Korea finally calms it shit?

[gibson]

Throughout the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s China recognized only North Korea

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2% ... _relations

Then why can't Wikipedia explain (the Confucian dimension in) this?
Anglo-Saxon world view has been very limited in dealing with conflicts all over the world and we only have to look at Africa and research wikipedia for the myriad of erroneous European claims about those nations.

Wikipedia is bester than uni.

I am reminded of a Polynesian matriarchal society which has no puberty phase. But if you would look up puberty in wikipedia it is prolly presented as a physiological phase all adolescents experience.

Its a much better overall source, yes.

[deleted_user]

The North's nuclear facilities collapsed due to a failed experiment. They're simply playing their last hand before the west finds out and they no longer have the advantage. Without the threat of nuclear weapons or research, North-Korea isn't nearly as intimidating, and they know it.

Presenting Bramboy's International IntelliginceTM coming to a disgruntled government near you! Don't trust your own intelligence agencies? Trust Bramboy! Because Dutch is clutch!

[Mr_Bramboy]

The North's nuclear facilities collapsed due to a failed experiment. They're simply playing their last hand before the west finds out and they no longer have the advantage. Without the threat of nuclear weapons or research, North-Korea isn't nearly as intimidating, and they know it.

Presenting Bramboy's International IntelliginceTM coming to a disgruntled government near you! Don't trust your own intelligence agencies? Trust Bramboy! Because Dutch is clutch!

If you don't trust me, here's the source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... tion-china

[deleted_user]

The North's nuclear facilities collapsed due to a failed experiment. They're simply playing their last hand before the west finds out and they no longer have the advantage. Without the threat of nuclear weapons or research, North-Korea isn't nearly as intimidating, and they know it.

Presenting Bramboy's International IntelliginceTM coming to a disgruntled government near you! Don't trust your own intelligence agencies? Trust Bramboy! Because Dutch is clutch!

If you don't trust me, here's the source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... tion-china

It's not that I don't trust you or whatever, I really have no stake in it, just reacting to the "before the west finds out" thing and then the (probably, at least, plausible) notion Trump doesn't trust his own intelligence agencies and then I employed a fun rhyme for fun and that's why I did those things.

[Mr_Bramboy]

Show hidden quotes

The North's nuclear facilities collapsed due to a failed experiment. They're simply playing their last hand before the west finds out and they no longer have the advantage. Without the threat of nuclear weapons or research, North-Korea isn't nearly as intimidating, and they know it.

Presenting Bramboy's International IntelliginceTM coming to a disgruntled government near you! Don't trust your own intelligence agencies? Trust Bramboy! Because Dutch is clutch!

If you don't trust me, here's the source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... tion-china

It's not that I don't trust you or whatever, I really have no stake in it, just reacting to the "before the west finds out" thing and then the (probably, at least, plausible) notion Trump doesn't trust his own intelligence agencies and then I employed a fun rhyme for fun and that's why I did those things.

Also The Netherlands is objectively the best country in the world so your argument is invalid.

[Radix_Lecti]

[Also The Netherlands is objectively the best country in the world so your argument is invalid.

It is called the most polluted drain of Europe and rightly so. We buy up Europe's chemical waste and dump it in our waters/fields and mix it with fuel oil which sells so cheaply that ships from Saudi Arabia come here to refuel... we support a large group of white Dutch people who refuse to work so immigrants come and work tough jobs at nights, but still 200.000 job openings are unfilled because it is easier to complain about others than to look for work...we squeeze our farmers to save pennies in the supermarket and refuse to share our wealth with Africans which was begotten by centuries of robbery, slavery, murder and exploitation in Africa, what is so great about us?

[VooDoo_BoSs]

I did attend a 2-year master at Yonsei university. Perhaps I got brainwashed into supporting NK propaganda at a catholic top ranking South Korean uni. founded by Americans, or maybe these commy professors teach their students shameless communist views on this war or...maybe we overlook something here. Wikipedia is righter than we.

