South Korea To Restart Propaganda Loudspeakers Along Border 170
jones_supa writes: South Korea has said that it will resume anti-Pyongyang loudspeaker broadcasts this week along the heavily fortified border with North Korea in retaliation of Pyongyang's claimed hydrogen bomb test. The broadcasts will resume at noon on Friday, told Cho Tae-yong, deputy chief of the presidential office of national security. Cho added that South Korean troops maintain combat readiness and will sternly retaliate against North Korea if Pyongyang follows with a provocation. In August, South resumed the broadcasts for the first time in 11 years in retaliation for the North's land-mine attack that maimed two South Korean soldiers. The two sides later held days of intensive high-level talks and produced a deal in which South agreed to stop propaganda broadcasts unless an abnormal situation occurs. Which now did.
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:it was an inevitable progression, to say the le (Score:5, Funny)
south korea: a chipmunk christmas remix of Gangnam Style at every border outpost by tomorrow morning.
Might constitute a war crime (torture, superfluous injury, unnecessary suffering), as technically they're still at war.
south korea: pick up a copy of whatever Biebers got out this year while you're at it...
Yeah, definitely a war crime...
Re: it was an inevitable progression, to say the l (Score:1, Interesting)
A few tracks on Biebers album that I've heard are actually good, get over yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
A few tracks on Biebers album that I've heard are actually good, get over yourself.
I'm willing to say it logged-in. There are a couple of mediocre tracks now that aren't embarrassing to listen to. To borrow a line from Penny Arcade "the new one is not all shit gravy".
Still, I find him weirdly grating on the ears - even the OK tracks got old fast when repeated on the radio.
Re: (Score:2)
" a chipmunk christmas remix of Gangnam Style at every border outpost by tomorrow morning."
You jest, but if all South Korea dod was set up one of those huge arrays of bigscreens at some border point where it was visible to the North, and play the Gangnam video, and the Norks would lose faith in their society.
Re: (Score:2)
pick up a copy of whatever Biebers got out this year while you're at it...
Yeah, definitely a war crime...
get the RIAA involved and someone is going to be bankrupted via lawyer fees.
Re:it was an inevitable progression, to say the le (Score:5, Funny)
... south korea: pick up a copy of whatever Biebers got out this year while you're at it...
Look, let's not go overboard, OK? I know, the set off a H-bomb, but we should be proportionate in our response.
Re: (Score:3)
... south korea: pick up a copy of whatever Biebers got out this year while you're at it...
Look, let's not go overboard, OK? I know, the set off a H-bomb, but we should be proportionate in our response.
Well, we already sent Rodman, we have to escalate.
Re: (Score:2)
A simpler solution.... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People will keep checking their phones, no one will be able to tell when their phone actually rings...that is beyond evil.
Re: (Score:2)
I also have the same ringtone. Recorded it myself using a modem back when I still had a dial-up connection.
Re: (Score:2)
Back under W, the South was going to use Celine Dion, but Dick Cheney told them even he couldn't support such a flagrant violation of the Conventions on Torture..
Re: (Score:2)
.... south korea: pick up a copy of whatever Biebers got out this year while you're at it...
south korea: And if you happen to stumble across the Yoko Ono Box set, pick that up as well.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure Japan has no desire to resurrect its war crimes on the Korean Peninsula. You're flirting with a diplomatic disaster, Friend.
Ineffective? (Score:1, Interesting)
How effective are these propaganda broadcasts, really?
If you grew up thinking the sky way red, nothing coming out of a loudspeaker (run by the enemy, no less) will convince you otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Ineffective? (Score:5, Interesting)
My wife was telling me about a story she read regarding a North Korean defector who fled across the border to China and then eventually made it to the West. The thing that convinced him he needed to leave? A soldier from the other side of the DMZ accidentally dropped nail clippers and didn't care enough to come back and get them later. When he realized that something as "incredible" as nail clippers were basically worthless to the other side's soldiers, he knew he had been lied to about how things were outside of his country.
