Comments on: War declarations, physical responses, sanctions, Article 42 and PSI, oh my! http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/ Korea... in Blog Format Tue, 2 Dec 2008 00:45:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Left Flank http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51611 Left Flank Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:21:59 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51611 <strong>Just Stuck In Damnation...</strong> "Stay the course!" It's the new Bush administration approach to all issues. In this MSNBC segment, Roseland Jordan reports that President Bush is annoyed with critics who condemn his insistence on Six-Party Talks, yet condemn him for not negotiat... Just Stuck In Damnation…

“Stay the course!”

It’s the new Bush administration approach to all issues. In this MSNBC segment, Roseland Jordan reports that President Bush is annoyed with critics who condemn his insistence on Six-Party Talks, yet condemn him for not negotiat…

]]> By: montclaire http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51552 montclaire Thu, 12 Oct 2006 00:37:37 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51552 The angry Korean gesticulating at the foreigner - and wearing a Nike cap. That says it all. North and South really are one. The angry Korean gesticulating at the foreigner - and wearing a Nike cap. That says it all. North and South really are one.

]]> By: Richardson http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51539 Richardson Thu, 12 Oct 2006 00:07:43 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51539 It only takes one to show a pretentious know-it-all that he doesn’t. If you have a <em>specific</em> question about Africa maybe you should just ask it directly. It only takes one to show a pretentious know-it-all that he doesn’t.

If you have a specific question about Africa maybe you should just ask it directly.

]]> By: Landros http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51535 Landros Wed, 11 Oct 2006 23:58:46 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51535 I understand that North Korea negotiates differently than what we are used to in the West. I read a book about negotiation and it said somethign like Soviet style negotiation. It used an example where businessmen from Russia were buying land in America. the price they started with was considered insane and after the contract was made they pushed for more and more. I really don't care if the North or china is labled as communists but I agree there are different ways t oNegotiate. We seem to expect two sides to compromise and come to an agreement benificial to both sides. Where as the North are trying to gain leverage and will stop at nothing. I guess Americans want to read agreements in their favour to but it is rediculas dealing with North Korea. And South Korea should realise Korea is not one country of bothers. I understand that North Korea negotiates differently than what we are used to in the West. I read a book about negotiation and it said somethign like Soviet style negotiation. It used an example where businessmen from Russia were buying land in America. the price they started with was considered insane and after the contract was made they pushed for more and more.

I really don’t care if the North or china is labled as communists but I agree there are different ways t oNegotiate. We seem to expect two sides to compromise and come to an agreement benificial to both sides. Where as the North are trying to gain leverage and will stop at nothing.

I guess Americans want to read agreements in their favour to but it is rediculas dealing with North Korea. And South Korea should realise Korea is not one country of bothers.

]]> By: sewing http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51526 sewing Wed, 11 Oct 2006 22:21:17 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51526 Bluejives, I don't think you actually read what I wrote. I was talking about one particular item that was agreed upon in 2000, that has nothing whatsoever to do with geopolitics: a measly rail connection. A few miles of railway track connecting existing railway lines in the South and North. I've been following news of the line since it was announced during the 2000 summit. The Norks' intransigence even on something as trivial as this—and their use of it as a bargaining chip to get concessions from SK in subsequent years—disabused me of any illusion that NK ever negotiates in good faith. Bluejives, I don’t think you actually read what I wrote. I was talking about one particular item that was agreed upon in 2000, that has nothing whatsoever to do with geopolitics: a measly rail connection. A few miles of railway track connecting existing railway lines in the South and North. I’ve been following news of the line since it was announced during the 2000 summit. The Norks’ intransigence even on something as trivial as this—and their use of it as a bargaining chip to get concessions from SK in subsequent years—disabused me of any illusion that NK ever negotiates in good faith.

]]> By: bluejives http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51524 bluejives Wed, 11 Oct 2006 21:25:58 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51524 Wow, congrats for coming up with...like...one counter-example. But since when did the US ever care so much about Africa anyway? Wow, congrats for coming up with…like…one counter-example. But since when did the US ever care so much about Africa anyway?

]]> By: Richardson http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51522 Richardson Wed, 11 Oct 2006 21:19:02 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51522 <blockquote>Blah, blah, blah... It also informs the enemy that the US is fundamentally not interested in peace or equal bargaining but rather brute-forcing its way into making things the way that the US thinks it should be. Hence, the enemy acts accordingly...</blockquote>Libya.

Blah, blah, blah… It also informs the enemy that the US is fundamentally not interested in peace or equal bargaining but rather brute-forcing its way into making things the way that the US thinks it should be. Hence, the enemy acts accordingly…

Libya.

