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.

(Global Times (China))   Oh my god, Kim Jong killed Kenny   (globaltimes.cn) divider line 62
    More: Followup, Kim Jong, North Koreans, South Korea, Yonhap, Jang Song-thaek  
•       •       •

4682 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Dec 2013 at 5:26 AM (31 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-11 10:57:26 PM
You bastard.
 
2013-12-11 11:12:34 PM
blogs.villagevoice.com
"Oh ruhry?"
 
2013-12-11 11:19:04 PM
Are these people being killed or are they in a forced retirement of sorts.
 
2013-12-12 12:36:31 AM

b2theory: Are these people being killed or are they in a forced retirement of sorts.


Yes, but in this retirement, they have to work until they die. If they don't work, they are executed.

So kind of like retirement.
 
2013-12-12 12:41:13 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: b2theory: Are these people being killed or are they in a forced retirement of sorts.

Yes, but in this retirement, they have to work until they die. If they don't work, they are executed.

So kind of like retirement.


This guy was dragged out during an Inner Party meeting. He'll be executed publicly.

Inner Party members who get dragged away under more private circumstances are likewise executed privately. As a bonus, Minitrue's evening news broadcast will say that the Inner Party member (and all his family) were tragically killed in a car wreck, as you might expect to happen on DPRK's notoriously crowded highways.

It's the Outer Party and Proles (and their next three generations) who get sent to Miniluv.
 
2013-12-12 12:42:45 AM
There can be only Un
 
2013-12-12 12:58:19 AM

BKITU: AverageAmericanGuy: b2theory: Are these people being killed or are they in a forced retirement of sorts.

Yes, but in this retirement, they have to work until they die. If they don't work, they are executed.

So kind of like retirement.

This guy was dragged out during an Inner Party meeting. He'll be executed publicly.

Inner Party members who get dragged away under more private circumstances are likewise executed privately. As a bonus, Minitrue's evening news broadcast will say that the Inner Party member (and all his family) were tragically killed in a car wreck, as you might expect to happen on DPRK's notoriously crowded highways.

It's the Outer Party and Proles (and their next three generations) who get sent to Miniluv.


He's executing his uncle, then, according to the article:

 "State media on Monday said Jang Song-thaek, the uncle of North Korean ruler Kim Jong-un, had been dismissed from his posts for "criminal acts" ranging from mismanagement and corruption to leading a "dissolute and depraved life."
Television in the tightly controlled and impoverished state showed him being frog-marched by uniformed personnel out of a meeting of the ruling Workers' Party."

Daaaaammn, shiat just got interesting there.
 
2013-12-12 05:45:59 AM
heh....good one.
 
2013-12-12 05:52:36 AM
Well, that's going to be an awkward Christmas dinner.
 
2013-12-12 05:53:13 AM
I would be surprised if Jang is executed. He's been purged before and come back from it. In any case, the family connection keeps him safe from execution. More likely he'll get permanent house arrest.
 
2013-12-12 05:55:20 AM
So... at what point are we as Americans morally obligated to finish what we started in Best Korea? I mean seeing as how President Obama said we were morally obligated to deal with Syria's government and their use of chemical weapons.

What's the tipping point, so to speak? I understand we're not morally obligated to stop them from developing nuclear weapons, not morally obligated to stop them from kidnapping foreigners for a diplomatic ransom, not morally obligated to stop them from sending Dennis Rodman back to us, not morally obligated to stop them from these purges, not morally obligated to stop them from sinking South Korean ships, not morally obligated to retaliate against them for shelling South Korean islands, not morally obligated to call their bluff when they decide to rattle their sabers.

We're morally obligated to send them food so they don't become so desperate as to attack us or our allies.

But if we're going to judge Syria's government and Best Korea's government on performing actions that require an outside party to intervene in their private affairs... so far what I've seen Best Korea is an even worse offender than Syria.
 
2013-12-12 05:57:51 AM

Weatherkiss: So... at what point are we as Americans morally obligated to finish what we started in Best Korea? I mean seeing as how President Obama said we were morally obligated to deal with Syria's government and their use of chemical weapons.

What's the tipping point, so to speak? I understand we're not morally obligated to stop them from developing nuclear weapons, not morally obligated to stop them from kidnapping foreigners for a diplomatic ransom, not morally obligated to stop them from sending Dennis Rodman back to us, not morally obligated to stop them from these purges, not morally obligated to stop them from sinking South Korean ships, not morally obligated to retaliate against them for shelling South Korean islands, not morally obligated to call their bluff when they decide to rattle their sabers.

We're morally obligated to send them food so they don't become so desperate as to attack us or our allies.