Take it with the requisite grain of salt, but it's an interesting anecdote, nonetheless.
Re: (Score:1)
This is what terrifies Kim Jong Un. That people will realize that they've been lied to for years, and realize what they're missing.
Pop music? Fun, upbeat pop music? From dozens of different singing groups? Enough if it to play around the clock?
News about Park Geun-hye traveling to meetings in other countries?
The only way this is possible is if South Korea is actually a cool place, and Kim Jong Un is a liar.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
It's not that fun music is an acquired taste, it's that grumpy people don't like having fun.
I think it comes from spending a lifetime performing grueling work under an oppressive regime (whether it be the USSR or a Baptist church) they don't want to believe that all of that sacrifice was for nothing but to amuse some dictator, so they will believe that fun is wrong.
Also, rock and fun upbeat pop music only overlap a *tiny* bit.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, my goodness! I can't even imagine the state of the populace's finger and toenails. Are there long lines and rations to use the services of the state-sponsored manicurists? Is there a National Policy to advise the glorious citizens as to what their nail states should aspire to be?
We must liberate this country of janky fingers, ingrown cuticles and hangnails in all haste!
God Bless
Re: (Score:2)
Even more than that, question is - WHAT are they broadcasting?
Is the message more of a 'don't try fighting us - you will lose'? Or is it more of a 'We're doing better than you - come & join us'. I'd get the value of the former. But the latter would be stupid - why would South Korea want to annex a basketcase like Nork? That's just begging to sink its economy - in the same way that Germany's economy took a dive after reunification. Yeah, I know they are both Korean nations, and there are people
Re: (Score:3)
why would South Korea want to annex a basketcase like Nork?
For the same reason West Germany rushed to embrace East German despite the real setback that caused to their economy: compassion.
Re: (Score:2)
It certainly wouldn't be cheap either - North Korea is in such a shambles that rebuilding it will make German reunification look cheap by comparison. One estimate I heard was that it would be something like 10 to 100 time
Re: (Score:2)
It was not cheap at the price. Was the population density of East Germany even that much lower than West Germany? Maybe?
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize you're agreeing with me, right? Compassion? (Well, unless you're a hardcore Buddhist insisting on a technical meaning of "compassion" that excludes people you have an emotional attachment to).
Re: (Score:2)
Is this not wonderful? Isn't freedom glorious? In the USSR you were forced to work and was given money, now nobody will even give you a job so you are finally free to starve, isn't it great?
Again? (Score:1)
What they really need is to shake Kim's hands, send him their congrats and push more trade with NK to help them get out of poverty.
Kim is not being invasive, but desperate and delusional. He needs friends and NK people need trading partners and investment to fix their shit country and become economically independent from Kim's regime - which the current foreign aid actually consolidates since Kim is the one who ultimately distributes everything.
Re: (Score:2)
North Korea's isolation is Kim's fault just as much as anyone else's. He's well aware that opening up trade internationally would end up creating a more educated and motivated populace....one that wouldn't look to kindly on their current leadership.
Look at the dogma that has been crammed down their throat for the past 50 years....Juche is usually translated as "self-reliance". Why would Dear Leader want to open up trade to the world when he's convinced the populace that they don't need it?
https://en.wikip [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
North Korea's isolation is Kim's fault just as much as anyone else's. He's well aware that opening up trade internationally would end up creating a more educated and motivated populace....one that wouldn't look to kindly on their current leadership.
Look at the dogma that has been crammed down their throat for the past 50 years....Juche is usually translated as "self-reliance". Why would Dear Leader want to open up trade to the world when he's convinced the populace that they don't need it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Juche is an interesting concept. I'm not sure its specific to North Korea either; the Mongolians have a saying "I'd rather suffer under my own rule than frolic under someone elses."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I often wonder just how 'aware' he is of these things.
