Revealed: the gas chamber horror of North Korea's gulag

[DevilsAdvocate2]

This is absolutely deplorable. The U.N. should step up to the plate and demand that Kim Jong Il step down or be forcibly removed.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0,2763,1136483,00.html

[lcordero]

1. This stuff is getting put out in the news just so that the next war

can be set up. I didn't fall for the "Saddam was a bad man" ploy, I ain't falling for this one either. N.Korea is a stepping stone towards threatening China and Russia. Whoever it is that wants N.Korea can do their dirty work themselves and leave me completely out of it.

[Taeger]

5. Agreed

BushCo didn't care about gassing Kurds while Saddam was still on the CIA payroll.

There may very well be Gulags in North Korea. However, we've had refugees streaming out of N Korea for quite some time. It's suspicious to see these claims revealed NOW. Remember all the horrible tales revealed out of "Kuwait" that turned out to be bogus. Remember the WMD "intelligence" gleaned from Iraqi dissidents.

North Korea is an incredible mess from many perspectives:

1) China WILL NOT tolerate the US going unilateral on their border. Any action there will have to be with Chinese consent and they will WANT something for it.

2) South Korea needs to take the lead on liberating their brethren in the North. The US could supply air and naval and special ops (locating and neutralizing nukes) but KOREAN troops should be the ones doing the grunt work on the ground.

3) The UN will be reluctant to help the US after the Iraq fiasco.

4) The Treasury is already broke.

5) Our resources are already stretched thin in Iraq and Afghanistan. Both countries are on the verge of civil war with Americans trying to fire at BOTH sides.

We are all quite suspicious that another military distraction is planned for election time. It looks like they are pushing North Korea right now since NOBODY likes them, not even the Chinese.

Other candidates for invasion:

* Syria - More WMD hooey, possible pipeline access if establishing an independent Kurdistan becomes necessary. The Kurds are the only reliable US ally in the region.

* Iran - I would watch out for covert US actions to topple an unsteady Iran. The focus on Iran has ALWAYS been a waste because the people there have been pro-democracy fighting against the Mullahs. If some deal can be reached by the military, the Mullahs could be toppled and a "free" Iran could be established. I put free in quotes because BuschCo would have no desire to empower the PEOPLE of Iran. Only their cronies who are after the oil.

* Cuba - Cuba is perfectly helpless against the United States. The US has intermittently accused Castro of being a drug smuggler and a terrorist (which is ironic considering what Bush's CIA was up to). This would also be useful in securing all the Cuban votes in Florida.

* Venezuela - Whenever people stand up to the WTO, they're accused of being communists. To BushCo Castro and Chavez are the same person. They've even tried to link the two together. I would doubt seeing an invasion, but I expect to see more CIA nonsense to spoil a democracy that isn't serving the globalists.

Countries that probably should be invaded, but won't.

* Pakistan - Surprise, surprise. Guess who DOES have WMD and HAVE been proliferating them???? Yep it's our Afghanistan "ally" Pakistan. I doubt there would be any serious action since Washington sees Pakistan as a way to keep India "in line".

* Saudi Arabia - They may not have WMD, but they finance terrorists who would use that cash to BUY WMD.

[DevilsAdvocate2]

8. You need to read my original post carefully

I said the U.N. (United Nations), not the U.S. needed to do something about it. Need some help getting that foot out of your mouth?

[lcordero]

9. The UN needs to mind it's own business and we(the US) need

to get our own house in order before we EVER go around telling somebody else what to do:mad:

[DevilsAdvocate2]

10. The U.N. needs to mind its own business?

What business would that be, exactly?

[lcordero]

11. that means not sticking it's nose where it's not welcomed

It's sanctions alone killed something like 1.5 million people in Iraq.
Sanction is another word for siege, siege is a form of war. The UN was at war, and a fraudulent war at that, with Iraq for 12 years.

The UN has never been effective and will never be effective.

[DevilsAdvocate2]

15. But I thought...

I thought everyone was outraged that the Bush administration acted unilaterally and disregarded world opinion. Well, if the U.N. is world opinion, then world opinion was fraudulent. If world opinion was fraudulent, then why was there an uproar over the Bush administration disregarding it?

And yes, I'm sure the U.N. is not welcome in North Korea, for obvious reasons. The full extent of the human rights abuses would then be xeposed for all the world to see. Departments of Children's Services aren't welcome in the homes of child molesters either. Does that mean they shouldn't stick their noses in there? Oh, I forgot. Children are still being molested so those departments are ineffective and never will be effective. Let them fend for themselves.

[lcordero]

21. What part of the US keeping it's own house in order did you not

understand?

The government should not even be allowed to deploy troops. There are no "American Interests Abroad". There are only corporate interests abroad. An American is should under no circumstances be obligated to protect corporate overseas interests.

