Kim jong ii dies

[wmaousley]

Thank God, How do you feel this will affect North Korea? Positive or Negative?

[bigdavevegas]

Will be positive in the long run I hope

[Knockout_Power]

it was in-neh-bi-ta-buw

[HitIt]

well his 20something youngest son will take over, hope he doesn't feel he need to prove anything....doubt things will get better. the video of all the "crying" is pretty funny though. didn't their glorious leader get 18 holes in one the first time he played golf? mm hmm.

[Flagg]

I'll be the first to say it's about damn time! South Korea and Japan might rest a little easier now.

Very little is known about his son that will be taken over. He could be as brainwashed as the rest of the regime, though I heard he was educated in Switzerland.

It could go good or bad I guess.

[Macon_Bacon]

it was in-neh-bi-ta-buw

Too funny.

I'll be the first to say it's about damn time! South Korea and Japan might rest a little easier now.

Very little is known about his son that will be taken over. He could be as brainwashed as the rest of the regime, though I heard he was educated in Switzerland.

It could go good or bad I guess.

The son that will take over has spent more time out of North Korea than in so hopefully he will have some sort of grasp on reality. But there are no promises.

[Times Roman]

n korea is, and has been, on the brink of economic collapse for quite awhile. I believe, hopefully, that the new "dear leader" is smart enough to understand that unless they open up to the world, at some point, he will run the risk of a coupe.

Like i said in the other thread of the same theme, his old man understood that bullets were cheaper than loaves of bread. sad....

[crazy_rocks]

how do you think hes enjoyed his first day in hell?

[dec11]

saw this on the news, i cant understand some ppl. fvcking wailing their heads off over someone they dont even know, retards

[domensional]

Its out of fear for what will happen if they dont look upset. Someone not crying would prob be considered a traitor.

[domensional]

saw this on the news, i cant understand some ppl. fvcking wailing their heads off over someone they dont even know, retards

Its likely out of fear for what will happen if they dont look upset. They would prob be killed as a traitor for not looking upset

[ecruz]

Ding Dong The Jong is GONE!!!

[dec11]

Its likely out of fear for what will happen if they dont look upset. They would prob be killed as a traitor for not looking upset

errrr, stay at home? no need to be out wailing your head off infront of tv cameras

[dec11]

lol, actually a good workout tune!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wj_t-GRXRk

[Swifto]

well his 20something youngest son will take over, hope he doesn't feel he need to prove anything....doubt things will get better. the video of all the "crying" is pretty funny though. didn't their glorious leader get 18 holes in one the first time he played golf? mm hmm.

11.

Now he's dead, everyone has gone up a notch in the PGA rankings...

[Swifto]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2011...ef=mostpopular

[terraj]

Bin Laden, Gaddafi and now Kim Jong....not a bad year huh

[BrownGirl]

I read somewhere that people believed that he could control the weather with his moods! LOL Weird.

[Thenard]

Could go either way. There still a country that has been detached from the rest of the world for far too long.

[dec11]

id be more interested in my own country gaining financial control again, rather than give two hoots about N Korea tbh. whats gona change with it? nothing.....

[terraj]

id be more interested in my own country gaining financial control again, rather than give two hoots about N Korea tbh. whats gona change with it? nothing.....

Well speaking from a financial view point, Jong dying could well cause political and military instability ....that's what poeple are worried about.

A country with a massive army and nuke weapons that no one knows what they will do next = uncertainty to the already uneasy global economy

[dec11]

Well speaking from a financial view point, Jong dying could well cause political and military instability ....that's what poeple are worried about.

A country with a massive army and nuke weapons that no one knows what they will do next = uncertainty to the already uneasy global economy

his war council will still be there though, i cant see how any great change is going to come around

[wmaousley]

how do you think hes enjoyed his first day in hell?

Most likely he was welcomed with open arms, so I'd say its going pretty well

[wmaousley]

Could go either way. There still a country that has been detached from the rest of the world for far too long.

The power of propoganda

[wmaousley]

Bin Laden, Gaddafi and now Kim Jong....not a bad year huh

Only if Bashir Alasad could join them would it be a Superfecta

[wmaousley]

his war council will still be there though, i cant see how any great change is going to come around

The way I see it is either things will get worse or better, we just have to wait and see.

