellish.


They have some destructive capability. If they didn't, it'd be a lot by now.

The DPRK withdrew from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty in 2003. The USA could've dealt with them well before then if it had the desire.

[conmharáin]

For one, the DPRK does have a pretty powerful trading partner in China, which basically keeps the DPRK on life support for it's own geopolitical interests. Seeing as how the DPRK's population isn't very large, at only 24 million, they could easily support their people if it were a priority for them to do so, rather than subject them to the forms of extreme rural deprivation that exist in the DPRK. I don't buy this crap about the siege at all; there is a sizable anti-American trade bloc that would gladly supply the DPRK with food and resources, and it's not like the DPRK doesn't have anything to barter with, being as rich in natural resources as it is.

How is it you've come to think that the government is capable of supporting both its citizens and a military on constant high alert?


As far as succumbing to foreign capitalists, they've pretty much done that. They brag on the internet now about how subservient their workforce is, which they now pimp out to nations like China.

I'm one of the few leftists here who would play devil's advocate for China; I typically don't consider it when I'm thinking of the capitalist world. To be fair, though, that really has more to do with political allegiance than with China's actual mode of production.

Actually, I started this response as a rebuttal, but I'm looking at your responses below and I wonder whether we disagree all that much.


Right. No nation is seperate from capitalism, including the DPRK, vassal state of China, one of the largest capitalist nations on earth. What I conclude is that class society exerts itself through force the world over, and the only difference is in scale & intensity of that force...in the DPRK it just happens to be especially hellish.



The DPRK withdrew from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty in 2003. The USA could've dealt with them well before then if it had the desire.


I guess I mean to say that we don't really accomplish anything by vilifying North Korea. I guess come the revolution, it will really be a moot point, huh?

[Invader Zim]

Indeed, but that is what I find so weird. Surely the North Koreans must know that South Korea and America won't take this seriously, for the reasons you mentioned above, but then why even bother? If North Korea doesn't do anything, then it doesn't matter, and if they do South Korea and America know what North Korean plans are.

They do it to make the west take them seriously. It is that simple, they want a better seat at the bargaining table. By posing a threat to western security, and the security of its allies, with nuclear weapons they automatically must be taken seriously as opposed to ignored. But moreover, because they have nuclear weapons they can't be easily attacked. They aren't like Iraq or Libya in that respect. It also allows them to state, eventually, that they will back down in exchange for, say, a reduction in embargoes.

The weapons aren't actually about destruction, or even potential destruction, they are about the threat of potential destruction. It's actually pretty clever, and not actually all that risky. They know that sabre rattling isn't going to provoke an actual war, nuclear or otherwise, but it does mean that they have something to offer. Obviously the west knows this too, but because its nuclear weapons they have to take it seriously regardless - after all, even if they think its all bluff, they can't know for sure. So, now they have nuclear weapons everyone has to take them seriously and bring them to the table.

Put yourself in their shoes, and consider the entire issue like you would a game of diplomacy - it is cold, calculated, but entirely rational - raising the stakes so that everyone has to take you seriously even though they know you aren't actually serious, they can't afford to take the risk that they are wrong.

[garrus]

Relax,doesn't Kim Jong-Un have superpowers like his pa and grandpa?
The imperialist pigs don't stand a chance. :rolleyes:

[Futility Personified]

On the topic of nuclear deterrence.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyJh3qKjSMk

[L.A.P.]

His grand father was actually a major leader in the korean resistance to japanese imperialism on the peninsula and northern china.

Kim Il-Sung was actually in the Soviet Union at that time, which is also when his son was born in Vyotskoye

[Rusty Shackleford]

Kim Il-Sung was actually in the Soviet Union at that time, which is also when his son was born in Vyotskoye

Ill revise my statement down to "Kim Il-Sung was a leader in the anti-japanese guerrilla movement until he retreated into the SU and ended up becoming a Red Army major before he was established as the first president of the DPRK"

Either i had forgotten something, or i didnt know this. Either way, some very brief investigation shows that there is some controversy over his role in the guerrilla movement. at least to the extent of it.


thank you

[ckaihatsu]

http://return2source.wordpress.com/2013/03/08/the-dprk-did-not-vow-nuclear-attack-on-washington-on-preemptive-strikes/


The DPRK Did Not “Vow Nuclear Attack on Washington”: On Preemptive Strikes


Mar 8

Posted by vincesherman


Former Chicago Bulls Forward Dennis Rodman became the first US citizen to meet DRK Supreme Leader Kim Jong-Il, and in doing so, he set a standard for international solidarity that the US Left should learn from.

