Replies to This Discussion | 이 토론에 대한 답글들

Permalink Reply by Dave Woods on January 31, 2011 at 10:45am

Without doubt more effective. It's a distribution/logistics issue, of information and technology. It does seem to have become more a matter of when not if.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lara Tosh on January 31, 2011 at 4:50pm

Excellent idea  ...technological infiltration!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Carl Kwan on January 31, 2011 at 8:02pm

But wasn't a N. Korean citizen recently executed for using a smuggled cell phone to call relatives in the South? I think it would definitely be more effective if it could be done, though. Having hundreds of thousands of devices rained down inside of air packets might work :)

 

The word dismantling may be up for debate because what if they just reformed instead of being dismantled?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joon Kim on February 1, 2011 at 10:22am

Sir

 

Thank you for your response. However, I must disagree with you.

You do not reform a Romanov, a Ben Ali, or a Caucescu.

Without trying to sound smug, or bloodthirsty: you annihilate, dismember, tear it down.

As for the lives lost, well, that's the price of freedom; revolutions don't come cheap.

As for the mess this would create, well, again, revolutions are messy and the outcome always uncertain.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lara Tosh on February 1, 2011 at 11:08am

I'm with you on the possibility of reform existing -as for the probability that reform is welcomed by those who would be undergoing the aformentioned reform (change), I'm sensing it might be slim -but you never know ...the hunger for something different might just be large enough (assuming there's any awareness that alternatives exist & are possible).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by vince rubino on February 1, 2011 at 10:16am

There's a problem of connectivity.  And if you do this using a satellite, it would just give the regime an excuse to try and shoot it out of orbit.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hanna Park on February 1, 2011 at 6:00pm

 I had wanted to be able to play the documentaries of Link (http://www.linkglobal.org/) last year at Korean universities but due to the climate I noticed it was not feasible.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hanna Park on February 4, 2011 at 10:09am

Is there a thumbs up option ? ( referring to Dan's comment)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Don Southerton on February 4, 2011 at 10:39am

Having followed North Korea politics since the 1980s ( when I was at West Point), and strong ties to some of the leading scholars on North Korea, I would argue that the North Korean military will never stand by passively if the masses stage any protests.

The military has the most to lose ( along with the Kim family).    

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lara Tosh on February 4, 2011 at 11:27am

I agree with you Don.  The Kim family & the "regime" have EVERYTHING to loose.

 

Besides, isn't most of the NK population somehow involved in the military (in the form of mandatory military service & continued drill obligations)? 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lara Tosh on February 4, 2011 at 5:43pm

sorry -that was a typo:  I meant "lose"

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Youngil Ely Loew on February 28, 2011 at 4:21am

Hello Don,

 

I was wondering if you think Lara's point above is correct in that most of the NK population is somehow involved with the military. If so, wouldn't it be possible for a revolution to happen within the military? I doubt everyone within the military structure is happy with the way things are going, and maybe if it reached critical mass, there could be a coup? Korean's (well, South Koreans, not sure about the North)) seem to idealize military leaders overthrowing a corrupt King, since it has happened a couple times in their history... In Egypt, one of the reasons things didn't become too violent is that a lot of the military were supporting the people's efforts.

 

I think if the masses staged protests, there is a chance that the military would be divided on it, but wondering what you think...

• ▶ Reply