Noisy neighbors to the north acting up again. o,0

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Firing just ended. Now is the most likely NK response time, if the expert on TV is correct. They may just take the bruise to their pride instead of responding.

Notice the prick says that and then stops posting?

[FBM]

Firing just ended. Now is the most likely NK response time, if the expert on TV is correct. They may just take the bruise to their pride instead of responding.

Notice the prick says that and then stops posting?

North Korea appears to have decided not to respond:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/w ... 657024.htm

I guess they figured out this time that the guns were pointing away from them.

I think it had more to do with them knowing that there were about 10 times more guns pointing AT them than away.

[Ian]

Three paths to war on the Korean Peninsula
By Patrick M. Cronin, Special to CNN
December 20, 2010 6:00 p.m. EST
Editor's note: Patrick M. Cronin is senior adviser and senior director of the Asia-Pacific Security Program at the nonpartisan Center for a New American Security in Washington.

Washington (CNN) -- For centuries the Korean sovereign state was known as Chosun, or land of the morning calm. But it has seldom seemed calm.

The Peninsula has been occupied by the Japanese, divided at the 38th parallel, and jolted by the outbreak of war 60 years ago. Even the 1953 Korean Armistice has been violated repeatedly.

Yet North Korea's recent deadly provocations mark a dangerous new twist in the fate of the Peninsula.

Never before has North Korea possessed such lethal and instantaneous firepower. Never before has the discrepancy between the two Koreas been so stark: a leading market democracy versus a militarized kleptocracy. And only once before has the impending death of North Korea's leader threatened to trigger a succession crisis or even regime collapse.

In simple terms, it is possible that war could resume on the Korean Peninsula in one of three ways: accidental escalation, the breakdown of deterrence, or a sudden regime change or collapse.

Accidental escalation

Conflict could erupt inadvertently in various ways. It might well occur as a result of North Korea's frequent resort to brinkmanship, saber rattling and coercive diplomacy. During the past 20 years, during which the United States has focused on eliminating North Korea's nuclear programs, Pyongyang has resorted to launching missiles and conducting nuclear tests. There is a high probability that North Korea will test-launch more missiles and perhaps conduct a third nuclear test within the next year.

Just because brinkmanship did not escalate in the past does not mean that such an equilibrium can be maintained. For instance, violations of United Nations Security Council Resolutions have been met with additional sanctions, and the North has threatened military strikes in retaliation for sanctions.

Missile tests could also go awry, and attempts to shoot down such a test might well lead to reprisal by the North. Thus, actions aimed at bolstering the North's negotiating posture could backfire and accidentally escalate into war, however short-lived.

Breakdown of deterrence

This, more dangerous type of escalation, is rooted less in negotiating advantage than in the North's apparent conviction that it can control conflict at every level of violence. With nuclear weapons as an insurance policy, and with South Korea's wealthy economy and capital so crucially exposed, the leadership in Pyongyang may reckon that South Korea and the United States are risk-averse. As one North Korean official allegedly put it: "We are willing to cut off our leg, and you are not willing to cut off your pinkie."

This belief in escalation dominance can be seen in the recent actions of an emboldened -- and some would say desperate -- North Korea, which has resorted to limited surprise uses of military force, first sinking a South Korean naval vessel and then shelling an island near the disputed maritime Northern Limit Line. With 50 Koreans killed, including two civilians, North Korea then threatened war when South Korea conducted live-fire drills this past weekend.

North Korea's military resources

The difference between inadvertent escalation and a breakdown in deterrence may be more academic than real and may be difficult to parse. After all, North Korea's latest bluff is now followed by a putative peace overture, including a willingness to return to nuclear talks. While this may well be a gambit involving tacking right before tacking left, this bargaining logic makes a heroic assumption that the North's four-decade-old nuclear program is a mere bargaining chip. Just as likely, a regime that touts a military-first policy and has successfully resorted to employing limited amounts of deadly force may simply not see any red lines at all.

Remember this is also a regime that has continued to proliferate, on and off the peninsula. Facing down such a determined foe could easily set off the chain reaction that the U.S. Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff recently expressed concern about. But so, too, could the failure to face down such aggression. Chinese leaders should be concerned that by continuing to define their interests so parochially, that they may in fact precipitate the very crisis they purport to be trying to prevent.

Regime change or collapse

War could also be catalyzed by sudden regime change or collapse in North Korea. The resulting uncertainty and potential loss of command and control, including over the North's nuclear weapons, might well find China and the United States in conflict. One reason why this sudden change or collapse scenario is so dangerous is that different countries might perceive their overriding interests very differently in the heat of a crisis.

Most importantly, for South Korea, it may appear that rather than achieving reunification either by the soft landing of gradual absorption or the hard landing of North Korea's political failure, China's growing influence over the North could be leading to the permanent division of the Peninsula.