But if we're going to judge Syria's government and Best Korea's government on performing actions that require an outside party to intervene in their private affairs... so far what I've seen Best Korea is an even worse offender than Syria.


Cough*China*cough
 
2013-12-12 05:59:30 AM

Ooba Tooba: Weatherkiss: So... at what point are we as Americans morally obligated to finish what we started in Best Korea? I mean seeing as how President Obama said we were morally obligated to deal with Syria's government and their use of chemical weapons.

What's the tipping point, so to speak? I understand we're not morally obligated to stop them from developing nuclear weapons, not morally obligated to stop them from kidnapping foreigners for a diplomatic ransom, not morally obligated to stop them from sending Dennis Rodman back to us, not morally obligated to stop them from these purges, not morally obligated to stop them from sinking South Korean ships, not morally obligated to retaliate against them for shelling South Korean islands, not morally obligated to call their bluff when they decide to rattle their sabers.

We're morally obligated to send them food so they don't become so desperate as to attack us or our allies.

But if we're going to judge Syria's government and Best Korea's government on performing actions that require an outside party to intervene in their private affairs... so far what I've seen Best Korea is an even worse offender than Syria.

Cough*China*cough


This is under the auspice that there is no complicated diplomatic or political reasoning, of course. But cut-and-dry 'moral obligation' taken at face value. ;)
 
2013-12-12 06:17:19 AM
I bet Dennis Rodman at one point during his visit said something meaningless like, "You gotta do what you gotta do."

And the translator botched it all the way to "Do to your inner circle before they do it to you. French fries."
 
2013-12-12 06:53:35 AM

Weatherkiss: Ooba Tooba: Weatherkiss: So... at what point are we as Americans morally obligated to finish what we started in Best Korea? I mean seeing as how President Obama said we were morally obligated to deal with Syria's government and their use of chemical weapons.

What's the tipping point, so to speak? I understand we're not morally obligated to stop them from developing nuclear weapons, not morally obligated to stop them from kidnapping foreigners for a diplomatic ransom, not morally obligated to stop them from sending Dennis Rodman back to us, not morally obligated to stop them from these purges, not morally obligated to stop them from sinking South Korean ships, not morally obligated to retaliate against them for shelling South Korean islands, not morally obligated to call their bluff when they decide to rattle their sabers.

We're morally obligated to send them food so they don't become so desperate as to attack us or our allies.

But if we're going to judge Syria's government and Best Korea's government on performing actions that require an outside party to intervene in their private affairs... so far what I've seen Best Korea is an even worse offender than Syria.

Cough*China*cough

This is under the auspice that there is no complicated diplomatic or political reasoning, of course. But cut-and-dry 'moral obligation' taken at face value. ;)


"America is not the world's policeman.  Terrible things happen across the globe, and it is beyond our means to right every wrong.  But when, with modest effort and risk, we can stop children from being gassed to death, and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, I believe we should act."

If you think that "finishing" North Korea is a matter of modest effort and risk, please proceed.
 
2013-12-12 06:58:06 AM
Now that's what I call a sticky situation.

/got nothing
 
2013-12-12 07:09:49 AM

Weatherkiss: So... at what point are we as Americans morally obligated to finish what we started in Best Korea? I mean seeing as how President Obama said we were morally obligated to deal with Syria's government and their use of chemical weapons.

What's the tipping point, so to speak? I understand we're not morally obligated to stop them from developing nuclear weapons, not morally obligated to stop them from kidnapping foreigners for a diplomatic ransom, not morally obligated to stop them from sending Dennis Rodman back to us, not morally obligated to stop them from these purges, not morally obligated to stop them from sinking South Korean ships, not morally obligated to retaliate against them for shelling South Korean islands, not morally obligated to call their bluff when they decide to rattle their sabers.

We're morally obligated to send them food so they don't become so desperate as to attack us or our allies.

But if we're going to judge Syria's government and Best Korea's government on performing actions that require an outside party to intervene in their private affairs... so far what I've seen Best Korea is an even worse offender than Syria.


Syria is much worse because Israel
 
2013-12-12 07:14:14 AM
"Kim Jong-un is strengthening the reign of terror ... Last year 17 people were publicly executed but this year there were about 40,"

It's kind of like a family tradition at this point but to what end I wonder. Is he killing all these people to consolidate his own power in order to achieve a goal the older generation wouldn't go for?

Like beginning to normalize relations with SK and.or reach out to the west with goal of removing sanctions?

Or is he just making his bones here simply to strike fear into anyone who might be thinking of challenging his rule?
 
