If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Bad Korea celebrates 60 years of uneasy peace, or as they like to call it: "North Korea's victory over a century of U.S aggression resulting in the defeat of imperialism." BONUS: That happy land maintains "worldwide fame as a country of heroes"   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 74
    More: Fail, North Koreans, U.S., military parade, imperialists, aggression, chinese vice president, South Korean navy, Maoists  
•       •       •

4189 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Jul 2013 at 10:43 AM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



74 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-27 08:44:48 AM
I just heard an interview on NPR with a Vet from Korea, he said they were pinned down in Pusan and had no backup, they thought they were going to die. Their orders were "stand your ground or die". Reinforcements came and they were able to fight and live. We came *this* close to losing the Korean War.

The Korean War is the forgotten war, but sadly we are still there, 60 years later.
 
2013-07-27 08:59:29 AM
State TV is doing an all-day marathon of the celebrated documentary about the war criminal Dr. Pierce
 
2013-07-27 09:06:09 AM
i thought US aggression is what defeated imperialism, but then again, I didn't learn history from bootleg Laffy Taffy wrappers.
 
2013-07-27 10:51:20 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJNBfBr-OGU

ain't no party like a NK party...cause...
 
2013-07-27 10:52:39 AM
A country who prioritizes their military and war over feeding their people is nothing to celebrate.

The real shame is that NK isn't even the worst offender that comes to mind.

/*cough*
 
2013-07-27 10:55:50 AM
Hey subby, just because you are a western imperialist dog, with a condescending note in your headline writing mind, doesn't make you right. Not that I can blame you, a lifetime of brainwashing by your leaders has given you that false sense of righteousness.
Stop for one minute and think, are you truly free, or merely a sock puppet doing your masters bidding?
 
2013-07-27 10:55:53 AM
I thought North Korea was Best Korea, now I'm confused.
 
2013-07-27 10:56:25 AM
What is truly sad is that the people believe all the lies.  When you live within a closed system where the people do not have access to information then they will believe whatever you tell them to believe.  I remember seeing a special on some European tourists who were visiting North Korea and their guide, a young woman who was educated at a university, was so adamant that the United States had started the entire Korean War.  It was really sad to watch.  You could tell that she was an intelligent woman, but she had been in effect brainwashed.
 
2013-07-27 10:57:12 AM

Rip Dashrock: Hey subby, just because you are a western imperialist dog, with a condescending note in your headline writing mind, doesn't make you right. Not that I can blame you, a lifetime of brainwashing by your leaders has given you that false sense of righteousness.
Stop for one minute and think, are you truly free, or merely a sock puppet doing your masters bidding?


6/10.  You are trying way to hard.
 
2013-07-27 10:58:31 AM
"The U.S. imperialists sustained a heavy defeat for the first time in their more than 100-year-long history of wars of aggression," Kim said, according to the North's state-run news agency. "The [North], which beat back U.S. imperialism, was widely known as a country of heroes and its army and people earned worldwide fame."

Wasn't the only thing that saved North Korea was the Chinese?
 
2013-07-27 11:01:05 AM

blacksharpiemarker: A country who prioritizes their military and war over feeding their people is nothing to celebrate.

The real shame is that NK isn't even the worst offender that comes to mind.

/*cough*


It's not that they prioritize the military over feeding their people. It's that they need to keep them starved to maintain control. People living on 375 calories per day don't put up much of a fight.
 
2013-07-27 11:02:08 AM
img.photobucket.com

"Very pretty, Colonel, Very pretty, But, can they fight?"
 
2013-07-27 11:05:03 AM
The Orphan Master's Son is the best novel I've read in many years.
 
2013-07-27 11:05:04 AM
I haven't had my first cup of snow coffee yet to come up with a comment.

/mmmmm
//snow coffee
///yummy yummy snow coffee
 
2013-07-27 11:10:29 AM
Why not take military steps to make NK's powerlesness obvious, even to its brainwashed people?  Destroying the power grid comes to mind and flattening their capitol building comes to mind, which could be done mostly with drones.  Happy anniversary!
 
2013-07-27 11:11:57 AM

Mock26: [img.photobucket.com image 533x300]

"Very pretty, Colonel, Very pretty, But, can they fight?"


That made me go and watch that scene again.  Sutherland is an underrated actor.
 