Well. Anglo-Saxon cultural views reign supreme so screw all those silly cultures! Deus Vult @lejend

Top university vs. Wikipedia

If you are so well educated, then you should be able to provide sufficient sources to disprove the notion that the Korean war began when the North invaded the South. The good thing about Wikipedia is that it cites its sources.

In all honesty, Wikipedia is incredibly accurate.

Until then, you are not persuading anybody, as none of us can a) verify what your professors taught you and b) confirm what sources your professors were referring to. Otherwise, I can say I went to a top university as well, hence I must be right about everything .

[deleted_user]

Wikipedia lacks a voice which is half the fun of learning something.

[Mr_Bramboy]

[Also The Netherlands is objectively the best country in the world so your argument is invalid.

It is called the most polluted drain of Europe and rightly so. We buy up Europe's chemical waste and dump it in our waters/fields and mix it with fuel oil which sells so cheaply that ships from Saudi Arabia come here to refuel... we support a large group of white Dutch people who refuse to work so immigrants come and work tough jobs at nights, but still 200.000 job openings are unfilled because it is easier to complain about others than to look for work...we squeeze our farmers to save pennies in the supermarket and refuse to share our wealth with Africans which was begotten by centuries of robbery, slavery, murder and exploitation in Africa, what is so great about us?

That's called the V.O.C. mentality.

[Radix_Lecti]

Just saying that our world view and understanding of history is highly inaccurate as what we don't have in our own culture, we cannot recognise in other cultures. So in that universities are far more holistic and accurate.
I restate my claim that NK /China did not attack SK but defended their country against foreign invasion of the US.

VAE VICTUS

[VooDoo_BoSs]

Just saying that our world view and understanding of history is highly inaccurate as what we don't have in our own culture, we cannot recognise in other cultures. So in that universities are far more holistic and accurate.
I restate my claim that NK /China did not attack SK but defended their country against foreign invasion of the US.

VAE VICTUS

... But what is your evidence for this??? You haven't cited any sources.

[Radix_Lecti]

Isn't it enuf to hear that China/NK will never attack any foreign sovereign state, except in defence.
I'm certainly not supporting NK but equally understand what is going on there. What I don't understand is why there are US soldiers in SK and Japan. Or in the 128? countries across the world.

[Papist]

The Korean war is /was a reaction to US actions and is viewed as a defence against white invaders. Vietnam too.

The United States didn't invade Korea until Kim Il-Sung violated the terms of the partition agreement by attacking South Korea. All foreign troops had withdrawn by that time, so he decided to conquer them while they were weak. The U.S. responded by sending troops to repel the invasion, at the request of the South Korean government. It's silly of you to characterize that as a "white invasion"

Vietnam is a very different story, and shouldn't be lumped in with Korea.

[Amsel_]

I think it's logical to conclude that North Korea started the 1950's Korean war. It would be good to get some background on the situation before attempting to explain why, however. The second world war ended, and for there were two major powers. America, with its liberal British and French allies; and Russia, with mainland China since Mao just finished the war against the Kuomintang. While partitioning East Asia, America was given Japan. The Soviet Union was allowed to occupy North Korea. (mind you that Russia had invaded Manchuria in 1945) If I were a Korean in this situation I would feel quite split. The Japanese came awhile ago. They gave us a lot of infrastructure and technology, but they were extremely oppressive overlords. They've been feeding us propaganda for years, and we've considered both the Soviets and Americans to be enemies. I would feel like both sides were invaders (which they were) because there wasn't a single Korea, allowed to determine its own national destiny. Instead we were arbitrarily given puppet governments that advance the party line of Washington and Moscow, but there's no government to advance the party line of Korea.