He's a third generation dictator and a vicious little sociopath.
I can't decide if he does these things because he's delusional and believed this is his right ... or if because he rationally knows the truth and does it anyway. In both scenarios he's a crazy, vicious little runt who places no value on the lives of people. The outcome is still the same.
Of course it's his
Re: (Score:2)
I often wonder just how 'aware' he is of these things.
He went to school in Switzerland. How could he not be at least a little aware?
Re: (Score:2)
Couldn't he follow China's example? Do what THEY did - open up his economy, but maintain hold on power. If his people try any tricks, he could pull a Tienanmen Square on them.
Only problem I see - China has had regular leadership changes since then - every few years. He probably thinks that there is no way he can avoid that if he goes that route.
It's a game (Score:2)
Kim is not being invasive, but desperate and delusional. He needs friends and NK people need trading partners and investment to fix their shit country and become economically independent from Kim's regime - which the current foreign aid actually consolidates since Kim is the one who ultimately distributes everything.
Actually, he's doing what worked for decades for his father and grandfather: Do or say something crazy to get everyone's attention then get the world to offer concessions for them to stop said crazy activity. Sanctions really don't hurt regimes that have the "us against the world mentality" like the DPRK, Cuba, and to a lesser extent Iran (they do tend to hurt the populations of those countries, but the regimes truly don't really care about that). In fact generally those sanctions are used to bolster the
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, Mr. Kerry.
Re: (Score:2)
South Korea shouldn't even bother trying to engage with them until the North thaws. The most likely chance of reform that is if / when dear leader drops dead or is bum
Re:Again? (Score:5, Informative)
On the other hand, if you believe that their goal is maintaining the Kim family dynasty, and the power of the North Korea military elites, then it's not so strange.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I'd expect Mr. Kim would very quickly end up dead if he tried to ally with the south, with current "war like" situation the generals live the high life while the
population suffers. If the situation was normalized they would be dirt poor nobodies in a dirt poor country like the rest of the population, and when the population learns what was really going on they'd be in front of a firing squad.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a whole city dedicated to trade and cooperation between the Koreas. It hasn't helped the situation any though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Original transcript (Score:5, Insightful)
Comrades of the Soviet Union, there is no need for this senseless bloodshed between our nations.
The German people are not your enemy.
If you surrender, you will be treated well.
You will be given plenty of good, hot food and warm clothing, and if wounded, proper medical treatment.
The German army is your friend.
North Korea To Restart Artillery Boom Along Border (Score:1)
The shelling will resume at 10 past noon on Friday.
Land Mine ... Attack? (Score:1)
For those wondering, South Korea accused Best Korea of sneaking across the border and planting land mines next to a South Korean guard tower. Two South Korean soldiers were maimed when it went off.
Re: (Score:3)
That whole landmine story still doesn't sit well with me. It's not very good border security if a couple guys with a backpack full of mines can just wander around un-noticed.
Yeah, I get that they're set up against a large full scale invasion, but you'd think with all the fancy technology they have on display, and especially with previous small-team infiltrations, they would be on top of things. (I know, I know, armchair quarterbacking.)
Re: (Score:1)
It's a long border, guarded by unmotivated conscripted youngsters.
Re: (Score:2)
That whole landmine story still doesn't sit well with me. It's not very good border security if a couple guys with a backpack full of mines can just wander around un-noticed.
Yeah, I get that they're set up against a large full scale invasion, but you'd think with all the fancy technology they have on display, and especially with previous small-team infiltrations, they would be on top of things. (I know, I know, armchair quarterbacking.)
I'll armchair quarterback with you... It seems insane that anything like that could happen along a DMZ.
Re: (Score:2)
Those crazy border guards and their practical jokes.... You knew *somebody* was going to try something more than just black shoe polish on the field glasses...