2013-07-27 11:14:08 AM

Mock26: What is truly sad is that the people believe all the lies.  When you live within a closed system where the people do not have access to information then they will believe whatever you tell them to believe.  I remember seeing a special on some European tourists who were visiting North Korea and their guide, a young woman who was educated at a university, was so adamant that the United States had started the entire Korean War.  It was really sad to watch.  You could tell that she was an intelligent woman, but she had been in effect brainwashed.


And just for lulz, I here note that the term "brainwashing" is originally Chinese: 洗脳. (Please forgive the simplified character.)
 
2013-07-27 11:14:33 AM

Forced Perspective: Why not take military steps to make NK's powerlesness obvious, even to its brainwashed people?  Destroying the power grid comes to mind and flattening their capitol building comes to mind, which could be done mostly with drones.  Happy anniversary!


And make them turn to their Dear Leader for protection against the unwarranted and naked aggression of the imperialist pigs? Sure, that sounds great!
 
2013-07-27 11:15:37 AM
Bad Korea?

Who greenlit this shiatty headline?
 
2013-07-27 11:16:42 AM

Forced Perspective: Why not take military steps to make NK's powerlesness obvious, even to its brainwashed people?  Destroying the power grid comes to mind and flattening their capitol building comes to mind, which could be done mostly with drones.  Happy anniversary!


I have a Samsung TV and refrigerator. Parts will be hard to come by when Seoul is a radioactive crater.
 
2013-07-27 11:17:31 AM

Even With A Chainsaw: Bad Korea?

Who greenlit this shiatty headline?


Some running-dog lacky of the Imperialist Curtis Republic.
 
2013-07-27 11:20:46 AM

blacksharpiemarker: A country who prioritizes their military and war over feeding their people is nothing to celebrate.

The real shame is that NK isn't even the worst offender that comes to mind.

/*cough*


"In FY 2011, federal spending on means-tested welfare, plus state contributions to federal programs, will reach $940 billion per year. The federal share will come to around $695 billion, or 74 percent, while state spending will be around $250 billion, or 26 percent.

Combined federal and state means-tested welfare is now the second-largest category of overall government spending in the nation. It is exceeded only by the combined cost of Social Security and Medicare. Welfare spending is greater than the cost of public education and is greater than spending on national defense. "

"The 69 means-tested programs operated by the federal government provide a wide variety of benefits. They include:

12 programs providing food aid;
10 housing assistance programs;
10 programs funding social services;
9 educational assistance programs;
8 programs providing cash assistance;
8 vocational training programs;
7 medical assistance programs;
3 energy and utility assistance programs; and,
2 child care and child development programs.

"For the past two decades, means-tested welfare or aid to the poor has been the fastest-growing component of government spending, outstripping the combined growth of Medicare and Social Security spending, as well as the growth in education and defense spending. Over the 20-year period between FY 1989 and FY 2008, total means-tested spending increased by 292 percent. The increase in combined Social Security and Medicare spending was 213 percent over the same period.

Means-tested spending on cash, food, and housing increased more rapidly (196 percent) than Social Security (174 percent). The growth in means-tested medical spending (448 percent) exceeded the growth in Medicare (376 percent). The growth in means-tested aid greatly exceeded the growth in government spending on education (143 percent) and defense (126 percent)."

"Welfare spending has grown enormously since President Lyndon B. Johnson launched the War on Poverty. Welfare spending was 13 times greater in FY 2008, after adjusting for inflation, than it was when the War on Poverty started in 1964. (See chart 1.) Means-tested welfare spending was 1.2 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) when President Johnson began the War on Poverty. In 2008, it reached 5 percent of GDP. Over the next decade, total means-tested spending is likely to average roughly 6 percent of GDP."

Annual means-tested welfare spending is more than sufficient to eliminate poverty in the United States. The U.S. Census Bureau, which is in charge of measuring poverty and inequality in the nation, defines a family as poor if its annual income falls below official poverty income thresholds. If total means-tested welfare spending were simply converted into cash benefits, the sum would be nearly four times the amount needed to raise the income of all poor families above the official poverty line.

Since the beginning of the War on Poverty, government has spent $15.9 trillion (in inflation-adjusted 2008 dollars) on means-tested welfare. In comparison, the cost of all other wars in U.S. history was $6.4 trillion (in inflation-adjusted 2008 dollars).

/cough indeed
 
2013-07-27 11:22:12 AM

tonguedepressor: Mock26: [img.photobucket.com image 533x300]

"Very pretty, Colonel, Very pretty, But, can they fight?"