Both North Korea and South Korea have dictators who have committed atrocities by this time. But naturally any communist should support the North, and anyone who supports liberal democracy should support the South. It's been five years since these new occupiers came in. Now they start fighting. For the sake of argument I will say that neither of them started the war in this case. But lets look at what happens: North Korea completely dominates the war, and the South is pushed back to the southern beaches of Korea. Now, North Korea used to be the richer half of the peninsula, but their ability to win thus far seems rather suspicious. If South Korea started the war then why did they never gain any territory? The only time I can think of anything similar to this proposed scenario happening is the Franco-Prussian war, but even then it is clear that France at least captured a small portion of Prussia before losing. Instead we see virtually no preparation on the part of South Korea. They haven't arranged support from the United States or anything. There are some more proper arguments to be made in favor of calling the North the aggressor, but I think this one is best for convincing someone who thinks otherwise.

@Radix_Lecti I appreciate your cultural sensitivity, but it seems quite clear that the war wasn't Korea vs a foreign invader. It was two foreign invaders fighting each other, and one trying to get the upper hand on the other.

[Radix_Lecti]

Long-ass write-up of Korean history and Sino-Korean relations:

Both China and Korea have had a SHARED history spanning over 4000 years. The predominant cultural dimension, which is not present in Anglo-Saxon culture, is a long-term view of time as circular rather than linear. This is also referred to as the Confucian dimension. Within confucianism the relationship between king and subject, older and younger siblings etc. take precedence over anything else. China has always viewed itself as the only high-cultured civilisation surrounded by barbarians. The only nation which in ancient texts is described as fairly cultured, and as such deserving of attention by historians, is the kingdom of Korea. Around 1000 BC the Shang dynasty starts diplomatic relationships with the kingdoms of Korea and Korea becomes a dependent vassal state of China. The Manchu Emperor demands yearly tributes of gold, horses and women which Korea submits to because they also believe in the Heavenly Mandate of the Emperor of China. Both nations focus all their resources on becoming more pure, more scholarly, more 'heavenly' and righteous states in the eyes of Heaven. The predominant thinking of the time is that the difference between a rock and a human being is that both consist of Xi (energy- atoms)
but humans are endowed with more Li (righteousness-Rationalism). Till this day this is the major determining factor in both cultures. These are Confucian countries with a 4000-year-old history whose only endeavour is to become more rational, more scholarly, surrounded by barbarians. Also the circular view of time is important to understand here. Whereas we might think that these past 50 years of terror in NK must end, to the Chinese the Confucian relationship between bigger brother (CN) and smaller brother (NK) of 4000 years is more important. As your younger sibling might throw a fit today, tomorrow he might say sorry to you and as long as he does not openly disobey you as older brother, your life-long relation is infinitely more important. Furthermore CN leaders see themselves not as dictators but as returning leaders, reincarnated if you want to use a very inadequate English concept, who are not individuals but 'sons of the nation' who are only there to continue the legacy of previous leaders going back to the first emperor Qin.

Confucian leaders make 10, 20-year plans which is why SK has become such a global powerhouse (General Park 1980) and you can clearly see the timeline of Chinese machinations in Africa and now into Europe if you understand how they think and operate. These countries do not use aggression nor military means to conquer but diplomacy and trade. The current plans which are known by researchers is that China is going to become 100% energy independent and has plans to claim the moon for its helium 3. Now I know that there were plans to build an enormous trade centre near Delft in Holland, which as to date has not been announced yet. This is typical for how the Chinese government operates. Very slow but steady it will come and swallow up a large part of an economy with gleeful cooperation of business- savvy local investors. But one could wonder who really benefits of such global expansion. China's hegemony is inevitable, such as Europe's decline is, but as a European I do agree that the future looks rather bleak if Europe's Christian ideals become equally as meaningless as Europe's influence in the world has and will decline.

Sources of Korean tradition- P. Lee; W.T. de Bary Volume 1 and 2

[Radix_Lecti]

Specifically on NK and SK war:

During the last years of the Chosun dynasty, the future SK president Rhee was actively trying to undermine the rule of the king. He was arrested and fled to the United States. During the Japanese invasion of Korea and colonial rule he was appointed to the Korean government in exile in Shanghai but was later deposed for abuse of power and generally because he was a selfish prick looking to enrich himself. The Koreans hated his guts. This is important to remember because this is a recurring theme in US politics in which they tend to plant a puppet government under the leadership of a straw man whose only saving grace is that he can speak English but indubitably is hated by everyone in that country. (Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, Vietnam etc.)