[DevilsAdvocate2]

23. I don't follow your argument

Based on your reasoning, we had no business bailing Europe out during WW1 or WW2. After all, Hitler didn't atack us, so why were we there? And what does "the US keeping its own house in order" have to do with the responsibility the U.N. has to the people of North Korea?

[lcordero]

25. How about this

Based on your reasoning, we had no business bailing Europe out during WW1 or WW2.
They didn't need us in the first place, Russia was doing just fine beating back Hitler.

After all, Hitler didn't atack us, so why were we there? And what does "the US keeping its own house in order" have to do with the responsibility the U.N. has to the people of North Korea?

The UN was propped in order so that it will be easier to invent a reason to take other people's natural resources. Ask the Iraqi people if there is any difference in between the US and Saddam. They'll tell you that we are worse.
We have made no difference.

Spilling American blood for corporate interests is totally unacceptable.

There is no difference. The only thing that changes is that the oppressor's face changes from a Korean face to an American face.

[DevilsAdvocate2]

26. Huh?

"They didn't need us in the first place, Russia was doing just fine beating back Hitler."

Yes, Russia did fine. France, on the other hand, did not.

"The UN was propped in order so that it will be easier to invent a reason to take other people's natural resources."

I guess that explains why the U.N. was behind the U.S. 100% in its invasion of Iraq.

"Ask the Iraqi people if there is any difference in between the US and Saddam. They'll tell you that we are worse.
We have made no difference."

Again, I refer you to the reports from Human Rights Watch. Where is the documentation to back up your assertion that Iraqis feel they are worse off under the U.S. than they were under Saddam?

[lcordero]

37. And again I say, NO THANK YOU

Yes, Russia did fine. France, on the other hand, did not.

And why is France any of my concern? Remember that Standard Oil and the ruling families here in the US were backing Hitler.

I guess that explains why the U.N. was behind the U.S. 100% in its invasion of Iraq.

All the nations in the UN are as badly overstretched as we are and Shrub was giving sweetheart deals to his cronies, so why should they participate? you tell me. The Iraq War was based on a lie, so was Vietnam.

Again, I refer you to the reports from Human Rights Watch. Where is the documentation to back up your assertion that Iraqis feel they are worse off under the U.S. than they were under Saddam?

Women's rights have been pretty much taken away. They can't even walk out in the street in the daytime without fear of getting abducted and raped. Do soldier casualties increase because somebody is supposedly doing something good? I don't think so

We do not have the man power. The only way that war with N.Korea is going to be accomplished is through a draft. The draft is unacceptable.

I will not have a government that drives me into poverty inconvenience me just because they want to threaten somebody or make money.

The US citizens are worthless to their own government. Why should citizens even so much as lift a finger to help their own government when the only thing that they do is stomp on their face.

FUCK THAT

If you want a war go down the street to the recruiter's station and fight it yourself.

[drewb]

38. If you want a war go down the street to the recruiter's station...

... and fight it yourself.

I'll drink to that...

:toast:
:loveya:

[Blitz]

47. Russia was doing just fine beating back Hitler?????

What history book did you get that out of? Not even Russians believe that. If the United States, Britain, Canada and the rest of the Allies didn't open up a Western front when they did, Russia may well have fallen to Hitler. No U.S., no Western Front. If the U.S. had ignored Germany and fought only against Japan, Britain, the Soviet Union and the Rest of Europe (and much of Africa) would have probably fallen to the Axis. And it probably wouldn't have stopped there.

[drewb]

39. Ding ding ding... Give that man (or woman) a PRIZE!!!

Quote - "The government should not even be allowed to deploy troops. There are no "American Interests Abroad". There are only corporate interests abroad. An American is should under no circumstances be obligated to protect corporate overseas interests."

I think I like you lcordero!

:loveya:

[lcordero]

40. thank you

:toast:

[GabysPoppy]

41. I always wondered what it was like in the US in 1940

[drewb]

42. You're not going to compare me to "Lucky Lindy" too now are you?

I just want a humble foreign policy with our troops pulled out of Europe, South Korea, and all points in between.

That's my opinion.

:loveya:


Those troops may just be faceless grunts to you, but I served with a good many of them, and it hurts me deeply whenever one of them is killed in some ridiculous conflict that we had no good reason to be involved with in the first place...

[GabysPoppy]

43. Compare yourself to whomever you want to.

[Taeger]

45. A Vote for foreign war

A Vote for a pre-emptive war should be made with a SPECIFIC enlistment to a conflict. When Senators start sending THEIR sons to war then we'll believe their votes. If you not willing to fight it, you shouldn't advocate it.

Really. World War I and II was marked by a tremendous amount of voluntary enlistements. If the war is just, men will enlist to protect their family and their way of life.

BTW, no one was "drafted" for the revolution. This is the truest sign of a just cause.