Test is almost certainly fake (Score:2)
The chances of the bomb they set off being a fusion bomb are vanishingly slim. The one they set off was probably another one of their fission bombs or possibly even a huge amount of conventional explosives. An underground test is ideal for hiding the source of the explosion, while if they actually had a fusion bomb, an above-ground explosion would prove it to the world beyond any doubt. So they want the rest of the world to think they have a fusion bomb when they clearly don't.
So it seems that escalating te
Re: (Score:2)
The People's Grammar (Score:2)
North Korea's fiery rhetoric may project some laughably inaccurate claims, but at least the grammar is better than that of a Slashdot editor.
What is the end game? (Score:2)
It is the equivalent of petting a cat the wrong way. We know it's annoying, so why do it? The only possible outcome from it is provocation.
If they use that nuke Pyongyang will be gone in ho (Score:2)
If they use that nuke Pyongyang will be gone in hours.
Re: (Score:3)
If they use that nuke Pyongyang will be gone in hours.
So many of you idiots make claims like this, but you're talking out of your ass. Nobody is going to bomb the hell out of a city full of civilians. We won't be having another Hiroshima, at least from this side. And, for those who believe we'd just steamroll over the country like it was Iraq, you don't know NK.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is NK used a nuke, China would no longer support them, in which case it would be another Iraq. They don't have the weapons or military strength to actually resist the US without China's help.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://theweek.com/articles/57... [theweek.com]
That article seems to go through it. China told Kim Jong Un to chill out after the last bomb was detonated, they are starting to tire with the hostility coming out of NK.
Re: (Score:3)
when your puppet has a bad case of Black Mold then you either
1 roast said puppet (china deals with NK)
2 hand the puppet to somebody with a can of Gas and a lighter (china tells the US Have Fun and Watch Your Splash Damage)
Re: (Score:2)
Is NK used a nuke, China would no longer support them, in which case it would be another Iraq. They don't have the weapons or military strength to actually resist the US without China's help.
Having spent six years in Korea as a defense contractor, I'll tell you that you're full of shit. NK is not Iraq. And, with the mountains and tunnels they have, unless we went into a full scorched earth campaign, not caring about collateral damage, it would be ugly.
Re: (Score:2)
You really think they have the supplies stockpiled for more than a week of war?
I just don't see it, but I will concede that you likely know more about it than I do.
Re: (Score:2)
You really think they have the supplies stockpiled for more than a week of war?
I just don't see it, but I will concede that you likely know more about it than I do.
Even if they don't, they do have enough artillery that's within range of Seoul to do major damage. If we didn't do a first strike on all of it, we'd see thousands of innocent civilians killed, and the damage to structures would likely be in the billions.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that was part of the whole Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) policy. Sure, we'd do it if we thought they were about to do it to us.
Re: (Score:2)
And, for those who believe we'd just steamroll over the country like it was Iraq, you don't know NK.
Invasion would solve nothing - even Bush didn't suggest it. All that it will take to end NK as a separate entity is to make it easy for people to cross the border. That's not an easy task (minefields especially are hard to clear: more work than removing the military leadership), but it is possible as a military action. It's not about nukes or taking over; a very different sort of military action would be needed.
Re: (Score:2)
and the Local Corps of Engineers just struck a pose and Yelled CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!
You just have to either run over the areas with heavy enough armour or drop enough explosives to gravel your pathways.
its not hard to do unless you have problems with getting "messy"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's only one part of the problem, though. Making a thousand-yard-wide "highway" for people to flee the country is a start (or more than one), but the troops who will be sent to stop people leaving are also people you want to leave, so you don't want to just shoot them all. It's a hard problem, but we've seen large troop formations surrender to us in the past, and we just need to trigger that.