After WWII the US president was warned to stay in SK to repel the 'red threat' but actually wasn't at all interested to stay there. This conversation is actually recorded in which he says something similar as to Trump's 'shithole country'. This changed when relationships with the Russians in Europe (Berlin) soured. The US appointed Rhee as president of the republic of Korea but he arrested and executed all public opposition and even more gravely, used the former colonial police forces to do so. Let me reiterate: This man used the brutal collaborators of the Japanese forces, pardoned them and kept them in their positions of power to continue their raping, murdering of the population. After Rhee had executed large numbers of communist party members, the North Korean government, seated in the ancient Royal capital city of Pyongyang, decided to stop the murdering of their fellow countrymen by the rule of the US/Japanese collaborator president Rhee. This is symbolically incredibly important: As a Confucian state, the NK government seated in Pyongyang was the only true government of Korea, as it continued the previous governments. The SK government is in this Confucian view merely a short intermezzo, a stray son going off on his 'rumspringa', but who will eventually return to his true faith. They indeed attacked the south, but in light of what I just wrote, one could see why the wikipedia description of this event lacks a holistic, historical view. You should now also be able to see that the response of China coming to the aid of NK when the Allied forces nearly had reached the border is partly a geo-political decision as described in Wikipedia, but probably an even more historic prolonging of the Confucian relationship which these 2 countries have had. During the numerous foreign invasions which Korea suffered in its past, it were always the Chinese forces that came to the rescue of its 'little brother'. China did not formally recognise the South for 30 years for this very reason, it has always viewed the NK government as the real Confucian continuance of the Korean kingdom.

The NK people truly believe that without the Kim family they would perish at the hands of the American/Japanese monsters, they are indoctrinated to believe ridiculous statements about their leaders and horrific acts of wars by the US GI and till this date the word 'GI' is a derogatory term for white foreigners, also in SK. They suffer tremendously but still believe they are the true keepers of the Korean historical tradition, with the South a capitalist bulwark of fellow countrymen who are brainwashed and enslaved to the foul Americans. (This is why public state announcements are always made by that horrible woman in her traditional dress and why the recent state visit featured Royal palace guards to welcome Kim.)

This is why I can say that NK will never attack the South or Japan because:
1) the Confucian relationship with China (need permission first)
2) their ideology is rooted in the hatred towards the USA/Japan, not towards the South Koreans.
They believe that one day the South will unify with the North once the Americans are gone.

I have only written from the point of view of the North because that is usually unknown, we all can guess fairly correctly how the South views the North and I am not going to claim who is right or not. I just wanted to correct the view that many in Europe have that NK is a dangerous rogue state. Although I must add that the lecturing prof in Holland, disagrees as he stated yesterday on TV that he is concerned about the proliferation of NK nuclear technology to other dictatorships in the Middle-East. He argued that the chemical weapons in Syria were produced by NK and that NK needs a lot of foreign currency, but I still disagree with him saying that 'he was very worried about the NK threat' for the reasons mentioned above.

* no sources because I merely wanted to say that Wikipedia can be correct but if you do not have any historical context you will not be able to cross-check sources or to enter the right search terms.

[momuuu]

to say that Wikipedia is more reliable than university training is not something very university-trained

In some fields Wikipedia is pretty damned amazing. It's a high school attitude to claim that wikipedia is not reliable, it's a uni attitude to realize wikipedia is the most reliable and complete source of information out there.

[Radix_Lecti]

The Anglo-Saxon scholarly tradition focuses on synthesising sources, however the lack of cultural-specific sources as seen from University rankings worldwide also means that only university researchers can present a holistic view of cultural-specific topics. In this wikipedia is as good/ accurate as its relevant and cultural-specific sources. To claim it is highschoolish to say wikipedia is incorrect is actually exactly the opposite, to question information and sources is highly academic, to just accept Wikipedia truths without questioning them is highschoolish imo. I now remember that was one of the first thing the now retired professor Walraven taught us and I now realise why I am pressing this point about Wikipedia.