2013-12-12 07:21:38 AM
Kim Jong Un: "You Will Respect My Authoritah!"

Too bad we can't full Desert Storm without completely alienating the Chinese, the South Koreans, and the Japanese (because those three really don't want a unified Korea).

/Ignore South Korean's rhetoric and look at their actions.  They saw what the Germans went through, and don't feel like dealing with that mess.  At least until the 'other party' is in power.  The wonders of a two party system are not uniquely American.
 
2013-12-12 07:24:26 AM
I feel so sad that some of the North Korean .001% got the ax. So very, very sad.

I'm sure that each and every one of them was doing wonderful things for the people of North Korea.

Such a human tragedy, this purge is. Truly, North Korea has never seen such horror.
 
2013-12-12 07:25:22 AM

August11: And the translator botched it all the way to "Do to your inner circle before they do it to you. French fries."


Was this guy his translator?

nyc.barstoolsports.com
 
2013-12-12 07:31:46 AM

Weatherkiss: So... at what point are we as Americans morally obligated to finish what we started in Best Korea? I mean seeing as how President Obama said we were morally obligated to deal with Syria's government and their use of chemical weapons.

What's the tipping point, so to speak? I understand we're not morally obligated to stop them from developing nuclear weapons, not morally obligated to stop them from kidnapping foreigners for a diplomatic ransom, not morally obligated to stop them from sending Dennis Rodman back to us, not morally obligated to stop them from these purges, not morally obligated to stop them from sinking South Korean ships, not morally obligated to retaliate against them for shelling South Korean islands, not morally obligated to call their bluff when they decide to rattle their sabers.

We're morally obligated to send them food so they don't become so desperate as to attack us or our allies.

But if we're going to judge Syria's government and Best Korea's government on performing actions that require an outside party to intervene in their private affairs... so far what I've seen Best Korea is an even worse offender than Syria.


Because we're always invading countries for moral reasons?
 
2013-12-12 07:32:38 AM
South Korea's intelligence service last week said two of Jang's close entourage had been executed for corruption and two of his relatives serving in embassies overseas had been recalled.

So, is it generally acceptable to say 'aw, fark no' and apply to defect (at the nearest Worst Korea embassy maybe), or will you be looking over your shoulder for a DPRK sniper for the rest of your life?
 
2013-12-12 07:35:30 AM

Lawnchair: So, is it generally acceptable to say 'aw, fark no' and apply to defect (at the nearest Worst Korea embassy maybe), or will you be looking over your shoulder for a DPRK sniper for the rest of your life?


My understanding is that they imprison and torture your family back in Best Korea-- although in this case it looks like that's already happening.
 
2013-12-12 07:35:33 AM
He's executing his relatives now? Thanksgiving couldn't have been THAT bad.
 
2013-12-12 07:52:32 AM

Weatherkiss: So... at what point are we as Americans morally obligated to finish what we started in Best Korea? I mean seeing as how President Obama said we were morally obligated to deal with Syria's government and their use of chemical weapons.

What's the tipping point, so to speak? I understand we're not morally obligated to stop them from developing nuclear weapons, not morally obligated to stop them from kidnapping foreigners for a diplomatic ransom, not morally obligated to stop them from sending Dennis Rodman back to us, not morally obligated to stop them from these purges, not morally obligated to stop them from sinking South Korean ships, not morally obligated to retaliate against them for shelling South Korean islands, not morally obligated to call their bluff when they decide to rattle their sabers.

We're morally obligated to send them food so they don't become so desperate as to attack us or our allies.

But if we're going to judge Syria's government and Best Korea's government on performing actions that require an outside party to intervene in their private affairs... so far what I've seen Best Korea is an even worse offender than Syria.


Atrocities Committed  x Proven Oil Reserves  = Moral Obligation


/it's not that hard, once you know the math.
 
2013-12-12 07:54:14 AM

quatchi: "Kim Jong-un is strengthening the reign of terror ... Last year 17 people were publicly executed but this year there were about 40,"

It's kind of like a family tradition at this point but to what end I wonder. Is he killing all these people to consolidate his own power in order to achieve a goal the older generation wouldn't go for?

Like beginning to normalize relations with SK and.or reach out to the west with goal of removing sanctions?

Or is he just making his bones here simply to strike fear into anyone who might be thinking of challenging his rule?


The latter. By all indications he is as or more extreme than those around him in his totalitarian measures and appears to be firmly devoted to following in the footsteps of his father and grandfather. I wouldn't expect any meaningful reform from him.

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: f you think that "finishing" North Korea is a matter of modest effort and risk, please proceed.