[thegodfather]

Foreign affairs is a system governed by chaos, under the premise, that anyone can do anything, at any time. With that being said, while the N.Koreans seem fanatical to many, I believe they're more sane than we give them credit for. Whilst their people are subject to one of the most extreme cults of personality on earth, it's mostly related to the 'juche' philosophy, of self-reliance, which is essentially a principle of extreme isolationism. Like all empires, they will often crumble because of financial instability, and not beause they are conquered or what not.

One thing no American should be advocating, is clandestine intervention in N.Korea's affairs, or an attempt to influence their regime. They are relatively neutralized as it stands today, in addition to the fact that they do not threaten the national security of the United States homeland, and while they posess nuclear weapons, lack the delivery system to be a credible threat. Where our own foreign policy gets us in trouble, is keeping a contigious force of 30,000 US troops in S.Korea, where N.Koreas weapons CAN reach US troops, if they wanted to harm them. This is why a foreign policy based on national DEFENSE, and not occupation, is a far superior one. Those who advocate that we police the world, live in one of two bubbles, a neo-conservative wet dream, or a progressive liberal fanaticism that we are the humanitarian police of the world. We should subscribe to neither, and should rather look to our country's constitution for the answer on how to deal with threats to our national security, which none of the nations that we've invaded in the past two decades, save for Afghanistan, have ever presented any credible threat to the HOMELAND of the United States. If we did not have troops OCCUPYING 130 of 190 countries around the world, foreign entities who have a grudge with America, would be lacking easy targets.

I've gotten off track anyway, I believe that N.Korea's leaders do not want to be vaporized anymore than the average person does, and therefore, I do not believe they would be foolish enough to launch a first strike on S.Korea, or American forces in the area, unless provoked. However, I believe it actually might be in America's interest for the current regime to keep power, as the nuclear weapons N.Korea posess's are tightly controlled, as opposed to the alternative scenario where political turmoil would leave N.Korea's nuclear weapons in the hands of, who knows, perhaps the highest bidder.

[Thenard]

The power of propoganda

How so?

[crazy_rocks]

Foreign affairs is a system governed by chaos, under the premise, that anyone can do anything, at any time. With that being said, while the N.Koreans seem fanatical to many, I believe they're more sane than we give them credit for. Whilst their people are subject to one of the most extreme cults of personality on earth, it's mostly related to the 'juche' philosophy, of self-reliance, which is essentially a principle of extreme isolationism. Like all empires, they will often crumble because of financial instability, and not beause they are conquered or what not.

One thing no American should be advocating, is clandestine intervention in N.Korea's affairs, or an attempt to influence their regime. They are relatively neutralized as it stands today, in addition to the fact that they do not threaten the national security of the United States homeland, and while they posess nuclear weapons, lack the delivery system to be a credible threat. Where our own foreign policy gets us in trouble, is keeping a contigious force of 30,000 US troops in S.Korea, where N.Koreas weapons CAN reach US troops, if they wanted to harm them. This is why a foreign policy based on national DEFENSE, and not occupation, is a far superior one. Those who advocate that we police the world, live in one of two bubbles, a neo-conservative wet dream, or a progressive liberal fanaticism that we are the humanitarian police of the world. We should subscribe to neither, and should rather look to our country's constitution for the answer on how to deal with threats to our national security, which none of the nations that we've invaded in the past two decades, save for Afghanistan, have ever presented any credible threat to the HOMELAND of the United States. If we did not have troops OCCUPYING 130 of 190 countries around the world, foreign entities who have a grudge with America, would be lacking easy targets.

I've gotten off track anyway, I believe that N.Korea's leaders do not want to be vaporized anymore than the average person does, and therefore, I do not believe they would be foolish enough to launch a first strike on S.Korea, or American forces in the area, unless provoked. However, I believe it actually might be in America's interest for the current regime to keep power, as the nuclear weapons N.Korea posess's are tightly controlled, as opposed to the alternative scenario where political turmoil would leave N.Korea's nuclear weapons in the hands of, who knows, perhaps the highest bidder.

just because we have people in countries it does not mean those countries are occupied.

[wmaousley]

How so?

Google it, use some form of a search function.