Fox News, CNN, the BBC, and a host of other Western news outlets were aflame yesterday – no pun intended – after a representative from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) said that their country would launch a preemptive strike against US aggression. The sensationalist headlines kicked into high-gear, with Fox News reporting, “‘North Korea vows nuclear attack on US, saying Washington will be ‘engulfed in a sea of fire.’” Almost 60 years after the armistice that ended the Korean war, the US media seems more eager than ever to make people believe that a nuclear strike by a small, partitioned nation is likely.

For all of the venom the Western press has spilled over the DPRK’s latest comments, it’s incredibly difficult to find the full quote or the context of such a statement. Also absent from any of the reporting is a real definition of the term “preemptive strike,” compared to a “preventative strike.”

University of Chicago Professor of Korean History Bruce Cumings famously said that reading the DPRK’s official news network gives you a better understanding of the truth in the Korean Peninsula than reading the South Korean or US press. This is indeed the case.

The Korean Central News Agency published the statement by the Foreign Ministry that caused so much controversy in the US. Entitled, “Second Korean War Is Unavoidable: DPRK FM Spokesman,” the statement details the multitude of ways that the US is trying “to ignite a nuclear war to stifle the DPRK.” Since the US and European media refuse to quote the piece in context, we will quote it at some length:

The U.S. is now working hard to ignite a nuclear war to stifle the DPRK.

Key Resolve and Foal Eagle joint military exercises kicked off by the U.S., putting the situation on the Korean Peninsula to the brink of war, are maneuvers for a nuclear war aimed to mount a preemptive strike on the DPRK from A to Z.

The U.S. is massively deploying armed forces for aggression, including nuclear carrier task force and strategic bombers, enough to fight a nuclear war under the smokescreen of “annual drills.”

What should not be overlooked is that the war maneuvers are timed to coincide with the moves to fabricate a new “resolution” of the UN Security Council against the DPRK, pursuant to a war scenario of the U.S. to ignite a nuclear war under the pretext of “nuclear nonproliferation”.

It is a trite war method of the U.S. to cook up “a resolution” at the UNSC to justify its war of aggression and then unleash it under the berets of “UN forces.”

That is why the U.S. is hurling into the war maneuvers even armed forces of its satellite countries which participated in the past Korean War as “UN forces”.

After directing the strategic pivot for world hegemony to the Asia-Pacific region, the U.S. regards it as its primary goal to put the whole of the Korean Peninsula under its control in a bid to secure a bridgehead for landing in the Eurasian continent. It also seeks a way out of a serious economic crisis at home in unleashing the second Korean war.

The U.S. is, indeed, the very criminal threatening global peace and security as it is staging dangerous war drills in this region, the biggest hotspot in the world and a nuclear arsenal where nuclear weapons and facilities are densely deployed.

Ignoring this context changes the entire message of the article. If we took the US media’s claims at face value, many are led to believe that DPRK Supreme Leader Kim Jong-Un woke up on the wrong side of the bed and haphazardly declared his intent to bomb Washington D.C. An actual study of the KCNA statement paints a different picture, namely one in which the US is the primary aggressor whose bellicose military exercises and insistence on debilitating sanctions on the DPRK are bringing the region closer to war.

The statement goes on to address the DPRK’s response to the aggressive war games that the US carries out in the Korean Peninsula. We quote it here:

The DPRK has so far made every possible effort while exercising maximum self-restraint in order to defend the peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in the region.

The U.S. is, however, responding to the DPRK’s good will and self-restraint with large-scale nuclear war maneuvers and the “annual” war drills are developing into a real war. Under this situation the opportunity of diplomatic solution has disappeared and there remains only military counteraction.