With this I mean to say that without knowing any context one would simply have assumed that NK instigated the Korean war. This is also what wikipedia tells us as this is the overriding view of Anglo-Saxon scholarly articles, cited by each other. The few Korean publications get less cited but to my mind are far more relevant and provide a deeper understanding of this relationship. You need a studied researcher as the brilliant scholars at universities worldwide to provide this academic corrective attitude.

[_NT_sven]

to say that Wikipedia is more reliable than university training is not something very university-trained

In some fields Wikipedia is pretty damned amazing. It's a high school attitude to claim that wikipedia is not reliable, it's a uni attitude to realize wikipedia is the most reliable and complete source of information out there.

Different understandings of reliability I think. After your critical examination you might find the materials there pretty good, yet it's unlike journal papers or academic encyclopaedias which you could trust in general even though you have only little background knowledge of it.

[FakeNews]

User has been banned for smurfing and ban-dodging.

[benj89]

The Anglo-Saxon scholarly tradition focuses on synthesising sources, however the lack of cultural-specific sources as seen from University rankings worldwide also means that only university researchers can present a holistic view of cultural-specific topics. In this wikipedia is as good/ accurate as its relevant and cultural-specific sources. To claim it is highschoolish to say wikipedia is incorrect is actually exactly the opposite, to question information and sources is highly academic, to just accept Wikipedia truths without questioning them is highschoolish imo. I now remember that was one of the first thing the now retired professor Walraven taught us and I now realise why I am pressing this point about Wikipedia.

With this I mean to say that without knowing any context one would simply have assumed that NK instigated the Korean war. This is also what wikipedia tells us as this is the overriding view of Anglo-Saxon scholarly articles, cited by each other. The few Korean publications get less cited but to my mind are far more relevant and provide a deeper understanding of this relationship. You need a studied researcher as the brilliant scholars at universities worldwide to provide this academic corrective attitude.

to add to your point which I agree with, accept academic sources (even peer reviewed) as truths is also "highschoolish", or shows the person hasn't done serious research before. The worse would of course be someone citing a paper after only reading the conclusion which is what most journalists do. In the end nothing wrong in particular with wikipedia, but you just can't claim to know about a subject while that's the only source you read.

I recently heard a pretty smart doctor in a podcast saying that 99% of the researches published on pubmed are meaningless, either proven wrong within a few years or simply dishonest/intentionally biased. In the fields which I am aware of, tons of dishonest papers are written based on corruption from the funding sources (each paper involving $100k+), lack of funding in general, need to satisfy certain lobbies, career progression, you name it. Many economists wrote completely bs papers before 2008, the same ones that wrote your college textbooks.

I'd say wikipedia is a good source to start with if you are clueless about a subject, but if you want to be truly knowledgeable, you just have to read a lot from different authors which isn't hard with internet, just time consuming.
It seems obvious that for History, you should read from authors from different countries, "winners write history" is a known phenomenon. Not that I know much about it and even less about the NK situation, but wasn't it established that the war in Iraq was based on dishonest interpretation of a CIA report?

[Radix_Lecti]

This is the first post of yours I sincerely agree with and convinced me that you are not @FakeNews @lejend but your own rational thinking person worthwhile of listening to.

[Amsel_]

@Radix_Lecti That's very interesting. I had assumed that Confucianism was mostly neutralized during the cultural revolution. But I'm still not really convinced that North Korea is "in the right" even from an Eastern perspective. My first problem is that a Confucian might argue that the South holds legitimacy. He could say that the North is in an intermezzo. The idea of a foreign occupier feigning legitimacy isn't even unprecedented, for the Japanese did just that. The North could simply be Sino-Soviet occupiers who will 'inevitably' fall, according to a cyclical interpretation of history. It honestly seems like you're trying to build a narrative that relies on giving North Korea double-standards, while attacking the West and South Korea at every opportunity.