[cprise]

48. A lucid, pithy comment!

The only problem is, the corporate masters live here and ensure our politicians have enough money to win elections.

But yes, "American interests abroad" translates into "Imperial power" or if you will, "piracy".

[Taeger]

33. No

The UN is a virtually powerless organization. They have no ability to force "lil Kim" to stop his atrocities.

[pink_poodle]

2. Whatever. Just like Saddam's human shredding machine. yawn. -nm

:

[DevilsAdvocate2]

3. Nice to see your concern

For fellow human beings. It has been widely documented by groups such as Human Rights Watch that systematic human rights abuses were commonplace in Iraq under Saddam.

From the HRW.org website:

"The government of Saddam Hussein was responsible for systematic violations of human rights and international humanitarian law."

"Since the overthrow of that government in April 2003, evidence of atrocities in the center and south of the county has become widely available in the form of scores of mass graves containing thousands of victims..."

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/01/29/iraq7130.htm

And yes, it says that there have been problems with collection & custody of this evidence, but HRW is not saying the evidence is discredited.

Or you can view this article:

http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/iraq031103.htm

Which says, in part, "This briefing paper examines Iraq's arbitrary and widespread use of the death penalty and extrajudicial executions. For more than three decades, the government of President Saddam Hussein has sanctioned the use of the death penalty and extrajudicial executions as a tool of political repression, both in order to eliminate real or suspected political opponents and to maintain a reign of terror over the population at large. The executions that have taken place over this period constitute an integral part of more systematic repression - characterized by widespread arbitrary arrests, indefinite detention without trial, death in custody under torture, and large-scale "disappearances" - through which the government has sustained its rule."

Yawn, indeed!

[Taeger]

7. Really ????

... sanctioned the use of the death penalty and extrajudicial executions as a tool of political repression, both in order to eliminate real or suspected political opponents and to maintain a reign of terror over the population at large. The executions that have taken place over this period constitute an integral part of more systematic repression - characterized by widespread arbitrary arrests, indefinite detention without trial, death in custody under torture, and large-scale "disappearances" - through which the government has sustained its rule."

Damn, read this again. How do you tell the difference between Saddam Hussein and George Bush????

If we want to BE the white hats, we have to wear them and act accordingly. Otherwise, we are indistinguishable from the "terrorists".

[pink_poodle]

12. Right on! -nm

:

[pink_poodle]

13. I just don't believe everything I read anymore. That's all. -nm

:

[drewb]

4. Oooh.... Feed me more propaganda!

Demonize the "enemy"!!!

The only way to perpetual peace is through perpetual war!

:loveya:

[DevilsAdvocate2]

6. The sense of compassion I feel is overwhelming!

You're right, this stuff isn't happening. Human Rights Watch is a patsy for the Bush administration.

http://www.hrw.org/un/chr59/dprk.htm

"Human Rights Watch has conducted research with North Korean refugees who have fled to China, and now reside in Seoul. We collected testimony on horrific conditions and treatment in labor camps and prisons in the DPRK, which we have corroborated with information from other sources."

http://hrw.org/editorials/2002/nkorea-refugees.htm

"In a new report to be released on Tuesday, Human Rights Watch has documented the refugee crisis and its human toll. A former detainee in a North Korean logging camp described how prisoners survived, catching rats using shoes as traps, then roasting and eating them secretly."

"A comprehensive strategy is needed to address the human rights disaster in North Korea and the impact on neighboring countries."

[pink_poodle]

14. You really want to talk human rights? Then why did your country..........

invade Iraq and Afghanistan????????????? The Taliban are still there in Afghanistan yet MANY innocent people there died and with Saddam gone is the world any safer as the US said was the case? Honestly!

[DevilsAdvocate2]

17. I think a better question is...

Why did YOUR country sit back and do nothing, knowing full well the extent to which women's fundamental human rights were being violated by the Taliban? After the Revolutionary War in America, circa 1776, there were still people here who were loyal to the British. Does that mean America lost that war?

[pink_poodle]

18. You need to realize that the USA has ZERO credibility with ...............

the rest of the world anymore. Once you realize that, you will then begin to realize what that means for your people now. And I mean ZERO credibility. In fact, we basically think you are liars and if you support this shit being dished out all the time, then you are one of the lying liars also. People believe what they WANT to believe.

[pink_poodle]

19. Also, Canadians died in Afghanistan. You must have that..............

"revisionist" memory thing happening that Americans have aquired recently.

[DevilsAdvocate2]

24. Settle down Pink Poodle

"...we basically think you are liars and if you support this shit being dished out all the time, then you are one of the lying liars also."...

Liars...lying liars? Sounds like you're getting a bit flustered. First, the paper that reported the story is in the U.K., not the U.S. Second, Human Rights Watch has documented this "shit", so you might want to ask them why they are the lying liars that keep dishing out the shit.