Is the statement really incorrect? The DPRK is surrounded by US warships containing nuclear missiles. They have pushed for dialogue with the international community about their nuclear weapons program, but Washington has rebuffed their attempts and responded with harsher sanctions, which is a form of economic warfare. Former US President George W. Bush once said that North Korea is “the most sanctioned country in the world,” Independent scholar Stephen Gowans explains the terms of these sanctions, which restrict “the export of goods and services,” the “blocking of any loan or funding through international financial institutions,” and a “ban on government financing of food and medicine exports to North Korea.” Rather than attempting good-faith rapprochement with Pyongyang, the US continues to point its most deadly weapons at the small country and heavily sanction its access to essential goods and industrial equipment.

Let’s now look at the statement in controversy from the Foreign Ministry of the DPRK:

First, now that the U.S. is set to light a fuse for a nuclear war, the revolutionary armed forces of the DPRK will exercise the right to a preemptive nuclear attack to destroy the strongholds of the aggressors and to defend the supreme interests of the country.

The Supreme Command of the Korean People’s Army declared that it would totally nullify the Korean Armistice Agreement (AA) from March 11 when the U.S. nuclear war rehearsal gets into full swing. This meant that from that moment the revolutionary armed forces of the DPRK will take military actions for self-defence against any target any moment, not restrained by AA.

Contrary to the media’s fixation on the phrasing of the first statement, it is actually the following paragraph that explains the DPRK’s understanding of a preemptive strike. Joe Barnes of Rice University describes the difference between a ‘preemptive strike’ and a ‘preventative strike’ in a March 2007 paper entitled, “Preemptive and Preventative War: A Preliminary Taxonomy.” The following quote from Barnes’ paper illustrates the ‘right to a preemptive nuclear attack’ that the statement alludes to:

The two categories of national strategy are preemption and prevention. Preemption is the taking of military action against a target when there is incontrovertible evidence that the target is about to initiate a military attack. Prevention is the taking of military action against a target when it is believed that an attack by the target, while not imminent, is inevitable, and when delay in attacking would involve greater risk.

For most US citizens, their first exposure to the term “preemptive war” was when the Bush Administration invoked in in 2003 to justify their imperialist invasion of Iraq. They unleashed brutal war and occupation on the Iraqi people on the basis of a total lie, namely that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and might be a threat to the US. However, if we look at Barnes’ quote, we understand that the war in Iraq was a preventative war, not a preemptive war. There was no “incontrovertible evidence that the target is about to initiate a military attack.” Instead, all of the evidence pointed to Iraq not having weapons of mass destruction, much less having the capability and the will to fire such weapons at the US. As Noam Chomsky puts it:

The grand strategy authorizes Washington to carry out “preventive war”: Preventive, not pre-emptive. Whatever the justifications for pre-emptive war might be, they do not hold for preventive war, particularly as that concept is interpreted by its current enthusiasts: the use of military force to eliminate an invented or imagined threat, so that even the term “preventive” is too charitable. Preventive war is, very simply, the “supreme crime” condemned at Nuremberg.

The DPRK has threatened preemptive war, not preventative war. The difference is so glaring that one can only conclude that the US media is knowingly distorting and lying about the DPRK’s military intent. Because the DPRK rightly recognizes the crippling sanctions on itself as a form of economic warfare and they recognize the growing threat of US invasion, they have made a strong statement expressing their willingness to shoot first if “there is incontrovertible evidence that the target is about to attack.” This becomes painstakingly clear in the second paragraph of the statement in question, in which the DPRK claims it will only nullify the armistice “when the US nuclear war rehearsal gets into full-swing.”

Admittedly, the use of the term “when” rather than “if” seems fatalist and damning, but when one considers the 63+ year aggression that the DPRK has continually faced by the US, their cynicism at the US radically changing its pro-war policy seems justified.