That made me go and watch that scene again.  Sutherland is an underrated actor.


But that doesn't relieve you from your responsibility for this material. I'm waiting for reports from some of you. I'm not joking! This is my job!
 
2013-07-27 11:24:03 AM
Obama happy
 
2013-07-27 11:34:40 AM
farm3.staticflickr.com
Image not to scale

/sadly
 
2013-07-27 11:44:05 AM

Forced Perspective: Why not take military steps to make NK's powerlesness obvious, even to its brainwashed people?  Destroying the power grid comes to mind and flattening their capitol building comes to mind, which could be done mostly with drones.  Happy anniversary!


What power grid?  Most of their country is dark anyway. (look up night time satellite images of N. Korea and compare it to a normal country)

Just like every other country we have stepped in - we shouldn't be there. 60 years and we are still wasting money on their ass. You can't fix them, period.

The fact that Kim Jong phatass is putting on a charm show and soon to be buttering up the rest of the world for handouts. Nothing new really.  Pull all soldiers, all aid, and let them blow themselves up, just like every other unstable crazed country eventually does.
 
2013-07-27 11:46:06 AM
I once hired a guy as a network admin who'd served in Korea.  He'd learned IT courtesy of the US Army, and had been deployed with an artillery unit near the "DMZ."  He told me that the only thing that didn't suck about being there was R&R in Australia.

/the place with the surf boards and sharks - not the one in Europe
 
2013-07-27 11:46:13 AM

Forced Perspective: Destroying the power grid comes to mind and flattening their capitol building comes to mind, which could be done mostly with drones.


What power grid?

North Korea at night.
 
2013-07-27 11:47:01 AM
hasty ambush:
"In FY 2011, federal spending on means-tested welfare, plus state contributions to federal programs, will reach $940 billion per year. The federal share will come to around $695 billion, or 74 percent, while state spending will be around $250 billion, or 26 percent.

Also let's be straight on the difference between welfare and food aid in the US and in NK. In the US not having enough food means having less than your ideal amount of calories per day (generally around 2000). You don't have to be starving, just not fully fed. For all that, few people are at that level. Indeed to qualify for SNAP, you aren't at a level where you can't afford to feed yourself, it is that you can't afford to feed yourself quality food. So the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program is to give you more money to spend on food, so that you have the chance to purchase better quality and more variety of foodstuffs.

In NK it means starvation, as in having NO food. Everyone except for the elite gets less than their ideal amount of calories per day. 700, roughly, for those that can get food from the government.

I mean hell, look at the earning difference. In NK the average per capita GDP is $506. In the US it is about $50,000. If you make less than $11,500 per year (for a single person) in the US, you are considered to be below the poverty line. That is over 20 TIMES the GDP (which is total production, not wages) of the AVERAGE in NK.

Speaking of GDP, expenditures in absolutes aren't much of a useful measure, but rather in terms of percentage of GDP. In that case, the US is 11th, spending about 4.5%. North Korea doesn't publish any official numbers, but it is around 25% as best as can be estimated (maybe more).

So seriously, while the US has issues with income inequity, poverty, and all those things that, well, really all countries do, don't try and compare it to NK. You just look silly.
 
2013-07-27 11:49:32 AM
I actually enjoyed the parade a lot more then I thought I would...

i614.photobucket.com
 
2013-07-27 11:50:04 AM
And let's not forget they won the last two World Cups.
 
2013-07-27 11:53:35 AM

thamike: i thought US aggression is what defeated imperialism, but then again, I didn't learn history from bootleg Laffy Taffy wrappers.


hahahaha how cute
Imperialism is still alive and well, and STIlL needs defeating

// hates imperialism
/ hate US assumptions
// lives next to best Korea - hates NK too
/ loves the US for what it stands for, best hope to fight Imperialism
// ... not looking good in practice though
 
2013-07-27 11:54:48 AM
I did a study on the miltiary might of the North Korean army a few years back, interestingly I come to the conclusion the north would probably fall apart in the first three weeks of fighting. Poverty, lack of food will take its toll. Munitions for example in north korea are starting to age big time, as most of their military equipment. With a decent U.N. task force, the only answer north korea has on a military operation is artillery and manpower.