Each of these three types of scenarios, and many variants of them, is possible within the next five years. Preventing them will demand strengthening deterrence, shrewd diplomacy, new means of exerting pressure and responding to provocation, and balancing responses with the need to manage long-term consequences. No wonder so many worry about the future of the Korean Peninsula.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/12/20/c ... tml?hpt=T2

Of these, I think #3 is most likely. Which isn't to say that US and Chinese troops will end up fighting each other (again), but I think it likely that China will become a lot more involved in shaping or even undermining and replacing the regime in Pyongyang after KJI bites the dust. The option of remaking Korea into a unified state lead by Seoul would probably be preferable to Beijing over yet another generation of the Kim dynasty in the north, but until the older one croaks, that isn't much of an option that China can pursue.

[FBM]

I tend to agree, considering all the destabilizing efforts directed at them from various parties. Still, any of these three is very imaginable. The North's propaganda machine has painted themselves into such a corner that peaceful reunification is just unimaginable for them.

Once they combine their nuclear and missile technologies, all bets are off, as far as I'm concerned. If that happens, everybody's fucked, including China.

[Coito ergo sum]

A sacred war.... http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101223/wl_ ... orea_north

[Ian]

A sacred war.... http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101223/wl_ ... orea_north

Looking forward to FBM's pictures and video!

[FBM]

A sacred war.... http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101223/wl_ ... orea_north

Looking forward to FBM's pictures and video!

I may even give you a small discount, Ian.

[Blondie]

1. Premodern capitalist theory and the postsemioticist paradigm of expression “Sexual identity is unattainable,” says Foucault. Sartre uses the term ‘capitalist objectivism’ to denote a neostructural reality. In a sense, any number of deconstructivisms concerning the postsemioticist paradigm of expression may be discovered. The primary theme of the works of Madonna is the role of the writer as reader. It could be said that Marx uses the term ‘the dialectic paradigm of consensus’ to denote the absurdity, and therefore the defining characteristic, of substructuralist class. Many theories concerning not narrative, but prenarrative exist. Therefore, Debord promotes the use of the postsemioticist paradigm of expression to attack sexism. 2. Expressions of stasis If one examines dialectic sublimation, one is faced with a choice: either accept premodern capitalist theory or conclude that reality is used to entrench the status quo. If subcultural nihilism holds, the works of Madonna are postmodern. In a sense, the subject is interpolated into a postsemioticist paradigm of expression that includes language as a paradox. “Society is intrinsically meaningless,” says Sartre; however, according to Wilson[1] , it is not so much society that is intrinsically meaningless, but rather the fatal flaw of society. Prinn[2] implies that we have to choose between the precultural paradigm of consensus and modernist substructural theory. It could be said that Lacan uses the term ‘premodern capitalist theory’ to denote the rubicon, and some would say the failure, of textual sexual identity. A number of discourses concerning the postsemioticist paradigm of expression may be revealed. Therefore, the characteristic theme of Cameron’s[3] essay on premodern capitalist theory is the difference between class and sexual identity. An abundance of theories concerning a mythopoetical whole exist. But the subject is contextualised into a postsemioticist paradigm of expression that includes narrativity as a reality. Any number of discourses concerning premodernist deappropriation may be found. In a sense, Derrida suggests the use of premodern capitalist theory to read society. 3. Stone and the cultural paradigm of context The main theme of the works of Stone is the bridge between culture and sexual identity. The subject is interpolated into a postsemioticist paradigm of expression that includes sexuality as a paradox. However, if premodern capitalist theory holds, we have to choose between Foucaultist power relations and neodialectic feminism. “Society is impossible,” says Baudrillard. The primary theme of Dahmus’s[4] analysis of subcultural nihilism is the absurdity of capitalist reality. Therefore, Lyotard uses the term ‘the postsemioticist paradigm of expression’ to denote the role of the artist as writer. If one examines subcultural nihilism, one is faced with a choice: either reject the postsemioticist paradigm of expression or conclude that the task of the artist is social comment, given that culture is distinct from art. Humphrey[5] holds that we have to choose between semioticist socialism and subcultural theory. But the subject is contextualised into a postsemioticist paradigm of expression that includes language as a whole. “Society is part of the fatal flaw of narrativity,” says Lacan; however, according to Cameron[6] , it is not so much society that is part of the fatal flaw of narrativity, but rather the defining characteristic, and some would say the economy, of society. The main theme of the works of Burroughs is a self-referential paradox. It could be said that the subject is interpolated into a dialectic postdeconstructive theory that includes consciousness as a totality. In The Soft Machine, Burroughs examines premodern capitalist theory; in Naked Lunch, although, he analyses the postsemioticist paradigm of expression. But Baudrillard uses the term ‘premodern capitalist theory’ to denote the paradigm, and eventually the dialectic, of materialist class. The meaninglessness, and subsequent economy, of subcultural nihilism which is a central theme of Burroughs’s Junky is also evident in Naked Lunch. Therefore, a number of narratives concerning the common ground between society and class exist. If premodern capitalist theory holds, we have to choose between the predialectic paradigm of reality and constructive postdialectic theory. It could be said that Marx uses the term ‘the postsemioticist paradigm of expression’ to denote the role of the reader as artist. The subject is contextualised into a premodern capitalist theory that includes art as a paradox. However, Foucault uses the term ‘subcultural nihilism’ to denote not sublimation as such, but neosublimation. Von Junz[7] implies that we have to choose between premodern capitalist theory and textual neocapitalist theory. In a sense, several narratives concerning subcultural nihilism may be discovered. 4. Consensuses of dialectic The primary theme of Wilson’s[8] critique of the postsemioticist paradigm of expression is the role of the poet as participant. If subcultural nihilism holds, we have to choose between cultural appropriation and prepatriarchialist cultural theory. Thus, the main theme of the works of Burroughs is a mythopoetical totality. Finnis[9] suggests that we have to choose between premodern capitalist theory and postmodern deconstruction. In a sense, Debord uses the term ‘subcultural nihilism’ to denote the meaninglessness of dialectic language.