I do! And I wish we would. But the problem isn't China, which really wouldn't much care if we cleared the Kims out, it's political and economic elites in Seoul who don't want to deal with taking in ~25 million impoverished new citizens and who are afraid (I think unreasonably so) of potential damage to Seoul in the event of a war. As long as the South's economy is doing well and North Korea's not too aggressive they're fine with the status quo, though they pay lip service to the goal of reunification.
 
2013-12-12 08:22:50 AM
gives me the chills. like when Saddam "purged" his cabinet (or whatever) of "traitors" too.

I blame China for allowing that psychotic kid to starve that country. It's goddamn depressing.
 
2013-12-12 08:23:09 AM

NobleHam: The latter. By all indications he is as or more extreme than those around him in his totalitarian measures and appears to be firmly devoted to following in the footsteps of his father and grandfather. I wouldn't expect any meaningful reform from him.


You are most probably right about that. So... Maybe the 4th time will be the charm for NK. Or not.
 
2013-12-12 08:25:41 AM

NobleHam: I would be surprised if Jang is executed. He's been purged before and come back from it. In any case, the family connection keeps him safe from execution. More likely he'll get permanent house arrest.


Pretty much this.  His associates are getting executed, but Jang is a blood relative of Kim il-Sung (I think?), or at least an in-law.  One of the last people with a personal connection to Kim il-Sung, anyway.  Jang won't get killed, but I bet his career is over.
 
2013-12-12 08:25:49 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: b2theory: Are these people being killed or are they in a forced retirement of sorts.

Yes, but in this retirement, they have to work until they die. If they don't work, they are executed.

So kind of like retirement.

American retirement isn't that far off this model.

 
2013-12-12 08:26:41 AM
It's propaganda time!!!

www.dprkcool.com

www.headofrothchild.com

gerrycanavan.files.wordpress.com

blog.theacademictraveler.com
 
2013-12-12 08:29:46 AM

Gergesa: It's propaganda time!!!


static.guim.co.uk
This is a sign at one of their ski resorts.  YOU WILL SKI OR DIE!
 
2013-12-12 08:35:28 AM

nekom: This is a sign at one of their ski resorts. YOU WILL SKI OR DIE!


I bet there is a sign saying something like "you will have fun as properly directed or you and your family will be re-educated."
 
2013-12-12 08:38:13 AM

Gergesa: It's propaganda time!!!


What is the translation of flag-rip girl???
 
2013-12-12 09:12:18 AM

August11: Gergesa: It's propaganda time!!!

What is the translation of flag-rip girl???


Best Korea, FARK YEAH.
 
2013-12-12 09:12:43 AM
There is only one Korea - the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
At the moment, half of it is under illegal occupation by American led Western Imperialist forces and its people are crying out for liberation!
 
2013-12-12 09:47:06 AM

Rev. Skarekroe: There is only one Korea - the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
At the moment, half of it is under illegal occupation by American led Western Imperialist forces and its people are crying out for liberation!


Absolutely!!  And all those kpop songs coming out of south korea are actually cleverly disguised cries for help to save them from the capitalist pig oppressors.
 
2013-12-12 10:06:46 AM

August11: Gergesa: It's propaganda time!!!

What is the translation of flag-rip girl???


We lip youl frag!
 
2013-12-12 10:47:58 AM
Flag rip girl says, "Let's destroy the invading American bastards!"-- really, that's what the poster says.
 
2013-12-12 10:53:27 AM
I just checked my dictionary, and I got the verb wrong. It's "Let's throw out the invading American bastards!"
 
2013-12-12 11:29:21 AM
static.businessinsider.com
Let's extensively raise goats in all families!
 
2013-12-12 12:06:41 PM

KarmicDisaster: August11: Gergesa: It's propaganda time!!!

What is the translation of flag-rip girl???

We lip youl frag!


or,
"I'm hungry enough to eat a flag!"
 
2013-12-12 12:09:00 PM
NobleHam:
I do! And I wish we would. But the problem isn't China, which really wouldn't much care if we cleared the Kims out,

Strongly disagree.

The current Chinese regime is extremely sensitive to the US's "pivot to asia." Nationalist elements of the Chinese government would flip out if we used military force to effect regime change in a Chinese client state that shares a border with China. They'd be even more upset if that regime change installed a pro-US government (such as the current South Korean government).

That said, Uncle Jang was the second most powerful figure in North Korea, and apparently well liked by the Chinese leadership who saw him as a stablizing force on his nephew. China can't be thrilled about this. They'd probably love to have Kim Jong-Un replaced, but in a way that doesn't a) involve western forces, b) leave a pro-western government and c) doesn't leave millions of refugees fleeing across the border to China.
 