The north lacks the industry to sustain a war, their main goal would be to shell the hell out of Seoul and cause mass civilian casualties. Their Idea would be "well we were attacked, we retaliated" hoping for international support. Problem is China wants nothing to do with north korea, but china also doesn't want to deal with the retarded commie in the south, and especially do NOT want a war so close to them.

If I remember correctly, recently an entire armored division moved to the north korean border, my speculation was if the USA struck north korea, problem is the Chinese would move in to claim the territory - this would pose a huge problem for south korea. China wants the land for itself and any raw minerals it can get, it has no intention of giving north over to the south.

And china has no interest in backing off north korea so it basically plays out as - lets see what "best" korea does next.
 
2013-07-27 11:56:00 AM

Forced Perspective: Why not take military steps to make NK's powerlesness obvious, even to its brainwashed people?  Destroying the power grid comes to mind and flattening their capitol building comes to mind, which could be done mostly with drones.  Happy anniversary!


Because they won't welcome us as liberators, despite what you might have heard in Afghanistan and Iraq, because we need to get out of the business of attacking first, and because NK has NO electrical grid or infrastructure to speak of, and most of it's military and command structure is underground.
 
2013-07-27 11:56:53 AM
"Massive military parades", but no kimchi for you.  Lieutenant/Colonel/General Scheisskopf is envious.
 
2013-07-27 11:57:04 AM

Misconduc: The north lacks the industry to sustain a war, their main goal would be to shell the hell out of Seoul and cause mass civilian casualties.


Since they only have about 15 guns that could even touch Seoul on the border, that would be an impressive sight to behold.
 
2013-07-27 12:00:39 PM

sycraft: I mean hell, look at the earning difference. In NK the average per capita GDP is $506. In the US it is about $50,000. If you make less than $11,500 per year (for a single person) in the US, you are considered to be below the poverty line. That is over 20 TIMES the GDP (which is total production, not wages) of the AVERAGE in NK.


It is not what you earn that matters, it is not what you spend that matters, it is the difference between the two (sorry J P Getty for paraphrasin)

I do not doubt that NK is living in poverty (they are, quite drastically) but the US is not exactly wealthy at 50k.

506US$ could buy me cigarettes and get me drunk for 337 days where I am... or if you want to talk chickens and rice that would feed me for a year and get me broadband (or pay rent for 2 months)

// Not far from NK, Beijing
 
2013-07-27 12:04:35 PM

Misconduc: I did a study on the miltiary might of the North Korean army a few years back, interestingly I come to the conclusion the north would probably fall apart in the first three weeks of fighting. Poverty, lack of food will take its toll. Munitions for example in north korea are starting to age big time, as most of their military equipment. With a decent U.N. task force, the only answer north korea has on a military operation is artillery and manpower.


isnt that what was used to beat the US and UN last time ?

Poverty is a huge problem, lack of food is a huge problem (makes me wanna smack anyone name kim in the jong uns) but it won against massive spending last time what is different this time ?
 
2013-07-27 12:04:46 PM

hardinparamedic: Misconduc: The north lacks the industry to sustain a war, their main goal would be to shell the hell out of Seoul and cause mass civilian casualties.

Since they only have about 15 guns that could even touch Seoul on the border, that would be an impressive sight to behold.


There are far more guns then 15, I would put the number around 50 if not more. the 170mm M-1978 could reach seoul, last I read there were over 36 guns alone on the border, not counting other types of artillery.
 
2013-07-27 12:05:44 PM
The US invading North Korea would get the same kind of reaction from China as the US would give if the Chinese invaded Baja California or Vancouver. Superpowers CANNOT let others interfere on their doorsteps. Even if China didn't like the regime, they can't let anyone else take care of it without looking weak.
 
2013-07-27 12:09:21 PM

Gortex: The US invading North Korea would get the same kind of reaction from China as the US would give if the Chinese invaded Baja California or Vancouver. Superpowers CANNOT let others interfere on their doorsteps. Even if China didn't like the regime, they can't let anyone else take care of it without looking weak.



Conversely, I wonder what the ROK/USA response would be to a Chinese "intervention" in the DPRK.
 
2013-07-27 12:12:05 PM

hardinparamedic: Since they only have about 15 guns that could even touch Seoul on the border, that would be an impressive sight to behold


what makes you assume they would attack across the border ? SK is surrounded by sea, dependent on the internet and trade biased... you dont think a naval attack on ports is an option ? million man standing army, most of which can swim arround the DMZ ... Why Seoul ? Why not Busan ? or just knock them off the net with a nuke. Seoul is not the only target in SK and NK is not exactly unarmed.
 