Re: (Score:2)
"easy" fix for that
at Point A post a BIG SIGN (in english/korean)
"Troops wishing to surrender please place your weapons/muntions on the trucks on either side of the road ALL ARMED PERSONS PAST THIS POINT WILL BE SHOT ON SIGHT
--------
mugileul baechi hasibsio hangbog eul huimanghaneun budae neun / doloui yangjjog-eissneun teuleog e muntions i sijeom gwageo modeun mujang mich sinche neun silyeog gihoega doel geos-ibnida"
Re: (Score:2)
No, that sort of thing wont work, because the NK officers can just march their troops past the sign. The troops won't surrender until (a) they're convinced life will be better, and (b) superior force arrives on the scene (so they know they won't be shot for surrendering). Ultimatums won't work, but still it could be done.
Re: (Score:2)
> Nobody is going to bomb the hell out of a city full of civilians.
No, none of the sane nations are going to start a war with such an action. China would never do something like that. America, Russia, etc. No way. But if the Kims nuked Seoul? The response might well be nuclear, and if it wasn't, it would be a three sided superpower pincer.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, with uncontested air superiority it would be a steamroll.
We had uncontested air superiority in Iraq, and we still lost the war.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:If they use that nuke Pyongyang will be gone in (Score:4, Informative)
Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney explains why, after kicking Iraq out of Kuwait, it would be fucking stupid to invade Iraq:
Lets not forget that Iran is a theocracy due directly to the US of A overthrowing the elected government. They all knew exactly what would happen in Iraq back in the 90s, and they knew again in the 2000s. Only this time, they also ready to make it profitable.
MP3 players, not Nukes (Score:2)
That is the deadly weapon N Korea fears mosts. Drop a million solar powered MP3 players on K Korea. Load them up not with propoganda or an in depth analysis, but instead load them up with South Korean soap operas.
It is ironic to note that Bush is responsible for all of this. Everyone has forgotten that under Clinton N Korea had nuclear inspectors and no bomb. But after 9/11 they were ignored.
This could still go very wrong. I am amazed at S Korea and Japan's tolerance of N Korea.
Love the Dick Cheney quo
Re: (Score:2)
They know exactly how much damage the DPRK would do. An invasion of the DPRK, after generations of inculcation by the Kim dynasty, would more or less require outright genocide to pacify the country.
No, the best thing for all parties probably is to slowly chip away at the bullshit and wait for Best Korea's people to be ready for liberation.
Re: (Score:2)
Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney explains why, after kicking Iraq out of Kuwait, it would be fucking stupid to invade Iraq:
Lets not forget that Iran is a theocracy due directly to the US of A overthrowing the elected government. They all knew exactly what would happen in Iraq back in the 90s, and they knew again in the 2000s. Only this time, they also ready to make it profitable.
Wrong war. You are talking about what Cheney said in 1991. I'm talking about what Bush said in 2003.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pointing out that SecDef Cheney knew that going into Iraq would never have a positive outfcome, and that 10 or 12 years later, VP Cheney advocated invading Iraq.
Nothing in the geopolitical landscape, human psychology, or any thing else changed. What he said in 91 was still completely accurate and valid, and his prediction about what WOULD happen, should the US invade and occupy Iraq, came about. Sure, instead of Iraq disintegrating, instead we had ISIS fill a power vacuum, but while he got some of the
Re: (Score:2)
The 2 issues in 2003 that caused Cheney and others to reconsider were - the potential of Iraq giving Jihadis WMDs (later, it was proven that the intelligence on that one was bad) and the fact that Iraq was supporting Jihad groups like Hamas and even hosting Abu Nidal, who was killed weeks before the invasion.
The mistake US made - in addition to the EXTENDED OCCUPATION - was trying to preserve Iraq as a single country. There was no good historic reason to have tried to force that. Historically, Iraq ha
Re: (Score:2)
Not a bad suggestion; quite a few war-torn regions would be somewhat fixed through the simple expedient of removing lines on a map that various colonial powers placed, generally arbitrarily, in the last few hundred years.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you just call Arabs 'brown' people? That'd be news to them: they think of themselves as white.
