Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Steelmagic]

It's my birthday tomorrow.

Interesting, but irrelevant unless you are Kim Jong-un.


...!

Dear god. He's been among us the whole time.

[My Name is Immaterial]

It's my birthday tomorrow.

Interesting, but irrelevant unless you are Kim Jong-un.


...!

Dear god. He's been among us the whole time.

What would your father say?!

[Yoink]

...

How did that post end up in here, of all places?!

* Yoink  totally isn't Kim Jong-un. Totally.

[USEC_OFFICER]

...

How did that post end up in here, of all places?!

* Yoink  totally isn't Kim Jong-un. Totally.

Right... Sure you aren't... _{When are you going to hook me up with that sweet OS of yours?}

[martinuzz]

Kim Yoink Un. It all makes sense now.

[acetech09]

By request, another portrait of Kim Jong Un Yoink:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Even tho it says acetech09, I can't take the credit. Enjoy.

[Flying Dice]

Suddenly everything appears as though through a lens of greater clarity.

[Loud Whispers]

The cuban ship was clearly just trying to send supplies to the Nigerian Prince.

[Beast Tamer]

So my teacher told us we needed to write an persuasive essay then assigned us our topics and stances. I'm supposed to write an essay advocating the invasion of North Korea...

Any ideas?

[Frumple]

Do it from the perspective of something like a former Soviet Union nationalist, wanting the western dogs and their puppets to bleed themselves out in fruitless, wasteful wars.

E: For the persuasive aspect, you could talk about the benefits inherent in breaking up a hyperpower or introducing more superpowers (by breaking current superpower strangleholds on developing nations) to the global stage. Competition and all that rot.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

So my teacher told us we needed to write an persuasive essay then assigned us our topics and stances. I'm supposed to write an essay advocating the invasion of North Korea...

Any ideas?

-North Korea is an increasingly unstable threat that must be taken down now before they go off the deep end.
-It is immoral and hypocritical to allow other human beings to persist in a totalitarian state just because it would inconvenience the rest of us to liberate them.
-The existence of North Korea and the existence of democratic states are inherently unable to coexist, and will continue to conflict until one or the other is destroyed. The correct choice is obvious.
-(If American) We owe a debt to both the South and North Koreans by becoming geopolitical involved with them to reunite Korea, we are ultimately responsible in part all the hardship that both sides have suffered as a result of the division.
-Kim Jong-un is absolutely fucking insane.
-(If American) The end of North Korea means a weakening of China, a weakening of China means the continued dominance of the United States, the continued dominance of the United States is in the interests of everybody.

[Beast Tamer]

So my teacher told us we needed to write an persuasive essay then assigned us our topics and stances. I'm supposed to write an essay advocating the invasion of North Korea...

Any ideas?

-North Korea is an increasingly unstable threat that must be taken down now before they go off the deep end.
-It is immoral and hypocritical to allow other human beings to persist in a totalitarian state just because it would inconvenience the rest of us to liberate them.
-The existence of North Korea and the existence of democratic states are inherently unable to coexist, and will continue to conflict until one or the other is destroyed. The correct choice is obvious.
-(If American) We owe a debt to both the South and North Koreans by becoming geopolitical involved with them to reunite Korea, we are ultimately responsible in part all the hardship that both sides have suffered as a result of the division.
-Kim Jong-un is absolutely fucking insane.
-(If American) The end of North Korea means a weakening of China, a weakening of China means the continued dominance of the United States, the continued dominance of the United States is in the interests of everybody.

Your first point is actually my current main point of the paper. I'm trying to stay away from moral cases for the invasion, because my professor told me he won't be shy about drawing parallels between the proposed North Korean Invasion and Vietnam/Iraq/Pakistan.

About how much is known about NK's current military prowess? Earlier in this thread someone claimed they had hundreds of artillery
emplacements aimed at Seoul, South Korea.

Do it from the perspective of something like a former Soviet Union nationalist, wanting the western dogs and their puppets to bleed themselves out in fruitless, wasteful wars.

Trying to be serious here. 

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Your first point is actually my current main point of the paper. I'm trying to stay away from moral cases for the invasion, because my professor told me he won't be shy about drawing parallels between the proposed North Korean Invasion and Vietnam/Iraq/Pakistan.

You're going to have to address that whether you use moral arguments or not....Pakistan?

About how much is known about NK's current military prowess? Earlier in this thread someone claimed they had hundreds of artillery
emplacements aimed at Seoul, South Korea.

Not much is known for certain. They have lots of artillery pointing over the DMZ, the question is how well they've been able to maintain it and how good their supply lines are. They have plenty of parade forces that look impressive, but that's all they ever show the world. All available evidence suggests everything else is not even remotely as well maintained. I noticed back during the Channel 4 documentary that their police don't even carry guns.

[Flying Dice]

As MSH suggested, just go for the good ol' neocon application of democratic peace theory.

1. The least likely pair of states to go to war are two democracies.
2. It is good to minimize the possibility of war.
3. Therefore, autocracies should be invaded and forcibly converted into democracies whenever the political capital can be mustered and a weak target is available.

If you need an example, just bring up Iraq. It worked so well, too; they're holding free elections and not going to war with anyone! We don't even need to fabricate evidence of WMDs for a casus belli to invade North Korea, either, and the cover story about ending human rights abuses sounds even better.

[Frumple]

Trying to be serious here. 

That was unfortunately only about half not. The frank fact of the matter, as, from what I've seen, has been fairly well established every time the subject of invading NK has came up, is that it's an absolute lose situation for everyone that would be involved in most invasion scenarios. N+SK comes out worse, any Western support involved comes out worse, any non-Western support comes out worse, multiple groups (Such as China, who have a non-zero chance of just letting NK sink in the case of an invasion) that may or may not get involved directly either end up worse or no better. No one directly or indirectly involved wins.

More or less the only group that's going to gain any benefit, at bloody all, from an NK invasion is a mostly uninvolved* third party that wants the involved to be weakened. It's a powerful likelihood that even the NK populous would be in a worse position from it for at-minimum several years out.

*Mostly, of course, being because the major powers getting involved and screwing themselves over (which is an unavoidable results of an invasion, pretty much no matter how you cut it) would have global consequences regardless.