2013-07-27 12:13:41 PM
Moisin-Nagants? With fixed bayonets? No wonder they collapsed after the parade, damn things are heavy, not to mention unwieldy.

I would've thought they'd have Chinese AK knock-offs.
 
2013-07-27 12:17:16 PM

JK47: Conversely, I wonder what the ROK/USA response would be to a Chinese "intervention" in the DPRK


borrow more money from th PRC
 
2013-07-27 12:19:12 PM

Frantic Freddie: Moisin-Nagants? With fixed bayonets? No wonder they collapsed after the parade, damn things are heavy, not to mention unwieldy.

I would've thought they'd have Chinese AK knock-offs.


Standard rifle in the north korean army is the AKM, they are outdated on their military equipment, but not exactly rocks and clubs.
 
2013-07-27 12:19:13 PM

JK47: Gortex: The US invading North Korea would get the same kind of reaction from China as the US would give if the Chinese invaded Baja California or Vancouver. Superpowers CANNOT let others interfere on their doorsteps. Even if China didn't like the regime, they can't let anyone else take care of it without looking weak.


Conversely, I wonder what the ROK/USA response would be to a Chinese "intervention" in the DPRK.


I don't think anybody wants war there.

NK knows war means the end of their existence as a separate nation. They'll pull stupid crap, but they try to hold short of actual war.

SK knows war means real damage to civilians and infrastructure, even if the war is short lived. They don't want to lose a lot of people and sustain damage if it isn't absolutely necessary.

China knows war means a massive influx of refugees at the very least. If they intervene on the NK side they'll be taking on the US, which means they just got into a fight they can't win while also driving a wedge between them and the people keeping their economy afloat. If they sit out they lose influence in the region since a reunified Korea under Seoul's leadership will be more closely allied to the US than China.

The US is overcommitted overseas as it is. We're tired of fighting and we've really only been fighting low intensity conflicts. We've done enough warmongering, the people aren't interested in adding another to the list.

So right now NK just waits and hopes that doing the same thing will bring different results while everybody else just waits for the inevitable collapse that has been a long time coming and still isn't yet here.
 
2013-07-27 12:19:39 PM

Forced Perspective: Why not take military steps to make NK's powerlesness obvious, even to its brainwashed people?  Destroying the power grid comes to mind and flattening their capitol building comes to mind, which could be done mostly with drones.  Happy anniversary!


No one wants to feed them or clean up the mess if they collapse. Not the Chinese, not the US, and not even South Korea. Idealistically South Korea may want to unify, but they don't really want it to happen today, because it will demolish their economy.
 
2013-07-27 12:26:12 PM

accelerus: Forced Perspective: Why not take military steps to make NK's powerlesness obvious, even to its brainwashed people?  Destroying the power grid comes to mind and flattening their capitol building comes to mind, which could be done mostly with drones.  Happy anniversary!

What power grid?  Most of their country is dark anyway. (look up night time satellite images of N. Korea and compare it to a normal country)

Just like every other country we have stepped in - we shouldn't be there. 60 years and we are still wasting money on their ass. You can't fix them, period.

The fact that Kim Jong phatass is putting on a charm show and soon to be buttering up the rest of the world for handouts. Nothing new really.  Pull all soldiers, all aid, and let them blow themselves up, just like every other unstable crazed country eventually does.


Seriously?! You think we should have just let them be overrun? I can't even begin to imagine how differently the cold war would have been had we let that happen. Not to mention what the people in the other half of the country would be having to live through. We have less than a division stationed over there and it was barely a division for a really long time. It can't cost us all that much.
 
2013-07-27 12:27:52 PM

akula: they intervene on the NK side they'll be taking on the US, which means they just got into a fight they can't win


they won the last two
 
2013-07-27 12:31:03 PM

Medic Zero: No one wants to feed them or clean up the mess if they collapse. Not the Chinese, not the US, and not even South Korea. Idealistically South Korea may want to unify, but they don't really want it to happen today, because it will demolish their economy.


agreed mostly ... nobody wants that farkup of a country, it will take generations to fix the crap the Kims have inflicted .... but SK could handle it, it wont collapse them (it would hurt a lot like east germany hurt the west)
 
Displayed 50 of 74 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report