Home | About | Donate

To End North Korea’s Nuclear Program, End the Korean War


#1

To End North Korea’s Nuclear Program, End the Korean War

Christine Ahn

North Korea announced recently that it had successfully detonated its first hydrogen bomb. “This test is a measure for self-defense,” state media announced, “to firmly protect the sovereignty of the country and the vital right of the nation from the ever-growing nuclear threat and blackmail by the U.S.-led hostile forces.”

South Korea, Japan, and China were swift to respond with condemnation, as was the UN Security Council, which issued a statement that North Korea’s test was a “clear violation of Security Council resolutions” and resolved to take “further significant measures.”


#2

The Korean war was never called "war" it was called euphemistically, a "police action" which gave the green light to circumvent Congress. Ever since, the US has kept at least 28.000 troops stationed in South Korea in what was called a "police action".

I am not calling North Korea a peaceful nation, but let me ask: what if this was reversed and North Korea had 28,000 of their troops stationed on either the Canadian or Mexican borders since 1952 and they had nukes and the US didn't?


#3

I think the development of a nuclear arsenal by North Korea is being done for defensive purposes. They probably, and rightly, believe that the US is less likely to attack a country that possesses nuclear weapons.

The US, and allied militaries, exist primarily for the purpose of defeating socialism in all its forms, and spreading capitalism throughout the world.

Secondarily, some of these capitalist nations have based their economies on the production of war implements and machines, and they generate much wealth by this production and its sale.

The use of these capitalist militaries for national defense would be unnecessary if these countries refrained from aggressive military activity against other nations.

Disarmament is not considered by these capitalist countries, except for trivial, useless agreements made for use as propaganda.

A socialist world, based on mutual cooperation, would have no reason to initiate warfare. Thus disarmament is a genuine goal of socialism.

It is the greedy, aggressive, dehumanizing nature of capitalism that keeps the world at war.


#4

Thank you for the informed report, Ms. Ahn.

Few understand the enforced sexual servitude of the "comfort women," and I, personally, didn't realize that THAT much ordnance was dropped on North Korea!

Since three is often termed "a charm," perhaps this invitation holds merit:

"President Obama should build upon his diplomatic victories with Iran and Cuba — and make 2016 a year of peace by ending the longest standing war with North Korea."


#5

Christine Ahn is correct in her assumption that an end to the Korean war would ultimately bring about the end of nuclear weapon expansion by North Korea. But this is not possible because foreign policy is not a democratic policy in the U.S. halls of government. The electorate has no say in developing peaceful solutions to the crisis due to the inordinate amount of influence defence contractors have over every administration since the Roosevelt years. The U.S. has never seriously engaged in peace talks with the DPRK and only accomplished more animosity between the U.S. and North Korea when a hard right team of NeoCons went to area two decades ago with the sole purpose of threatening the North Koreans to ensure that the peace talks would fail.
Obviously Obama doesn't have the political power or the political will to demilitarize the peninsula and will humbly step down at the end of his term having done nothing in 8 years except reinforce the MIC's grip on foreign policy in the U.S. Meanwhile the Chinese have all the proof they need of an aggressive American military posture as they witnessed first hand the charade called the "Six Party Talks" when the U.S. only threatened the North Koreans while making no concrete promises to the North for demilitarizing their country. The U.S. has no embassy, no diplomatic or civilian line of communication with the DPRK while unofficially expecting every politician in D.C. to honour the pledge to 'never communicate with anyone in North Korea under any circumstances'. A similar unwritten rule affects all American politicians with regards to communicating with Iran.
The key to eliminating nuclear weapons proliferation is to remove all corporate influence from D.C. and involve the electorate with any and all foreign policy initiatives. By establishing a democratic mechanism to develop our foreign policies, the U.S. could replace themselves as the arms supplier of the world to becoming a legitimate body for establishing peace around the globe. No small feat to be sure!


#6

What, and lose a valuable enemy?