]]> By: bluejives http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51513 bluejives Wed, 11 Oct 2006 19:47:13 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51513 Sewing, in Physics, there is a certain well known headache-inducing conundrum known as the "three body problem". Analyzing the dynamics and mechanics of interaction between two bodies in a controlled, isolated environment is simple enough. Introduce a third body into the situation and the problem instantly becomes orders of magnitude more difficult. The case study that you bring up makes a fundamental assumption that North-South inter-relations is like the two-body problem (completely free and independent of outside variables). But we all know that is not the case. Basically, SKorea's peaceful overtures to their northern brethren were doomed to failure from the gecko because the South was basically saying "let's make love not war but pay no attention to that world police man behind the curtain either." Just because the North is reluctant to be foolish in their own best interest doesnt make them peculiar Martians or something. But, unfortunately therein lies the truth about why the West has failed to effectively deal with the likes of North Korea, Al Qaeda, etc. The West insists on viewing North Korea through a flawed lenses of what is effectively a caricature. It is incorrect to even label North Koreans or especially the Chinese as Communists anymore in the rigorous, original sense of that term as Marx or Engels may have meant it. Yet, the term persists. The West's insistence on understanding the enemy not on their terms but based on our own arrogant, contrived framework is a gross violation of one of Xenzu's principal axioms stated in the Art of War and has been the reason why the US has failed in much of its military overseas adventures starting with Vietnam. It also informs the enemy that the US is fundamentally not interested in peace or equal bargaining but rather brute-forcing its way into making things the way that the US thinks it should be. Hence, the enemy acts accordingly. Sewing, in Physics, there is a certain well known headache-inducing conundrum known as the “three body problem”. Analyzing the dynamics and mechanics of interaction between two bodies in a controlled, isolated environment is simple enough. Introduce a third body into the situation and the problem instantly becomes orders of magnitude more difficult.

The case study that you bring up makes a fundamental assumption that North-South inter-relations is like the two-body problem (completely free and independent of outside variables). But we all know that is not the case.

Basically, SKorea’s peaceful overtures to their northern brethren were doomed to failure from the gecko because the South was basically saying “let’s make love not war but pay no attention to that world police man behind the curtain either.” Just because the North is reluctant to be foolish in their own best interest doesnt make them peculiar Martians or something.

But, unfortunately therein lies the truth about why the West has failed to effectively deal with the likes of North Korea, Al Qaeda, etc. The West insists on viewing North Korea through a flawed lenses of what is effectively a caricature. It is incorrect to even label North Koreans or especially the Chinese as Communists anymore in the rigorous, original sense of that term as Marx or Engels may have meant it. Yet, the term persists. The West’s insistence on understanding the enemy not on their terms but based on our own arrogant, contrived framework is a gross violation of one of Xenzu’s principal axioms stated in the Art of War and has been the reason why the US has failed in much of its military overseas adventures starting with Vietnam. It also informs the enemy that the US is fundamentally not interested in peace or equal bargaining but rather brute-forcing its way into making things the way that the US thinks it should be. Hence, the enemy acts accordingly.

]]> By: sewing http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51511 sewing Wed, 11 Oct 2006 19:25:28 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51511 By the way, <i>How Communists Negotiate</i> was written by <a href="http://www.history.navy.mil/wars/korea/joy.htm" rel="nofollow">Vice Admiral C. Turner Joy</a> of the US Navy, who was the senior UN delegate to the Korean Armistice Conference, from July 1951 to May 1952. He wrote the book in 1955, based on his experiences, and in particular his exasperation at negotiating an end to the war. Keep in mind, by the way, that it took <i>two years</i> just to negotiate an end to hostilities; all the while, soldiers were dying protecting the front that would soon become the Military Demarcation Line, the centre strip of the DMZ. By the way, How Communists Negotiate was written by Vice Admiral C. Turner Joy of the US Navy, who was the senior UN delegate to the Korean Armistice Conference, from July 1951 to May 1952. He wrote the book in 1955, based on his experiences, and in particular his exasperation at negotiating an end to the war.

Keep in mind, by the way, that it took two years just to negotiate an end to hostilities; all the while, soldiers were dying protecting the front that would soon become the Military Demarcation Line, the centre strip of the DMZ.

]]> By: Richardson http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51507 Richardson Wed, 11 Oct 2006 19:09:31 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/10/12/war-declarations-physical-responses-sanctions-article-42-and-psi-oh-my/#comment-51507 BJ said: <blockquote>Negotiations involving war, strategic weaponry, the fate of nations, and millions of people obey its own logic and is universal...</blockquote> I stopped the quote there b/c that's where you are wrong. North Korea does not operate under those assumptions, it does not operate to ensure the national survival, only the <em>regime</em> survival. BJ said:
Negotiations involving war, strategic weaponry, the fate of nations, and millions of people obey its own logic and is universal…

I stopped the quote there b/c that’s where you are wrong. North Korea does not operate under those assumptions, it does not operate to ensure the national survival, only the regime survival.

]]>