The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.
The moral crisis of North Korea
: Iraq was a humanitarian crisis — whether or not it was a security crisis — and over at Harry’s place, Johann argues that the same is true of North Korea.
The worst human rights abuses in the world – including government engineered famines – are unfolding in North Korea today. Since the US isn’t involved, the Chomskyites aren’t interested. But the pro-intervention left – if we are serious about human rights – cannot take the same morally blank position.
Absolutely. Nor the pro-intervention Right, if “left and right” have any meaning in this context any longer. (Frankly, I’m coming to agree with Roger Simon — it should be “fascist” and “anti-fsacist”, and left or right is unimportant.)
It doesn’t necessarily follow that immediate attack is the only answer: there are lots of ways to skin a cat. But regime change is the only morally acceptable goal.
True. But there is no military option in North Korea, period. They already have nukes, they already have long range missiles. They also have enough conventional artillery to raze Seoul. So a war could result in literally millions of non-North Korean civilian deaths.
The military option in Iraq was possible because it would be relatively easy.
There are also limited economic options. North Korea doesn’t sell anything but weapons.
Aid doesn’t work, because the government just hogs it all to itself, not the people.
Anyway, because of how North Korea is today, I can no longer watch MASH.
The single best reason to ensure that Saddam’s trial merits international respect is the eventual need to try Kim Chong-il.
Charlie: “Left versus right” is a paradigm that assumes freedom of thought, speech and political behavior. The common enemy of everyone who believes in free thought and free politics is anyone who works to thwart those freedoms. These tyrants often cloak themselves in the vocabulary of the right or the left. But, no matter how many peole they fool, they remain the enemy.
Nothing’s going to be done about North korea till China puts her weight behind solving the problem. The US can protect South Korea somewhat, and maybe negotiate nuclear whatits, but that’s about it.
With all due respect to our military I think they would even agree that there is little we can do to protect South Korea from a million man invasion from the North. Heck Rumsfeld even talked of pulling Americans out of the DMZ to the southern tip of the Peninsula because when Korean War II breaks out they’ll be the first to know and thereby obliterated by the before mentioned NK artillery at the very least.
They may fight according to a rigid Maoist/Soviet doctrine with little room for improvisation and make low-quality weapons, but when its 1,000,000 fired up NKs fighting for their Dear Leader to 35,000 US troops, it ain’t gonna matter. Be morally outraged all you want, but with nukes they hold all the cards and nobody is willing to risk several milion civillian lifes on righting that wrong.
McA was Right: Did you know that SK has its own military? And a damned impressive one, too. I think our 35,000 might have just a little bit of help covering its flanks if NK were stupid enough to attack first. That said, I’m not sure the SK troops would be quite so eager to cover our guys if we attacked first.
“Nothing’s going to be done about North korea till China puts her weight behind solving the problem.”
I believe that Hugh is correct, but pressure may be applied by the United Nations on China re: North Korea. Alas, the UN stays quiet for fear of offending anyone but America and her allies.
Anyway, because of how North Korea is today, I can no longer watch MASH.
Whatever do you mean, Jeremy? Do you mean all that hand-wringing about “Oh what are we doing to these poor people why are we tearing up their country with our bombs don’t you know that the North Koreans only want to live in peace too how bad could Communism be, anyway?”
Yeah, me too.