I thought you were from Scotland because of the blurb on the bottom of your post,"Och aye! Scots wha hae......!!!", and the thing that looks like a swatch of a kilt on your posts. I'm not attempting to be a revisionist, I was merely confused about your nationality.

[pink_poodle]

31. Well, you looked at my profile obviously and so you saw that..........

it states Scottish and now I am in Canada, so why are you confused? I was seeing that you were flustered because you are definitely confused on what the issues are out there and you did not seem to be aware that Canada is over there in Afghanistan and that they have had fatalities. You just don't seem to have a very clear idea about things.

[DevilsAdvocate2]

35. Actually, no

I didn't look at your profile. I was simply going by the tag line that appears on the bottom of each message you post. Yes, I know Canada has troops in Afghanistan. Yes, I know Canada has suffered casualties (some of them as a result of friendly fire, unfortunately). And yes, I have a clear idea about "things" and the "issues that are out there". Thank you, drive thru please. :)

[Darranar]

36. Afghanistan is in total chaos...

any new rights extend maybe a mile beyond Kabul.

[pink_poodle]

16. Also, meant to add that the sanctions your country..................

inflicts has killed millions around the world and you are the leading cause of pollution which is not only killing people but the environment, animals, fish and birds. Think about those causes while you are at it.

[Forkboy]

20. Ok...how do you propose we forcibly remove him?

[Forkboy]

27. any ideas?

?

[Darranar]

22. This is horrible...

efforts need to be made to achieve peaceful regime change in North Korea.

[Forkboy]

28. Ok,I'll ask you

First,let me say I agree with you.

But how do you propose we do what you suggest? I think military answers would be a disaster,quite probably far beyond the mess we've made in Iraq.

Yet peaceful measures don't seem to have much effect on NK either :shrug:

[DevilsAdvocate2]

29. If I knew the answer to that, I'd have Kofi Annan's job

Let me state that I don't think the U.S. should do it. This is the U.N.'s responsibility. And I agree, military answers would most likely be a disaster, but apparently, as you say, non-military answers are a disaster as well. I suggest that the U.N. come up with a solution. It will undoubtedly be difficult, as Kim Jong Il is not a reasonable man. However, I don't feel it is in mankind's best interests to sit back and allow this type of thing to continue when it is known to exist. Just because the world failed to act in similar situations in the past does not mean it shouldn't begin acting now.

[Forkboy]

30. I agree totally

but I must say I dont even know what the UN intervention will accomplish if NK wont allow them in...and they wont.

Maybe if we approached them on strctly humanitarian reasons like feeding them it might allow the UN to get it's foot in the door,so to speak.I really dont know.I've driven myself crazy trying to figure out what to do about China as well.

[Darranar]

32. That's because they have a motive behind them that is clear...

remember all the stuff about how China was "improving human rights", which was why we were going to exploit the slavery there?

I think it is the same thing with North Korea. The US is not trying to improve the situation; it is trying to weaken possible competitors in Asia. South Korea seems happy enough to go along with it, though its people may begin objecting sooner or later.

Bush is not willing to go to war with North Korea. It has a strong military and a considerable supply of WMD. He'd rather go after weaker targets that at the same time will have as great or almost as great benefits.

What he is trying right now is intimidation, which shows incompetence beyond simply malice. He is trying to make North Korea another Libya, a "success" he can cheer about while at the same time granting benefits to his friends (in Libya it's the gas, in North Korea it's the elimination of a possible disturbance.) (Off topic, but I think Libya caved in because someone or something in the administration was competent enough to offer the carrot, conquest by US corporations, instead of threatening with the stick, conquest by the US military. We will have to see exactly what Bush does in regard to the sanctions there.)

I realize that I haven't answered your question. I'll complete this post eventually.

[Forkboy]

34. Maybe not answered

but a well thought out and interesting post nonetheless :toast:

[PVnRT]

44. Yes, it is disgusting

Where exactly will we get the troops to invade? And how will you keep China out? And how will you convince Japan to get on board, when they will get the brunt of any nuclear retaliation? Hmmmm?

[DevilsAdvocate2]

46. Who said anything about "we"?

As I originally said, this is a job for the U.N. The U.S. can contribute a token number of forces, say 10,000 maximum, if that. This is an issue that needs to be addressed by the world community, not the U.S. Therefore, the world community can contribute their forces to get the job done.

[cprise]

49. What's good enough for Europe and S. Africa

...is good enough for Asia.

Opressive regimes are candidates for war only if they militarily assualt other nations.

Should we have invaded Spain and Portugal to end their fascist regimes? Should we have invaded South Africa?

What would those places be like today if we had? What happens when a people are made to lose hope in controlling their own affairs? Do they not become ultra-religious and deeply impoverished?