#7

"contain, threaten, and if necessary take down China"

Take down China? Now I think someone somewhere is being very. very stupid. I doubt if the Chinese have forgotten being taken down by a number of nations between 1840 and 1949 and would probably resent the notion with some vigour..


#8

Japan invaded China in 1939 but did not defeat China. The communist partially defeated the nationalists in 1949 but that was a civil war. So I think your dates should be 1839-1939. (Britain started the first opium war in 1839).


#9

1839-1840; what's a year when one is being forced to buy opium? I wasn't sure of the precise date of the start of the first opium war, so thanks. I refer to 1949 as that is when China finally became stabilised after about 100 years of being "taken down". Not that I relish being part of a Chinese Empire one little bit, but the notion of "taking down" modern China can only be the ravings of a trigger-happy, alcohol-fueled, lunatic red-neck deep in the backwoods of the USA. Pity that such seem to get into positions of power in Washington. The USA had such potential..........

Japan started its world war in 1894, with its takeover of Formosa (Taiwan) and was into the Chinese mainland by 1932, after Korea and Manchuria. The Japanese navy sank the Chinese navy around 1895, followed by clobbering the Russkies in 1905 (Port Arthur and Tsu-Chima). Aggressive lot, for people who are allegedly so polite.........


#11

A number of nations have "prison labor camps". Thankfully, the US would never do such a thing...oh wait...


#12

Media and political response in the US has failed to consider a connection between this latest nuclear test and recent US saber rattling over the artificial islands that China has been building in the South China Sea. This may well be a counter-move approved by Beijing and designed to remind the US of the risks involved in the current "pivot to Asia."

For reasons of its own Beijing has not only tolerated but propped up the Kim dynasty since 1949 and it seems unlikely that young Kim is acting without at least tacit Chinese approval.


#14

Which prison camps? The North Koreans have three types.

  1. Political Prison camps... example Camp #14 Prisoners held for life, life expectancy around 3 years. Heavy labor.

  2. Criminal "Reeducation Camps"

  3. Political Prison Family Camps example Camp #22. Prisoners held for life. Includes wives, siblings, children , parents ect of political prisoners. Worked and starved to death , life expectancy around 2-3 years.

But hey, lots of countries have family death camps..nothing to see here..keep moving.


#15

You assume a lot. I know it makes you feel good to call others ignorant, but I'm quite aware of the camps in N. Korea, and the prison labor issue in the US as well. The US also maintains an unknown number of prisons around the world, details of which are rarely discussed in the MSM...

Seems just a bit hypocritical to point the finger at NK for using prison labor when America does it as well and has for a long time. Just as we don't like NK having a nuclear weapon, when the US has tens of thousands...


#18

Here is a list of nations that control their own central bank and currency: North Korea, Iran, Syria, Cuba, and Sudan, with a few hybrids here and there. There were more, but they were all destroyed following 9-11: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Tunisia, etc.

If we the people, want to end the so-called war against terrorism, all we need to do is to take back our sovereignty by taking the Federal Reserve System, which violates Article I, Sections 8 and 10, of the U.S. Constitution, and making it a pubic central bank.


#19

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#20

Your amplification is right on, and appreciated, Kallimachus.


#21

We can never know the extent to which our threatening posture toward North Korea has contributed to the well documented human rights issues there, and also, for example, in Cuba. Obviously, our threats have not deterred these crimes, and it would be very interesting to see whether a peace agreement would over time enable the regime to relax its grip--over time, as few leaders anywhere seem to want to reduce their powers, regardless. Still, it hasn't been tried. And if we, as a superpower (now in rapid decline) can pledge to do no more harm in a number of regions around the world...what might come of that is worth thinking about. I mean, it can't get any worse than it already is; why not take the risk--not for us so much, as for the NK people and the region. Yes, I know; this sounds like Tommy James and Crystal Blue Persuasion--but I am serious. Esp about the part: Do No Harm.