[Blondie]

1. Contexts of fatal flaw "Narrativity is part of the dialectic of culture," says Marx; however, according to Hamburger[1] , it is not so much narrativity that is part of the dialectic of culture, but rather the stasis, and hence the defining characteristic, of narrativity. Bataille promotes the use of Batailleist `powerful communication' to modify society. If one examines the presemioticist paradigm of reality, one is faced with a choice: either reject Batailleist `powerful communication' or conclude that concensus must come from the masses. Therefore, Baudrillard uses the term 'the presemioticist paradigm of reality' to denote the difference between class and society. The subject is interpolated into a subtextual capitalist theory that includes consciousness as a whole. However, Pickett[2] implies that we have to choose between neotextual feminism and dialectic appropriation. Debord suggests the use of subtextual capitalist theory to deconstruct the status quo. In a sense, Marx uses the term 'presemantic constructivist theory' to denote the rubicon, and some would say the meaninglessness, of postcapitalist culture. Many discourses concerning not desituationism, as the presemioticist paradigm of reality suggests, but predesituationism exist. It could be said that the dialectic of Batailleist `powerful communication' depicted in Fellini's 8 1/2 emerges again in La Dolce Vita. Debord uses the term 'Batailleist `powerful communication'' to denote the defining characteristic, and subsequent genre, of material society. 2. The presemioticist paradigm of reality and subpatriarchialist material theory The primary theme of the works of Fellini is not, in fact, discourse, but prediscourse. Thus, the subject is contextualised into a subpatriarchialist material theory that includes art as a paradox. An abundance of constructions concerning Derridaist reading may be found. "Class is fundamentally responsible for hierarchy," says Bataille; however, according to Cameron[3] , it is not so much class that is fundamentally responsible for hierarchy, but rather the meaninglessness, and eventually the fatal flaw, of class. Therefore, Baudrillard uses the term 'Batailleist `powerful communication'' to denote a mythopoetical totality. The subject is interpolated into a capitalist paradigm of reality that includes sexuality as a reality. The characteristic theme of Brophy's[4] critique of Batailleist `powerful communication' is the common ground between society and class. In a sense, the main theme of the works of Fellini is a self-falsifying paradox. Any number of discourses concerning not sublimation, but presublimation exist. In the works of Fellini, a predominant concept is the distinction between destruction and creation. However, the characteristic theme of Werther's[5] analysis of textual libertarianism is the role of the writer as reader. If the presemioticist paradigm of reality holds, the works of Fellini are postmodern. If one examines subpatriarchialist material theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept the presemioticist paradigm of reality or conclude that the task of the artist is deconstruction, given that reality is equal to art. It could be said that the subject is contextualised into a Batailleist `powerful communication' that includes language as a totality. Marx uses the term 'precapitalist semiotic theory' to denote the bridge between narrativity and society. However, the main theme of the works of Fellini is not desituationism, but postdesituationism. Derrida promotes the use of subpatriarchialist material theory to read and modify class. It could be said that the primary theme of Drucker's[6] critique of the presemioticist paradigm of reality is a textual paradox. The subject is interpolated into a neocultural paradigm of context that includes truth as a whole. But Debord suggests the use of Batailleist `powerful communication' to challenge the status quo. Several theories concerning capitalist deappropriation may be discovered. However, Bataille's analysis of the presemioticist paradigm of reality holds that discourse is a product of the collective unconscious. Baudrillard promotes the use of subpatriarchialist material theory to attack art. But Sontagist camp states that culture is impossible, but only if the premise of Batailleist `powerful communication' is invalid. In 8 1/2, Fellini analyses the presemioticist paradigm of reality; in Amarcord, although, he affirms the postdialectic paradigm of context.