Comments on: State Dept. researching responses to N. Korean collapse

By: ActionJackson

ActionJackson — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 20:53:52 +0000

Oh we’re in the ozarks?
Is that why the japs are f**kin the sheep?

By: Sperwer

Sperwer — Wed, 29 Mar 2006 09:25:51 +0000

Brendon: You may be “from” the Ozarks, but you ain’t “of” the Ozarks, boy!

By: Brendon Carr

Brendon Carr — Wed, 29 Mar 2006 08:21:59 +0000

As a Missourian of rural extraction who has spent a lot of (summer) time in the Ozarks, I take umbrage. What do any of you know of the Ozarks?

By: snow

snow — Wed, 29 Mar 2006 08:09:43 +0000

“South Korea and North Korea are brother and sister, so in the end South Korea has a chance, because this is the Ozarks.”

Ouch, Kushibo, that is hilarious.

By: Sperwer

Sperwer — Wed, 29 Mar 2006 07:38:19 +0000

Kushibo:

Nice one.

By: kushibo

kushibo — Tue, 28 Mar 2006 22:46:34 +0000

Baduk wrote:
South Korea is like a man who has desires for a married woman(NK) and keeps sending ravish gifts to her hoping that she would divorce her hubby(China) and marry him.

Your set-up is good, but you’re forgetting one thing in this analogy. South Korea has an ace up his sleeve when it comes stealing away the “married woman”: South Korea and North Korea are brother and sister, so in the end South Korea has a chance, because this is the Ozarks.

By: baduk

baduk — Tue, 28 Mar 2006 22:28:13 +0000

South Korea is like a man who has desires for a married woman(NK) and keeps sending ravish gifts to her hoping that she would divorce her hubby(China) and marry him.

Fat chance.

If NK wanted to be free, it would have opened up the country long time ago. NK has no intention of being freed from China’s control. In fact, NK is threatening the US with nukes because that is exactly what China wants it to do.

By: judge judy

judge judy — Tue, 28 Mar 2006 12:02:05 +0000

china’s shadow already covers north korea, and the rok has but a smidgen of leverage with the dprk left as financial control is taken over by the prc. it’s but a desperate attempt to send rice and build industrial plants all the while knowing the only thing you can do is hope for the dprk’s favor in the future because you’ve been nice to them. can anyone say “conflicting paradigms?”

By: R. Elgin

R. Elgin — Mon, 27 Mar 2006 08:21:07 +0000

I must concur with “wjk” regarding China. While looking through another site on the history of Korea-US relations, (http://rmc.library.cornell.edu/Straight/) I found this bit from 1877:

The U.S. recalled its representatives in Seoul at the request of China, as a result of disagreements between the Chinese and American representatives stationed there.

American Secretary of State Thomas F. Bayard, wrote to Hugh A. Dinsmore, American Minister Resident in Seoul, “If … the progress of Chinese interference at Seoul should result in the destruction of the autonomy of Korea as a sovereign state with which the United States maintain independent treaty relations, it will be time then to consider whether this Government is to look to that of China to enforce treaty obligations for the protection of the persons and interests of citizens of the United States, and their commerce, in Korean territory as a dependency of China.”

(September, 1877) Dinsmore expressed concern at efforts by the Chinese Minister at Seoul to prevent the recently appointed Korean Minister to the U.S. from leaving for Washington. The Chinese Minister denied this, and stated that since the Treaty of 1882 stipulated that Korea was a “vassal state to China”, Korean missions to foreign nations were subject to “obligations that are binding her to China” and that the U.S. should not interfere. The U.S. expressed “surprise and regret” at this action.

Finally, “Chung Yang Pak was received in Washington (1988) as first resident Minister of Korea “on a footing of diplomatic equality with the representatives of other states which maintain treaty relations with the United States.”

I just wonder why more Koreans don’t seem to know their own history.

By: Lankov

Lankov — Sun, 26 Mar 2006 10:31:08 +0000

Well, this is a useful exercise, but I am afraid it is too late. The probability of NK collapsing in near future is going down fast, with every new government-backed Chinese investor getting his/her yuan to the country. If Chinese indeed made a political decision to keep NK afloat (it seems to be the case), they will be able to do it, at least for few years. And nobody outside Beijing can do anything about it. Hence, the exercise has lost its urgency.