2013-12-12 01:46:58 PM

Weatherkiss: So... at what point are we as Americans morally obligated to finish what we started in Best Korea? I mean seeing as how President Obama said we were morally obligated to deal with Syria's government and their use of chemical weapons.

What's the tipping point, so to speak? I understand we're not morally obligated to stop them from developing nuclear weapons, not morally obligated to stop them from kidnapping foreigners for a diplomatic ransom, not morally obligated to stop them from sending Dennis Rodman back to us, not morally obligated to stop them from these purges, not morally obligated to stop them from sinking South Korean ships, not morally obligated to retaliate against them for shelling South Korean islands, not morally obligated to call their bluff when they decide to rattle their sabers.

We're morally obligated to send them food so they don't become so desperate as to attack us or our allies.

But if we're going to judge Syria's government and Best Korea's government on performing actions that require an outside party to intervene in their private affairs... so far what I've seen Best Korea is an even worse offender than Syria.


"A Million, A hundred Billion, and a Trillion"

A Million civilian dead.
A hundred Billion dollars in war costs on the part of the USA.
A Trillion in infrastructure damage to N. Korea.

The Kims fall into that same area as Saddam or Assad or Mugabe.  I'm really happy if they go away, and I don't want to spend the money, time, and effort to do it or deal with the aftermath unless there's some other underlying national interest that's also served by getting rid of them.

/So in the case of Saddam, he was funding Palestinian Suicide bombers, had various terrorist training camps on his soil, and in the greatest cultural misunderstanding since the Japs bombed Pearl Harbor early, he was running a fantastic glorious bluff for internal consumption that he still had usable chemical weapons and was looking for nukes and we accidentally fell for it (and then correctly freaked out) because Arab Culture is all about making yourself look as big and strong as possible and American Culture (or that part of it represented by Bush anyways) is all "Speak softly, and carry a bigger stick than everyone else's stick combined".
//And then if you believe that George Bush believed in the Arab Traditionalism theory of what this war is all about (Part 1, Part 2), as a possible step towards reforming their culture in a way that wouldn't generate more terrorists.
 
2013-12-12 01:52:24 PM
www.wantchinatimes.com
"I wonder, should I get back in the limo and drive?
Drive all the way to China and ask for asylum?
Will this new kid listen to me - or have me killed? I wonder?
Oh, well. Aint no rest for the wicked. Gotta a meeting now."


/wrong
 
2013-12-12 02:21:51 PM
If I was recalled from a foreign embassy job by this NK kid ruler I would think seriously about skipping out.
 
2013-12-12 02:39:42 PM

red5ish: If I was recalled from a foreign embassy job by this NK kid ruler I would think seriously about skipping out.


I think I read recently that a nork diplomat and his family defected to SK when Jang's two aides were killed.
 
2013-12-12 02:54:51 PM

nekom: Gergesa: It's propaganda time!!!

[static.guim.co.uk image 460x276]
This is a sign at one of their ski resorts.  YOU WILL SKI OR DIE!


img.fark.net
 
2013-12-12 03:07:21 PM

Willas Tyrell: NobleHam:
I do! And I wish we would. But the problem isn't China, which really wouldn't much care if we cleared the Kims out,

Strongly disagree.

The current Chinese regime is extremely sensitive to the US's "pivot to asia." Nationalist elements of the Chinese government would flip out if we used military force to effect regime change in a Chinese client state that shares a border with China. They'd be even more upset if that regime change installed a pro-US government (such as the current South Korean government).

That said, Uncle Jang was the second most powerful figure in North Korea, and apparently well liked by the Chinese leadership who saw him as a stablizing force on his nephew. China can't be thrilled about this. They'd probably love to have Kim Jong-Un replaced, but in a way that doesn't a) involve western forces, b) leave a pro-western government and c) doesn't leave millions of refugees fleeing across the border to China.


They'd complain and it might strain relations for a little while, sure. But it wouldn't set off World War 3. China's not putting its military on the line to save North Korea again. And at this point I honestly think they'd prefer a capitalist government in Korea, if not Western-allied. If a war happens China will shake its head, and then they'll send in their corporations to "rebuild," develop the new market, and exploit the North's resources. Economically, the fall of the Kim regime can only be good for China. Politically they'll posture but I really don't think they care that much about having a buffer between them and South Korea. China is already surrounded by American influence from South Korea to Taiwan and the Philippines. A land border, an extremely naturally secure land border I might add, wouldn't be much of a problem for them.
 
Displayed 50 of 62 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