This statement is nothing new from the DPRK, which has continually upheld its right to self-defense and self-determination. The DPRK acquired nuclear weapons out of necessary reality, a point further underscored by the US war with Iraq and NATO’s war with Libya in 2011. Again, we quote Gowans about the deterrent provided by nuclear weapons in his article, “Why North Korea Needs Nuclear Weapons“:

Subsequent events in Libya have only reinforced the lesson. Muammar Gaddafi had developed his own WMD program to protect Libya from Western military intervention. But Gaddafi also faced an internal threat—Islamists, including jihadists linked to Al Qaeda, who sought to overthrow him to create an Islamist society in Libya. After 9/11, with the United States setting out to crush Al Qaeda, Gaddafi sought a rapprochement with the West, becoming an ally in the international battle against Al Qaeda, to more effectively deal with his own Islamist enemies at home. The price of being invited into the fold was to abandon his weapons of mass destruction. When Gaddafi agreed to this condition he made a fatal strategic blunder. An economic nationalist, Gaddafi irritated Western oil companies and investors by insisting on serving Libyan interests ahead of the oil companies’ profits and investors’ returns. Fed up with his nationalist obstructions, NATO teamed up with Gaddafi’s Islamist enemies to oust and kill the Libyan leader. Had he not surrendered his WMDs, Gaddafi would likely still be playing a lead role in Libya. “Who would have dared deal with Gaddafi or Saddam Hussein if they had a nuclear capability?” asks Major General Amir Eshel, chief of the Israeli army’s planning division. “No way.”

Rather than threatening to destroy Washington D.C. in a sea of nuclear flames – which even the Western media admits the DPRK has no way of doing, even if they wanted to – the DPRK is once again asserting its right to defend itself and strike first if the US provokes nuclear war. The stakes are too high, and although liberals in the US and Western Europe may complain about these measures, they do so from the safety and comfort of their homes within imperialist countries. The people of the DPRK hang in the balance of a life-and-death struggle against nuclear war with the US. No one in the DPRK wants war, including the leadership. However, the DPRK has made clear that they will not hesitate to retaliate and defend their people from nuclear holocaust.

Once we cut through the lies of the US media, one truth stands above all others for US citizens: The ball is in your court if you don’t want nuclear conflict with the DPRK. Washington has shown a total disregard for human life – whether Korean, Iraqi, Libyan, or even American – when it comes to starting imperialist wars. They have continued economic warfare on the DPRK in the form of sanctions and currently carry on war games in the Korean Peninsula. They are not going to change on their own.

Nuclear war is a disturbing and horrific possibility, and all freedom-loving people should do everything they can to prevent it from happening. In the US, this means organizing and rebuilding the anti-war movement as an anti-imperialist movement. Rather than playing into the racist and chauvinistic rhetoric of US politicians, the US Left should pursue international solidarity with oppressed nations like the DPRK and stand resolutely against any military aggression by their own government.

Incredibly, former Chicago Bulls Forward Dennis Rodman may have set a better line on the DPRK than most of the US Left. His recent travel to Democratic Korea may have irked social-chauvinists like George Stephanopoulos, but Rodman has allowed many people in the US to view the DPRK through a different light. Even Rodman said in his interview with Stephanopoulos that Kim Jong-Un wanted US President Barack Obama to “call him.” The level of distortions and outright falsehoods by the US media is incredible when we consider that the DPRK wants dialogue, not warfare. Anti-imperialists on the US Left must make this clear and challenge the false narrative put forth by the imperialist class.

Ultimately, this is why reactionaries like Stephanopoulos and US politicians decried Rodman’s trip so loudly. Realizing that the DPRK is not a nation hell-bent on destroying the people of the US, but rather a nation that enjoys many of the same things that Americans do, makes it harder for the imperialists to build popular consensus for war. The US Left should commend and learn from Rodman’s example and seek to build greater cultural and political ties with the people of the DPRK while boldly opposing sanctions and military aggression by the US.

[khad]

Kim Il-Sung was actually in the Soviet Union at that time, which is also when his son was born in Vyotskoye

Korea was officially annexed by Japan in 1910. That you think the anti-Japanese resistance apparently began in the 40s when America entered the war shows your level of ignorance.


Ill revise my statement down to "Kim Il-Sung was a leader in the anti-japanese guerrilla movement until he retreated into the SU and ended up becoming a Red Army major before he was established as the first president of the DPRK"

Either i had forgotten something, or i didnt know this. Either way, some very brief investigation shows that there is some controversy over his role in the guerrilla movement. at least to the extent of it.
And he was a badass, one of the few PLA commanders who actually achieved some success in the 30s. The reason why he ended up in the USSR was that's where the Northeast Anti-Japanese Army retreated to after years of attrition. Operations on the Korean Peninsula had become untenable after 1940.