What should be done about North Korea

Post Reply New Topic

That is different. If THEY cross the border first, then THEY are the aggressor. If WE cross the border first then WE are the agressor.

THere is no ethical or moral justification for aggressive war. Defensive War, yes. Aggressive War, no.

Now, if you want to get into Just War Theory and the arguments over where the line between a Preemptive Strike and a Preventitive Attack are, well, that's a different matter.

The problem is that North Korea is *already* a humanitarian disaster, and a failed state; this isn't just that we don't think they're people are free enough, or we fear that a sovereign state may make a dangerous move. North Korea practically isn't a sovereign state anymore. It is increasingly not a matter of if their crap spills into South Korea, but when.

So we force them to take humanitarian aid?

This is an area of Geopolitics where we have already proven to have really bad luck.

NK is a Soverign State until it collapses and The People establish a New State... or, more preferably, No State. But it's not our or anyone elses place to interfere unless asked.

We aren't Team America.

Let's put this into a more human context:

Down the road, across the tracks, in the "bad part of town" there resides a Family in utter disarray. The Father appears to be one suit short of a full deck. The Mother has the culinary skills of your average Meth addict. The 12 kids are nearly starving, but seem to at least be getting by.

No "crime" has been committed by any member of this family, but they sure creep out the neighbors. The Next Door neighbor, a part of the Nutter's extended family that you helped excape and helped build a fence for - is quite concerned that bad things could happen to his family should the Nutter &/or his family "lose it".

The local cop station is right in the area, but the Precinct Capitan is related to the mom, so he mostly turns a blind eye... though he rumbles some disapproval.

Do you have the Right to grab your shotgun, go across town, kick in the nutter's front door, shoot his dog and tell him to shape up? What are the Cops going to think?

That is what "intervening" in NK means.

That sir, was a brilliant and funny post.

And so true!

Lets suppose that the father is beating the HELL out of his wife and kids on a daily basis. Even though he hasnt committed a "crime" against anyone outside of his home. Should the cops not do anything and allow the dad to "raise his kids without state interference"? Humanitarian aid to NK must be given directly to its citizens because otherwise the government will hoard it and distribute most of it to its soliders and government officials.

First of all, depending on the quality of life of the children, yes, intervention may be necessary. People don't get to do anything they want to children by virtue of having spawned them in a civilized society. On top of that, North Koreans do starve, to the tune of 3 million in the mid 90s. For the mathematically impaired, that's about 10% of North Korea's population. Now, maybe a repressive regime whose idiotic policies have killed millions of people is something you don't care about because they aren't yours, but when wars are waged between these arbitrary meaningless bodies known as "governments" and millions die, some people might get a little perturbed. Conferring protected status to such behavior because it happens to be on the part of a government which is in principle recognized as ruling over its subjects is ridiculous.

Second of all, because governments have no rights in analog to people, the analogy further breaks down. Even if someone were packing their house full of things like nerve gas, I'm relatively certain it would be considered justifiable to confiscate that.

I haven't actually said we *ought* to invade North Korea, but analogies likening governments to families is idiotic.

The cops are right there. They wear a shiny Red Star. If you believe that you can do anything to that "Family" without the Cops taking YOU down, you sorely misunderstand that family dynamic.

It's their sphere of influence, not ours.

So, we have the world all carved up eh? Need I remind you that 1) The US has allies in that area which North Korea has been giving s**t to (*cough* kidnapping Japanese citizens) and 2) Last I checked North Korea was even managing to get on China's nerves. Frankly, if the cop wasn't doing jack and their was risk that a friend of mine was bout to get nerve gassed, I would be forced to take matters into my own hands.

And cut the damn analogies. I hate analogies because they let people look like making real substantial arguments when they generally can't be bothered.

You may not like how I say it, but it expresses a consistant ethical and political position.

A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being for any reason whatever; nor will a libertarian advocate the initiation of force, or delegate it to anyone else.

Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim.

You really ought to read Just War Theory. In no respect could your position be seen as anyting but aggressive/authoritarian... certainly not libertarian.

For this instance I have to completely agree. IF they attack South Korea, I may change my mind, but this notion of preemptive war to save people from themselves is dehumanizing, bigoted, and downright evil.

If people want freedom badly enough, they will overthrow their government in favor of it. A rag-tag group of untrained poorly supplied boys kicked the s**t out of the British Empire for freedom 250 years ago (albeit with the help of the French).. it's not like they don't know freedom can be achieved if they are willing to fight for it. Furthermore, if the people are not willing to fight for freedom, then they don't deserve it! And that includes you.

I think that can be disputed. A minimalist state, for example, guarantees protection from violations resulting from one person infringing upon another's rights. Since, say, the Nutters do not have the right to starve their children, they aren't protected from, say, the cop's planting his boot so far up their asses they can use his shoelaces for dental floss.

A state isn't a person. It doesn't have natural rights. Period.


Who said my position was libertarian?

MrMisanthrope, if you are referring to China I'd like to point out as I did earlier that North Korea has Lost the support of its former allies China and Russia.THAT is why they are so desperate! And THAT is why they are trying to develop Nuclear Weapons!!
The whole point of NK building long-range nuclear missiles is to use them as a tool of BlackMail against Japan and the US if we dont help support them by sending them aid. NK is becoming increasingly unstable and a war with South Korea is LOOMING.......

I disagree. Libertarians believe in limited government, not no government. There are plenty of instances where a Libertarian would believe force against another person would be justified, such as in retaliation to being attacked or someone in their family. Or if you are taking something from them.

Also, let me point out that nobody is a pure anything, libertarian, communist, socialist. people are just degrees of certain types of political beliefs based on the circumstances that best suit them.

Which only shows that you failed to actually read & understand the Principle. It does not say "be a pacifist", rather that one shall not INITIATE force. Self Defense sufficient to stop the aggression actively being taken against you or others who have asked for your help is a categorical imperative. It is only INITIATING Agressive action against others that is unethical.


The older I get, the more important Ideological Purity becomes.

It is because people are willing to compormise their Ideologies that we ended up with Bush v.2 & Obama.

I will argue for Libertarian AnarchoCapitalisim - realizing that most people don't have enough self respect or personal responsibility to want true self determination, and therefore expecting significantly Less than Freedom to arize. I agitate/Hope for AnarchoCapitalisim. I will grudgingly accept a Libitarian Minarchist Government.

It's doubtful whether he's alive in the first place.

As for the current situation, blame it on South Korea's Grand National Party, ruining 10 years of diplomatic results in less than a year...