I'd consider the war a loss not when we captured and turned over Saddam, but when we started getting involved in setting up a civilian government in Iraq. (Same argument in Afghanistan). We won the war when we bombed the Republican guards and Saddam disappeared, and Iraqi citizens tore down his statue. After that point, our sole goal being there should have been in looking for WMDs, and when we didn't fin
Re: (Score:2)
Re:If they use that nuke Pyongyang will be gone in (Score:5, Interesting)
Or you could know your history and remember why the Korean war ended the way it did.
Ah right, you mean how MacArthur advanced further into North Korea than Truman authorized which prompted a Chinese counterattack turning what was a victory into a retreat that lead to the eventual borders between North and South Korea.
Re: (Score:1)
South Korea has no interest in wasting its time or resources on the production of nuclear weapons, they have the US for that.
Instead they put it into industrial and technological effort that is valuable for their own interests in a more direct way.
These speakers? Are just a way to tweak the noses of certain leaders in North Korea, a comparable minor investment that nonetheless has a sufficient impact since it shows they're not really cowed by North Korean actions. It helps the people of South Korea think
Re:Loudspeakers vs. nukes? (Score:5, Insightful)
But perhaps you think an active military response would be better? George W. Bush didn't seem to think so, even after North Korea blew past his "red line" on uranium enrichment and actually built the first of those bombs. Bottom line is, even the Bush administration didn't want a war in Korea, because it would be insanely bloody - and that's a best case scenario, nevermind that it was that way BEFORE North Korea had nukes. There just happens to be a major city of about 10 million South Koreans lying within artillery range of the border (where there just happens to be lots of artillery for that very reason).
Re:Loudspeakers vs. nukes? (Score:4, Insightful)
The North Korean border is so close to Seoul that the North wouldn't even need to actually directly nuke Seoul; they could line up the nukes on THEIR OWN side of the border and let them off and Seoul would be totally fucked.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
They have lots of such lined up and ready to go; any saber rattling is protected by this instant event. Yes they know it will be the end of them, but they would plan the south (and the US) would be more interested in grain shipments.
Re: (Score:2)
They could bombard Seoul with conventional artillery too. But they know it'd be an utterly suicidal course of action.
Sure but nuking their *own* territory? "oops sorry about that, totally accidental."
Re: (Score:2)
But perhaps you think an active military response would be better? George W. Bush didn't seem to think so, even after North Korea blew past his "red line" on uranium enrichment and actually built the first of those bombs. Bottom line is, even the Bush administration didn't want a war in Korea, because it would be insanely bloody
I think the most compelling reason against was that it could become a proxy war with China based on the "he might be a bastard, but he's our bastard" doctrine.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not only would it be insanely bloody, but regardless of the outcome China would somehow win.
Re: (Score:2)
I am actually surprised that there weren't already nukes in SK. I just always assumed we had some sitting on our bases there and that was the reason for Kim Jong Un's temper tantrums all the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would we need nukes in Korea? We've got plenty of boomers sitting safely at the bottom of the ocean, and our land-based missiles can reach anywhere in the world in minutes. Putting nukes in S Korea would be a propaganda / political move, nothing more.
The US is already incredibly unpopular among the S Korea populous from anecdotes I've heard, although I don't believe they hold animosity towards the citizens themselves. Not that I'm uncaring about their situation (I liked the S Koreans I've met and wor
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, this nut job needs to fall down some stairs.
Little Un would just bounce you know.
He is OBESE (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Wars have started for less than that.... Wait, Oh yea, technically all we have is a cease fire, the Korean war is still technically on.
Look, this is really about Littl' Un staying in power. What matters here is how this is played in the NK government miss-information machine and accepted by the population. What SK is suggesting involves bypassing the iron fisted control of information that NK must maintain to keep Littl' Un in power, at least in a small way for a small part of NK's population which happe