Do you think Kim Jung Un should be overthrown?

He is a complete dictator, tortures his people, is a loose cannon and wants to murder people for fun.

Do you think we should overthrow him or a coup should happen?

Sanctions are not going to work.

Yes, **** sovereignty in this case

Attacking targets in the country to over throw him might spark a reaction on south Korea and us forces there too. It could start a nuclear war.

We also don't know how China and Russia will react as they both border North Korea.

Who would start the coup? He'll just be replaced with someone just as bad and nothing will change if not get worse.

It would unleash the biggest humanitarian crisis in a short amount of time. And destabilizing regimes has recently lead to more problems.

At some point though. We just may have to wage war. To stop the developement of ICBM's. That can be a game changer of that region's politics.

We can't strike first. I think that's the agreement with China.

We'll need to provoke North Korea to give us a Pearl Harbor-like event. It just wouldn't look great on the international world to start waging war or doing preemptive strikes.

I say we hit them where it hurts and embargo them from having access to oil imports. Worst case scenario, we stage an attack that's convincing enough for everybody to justify war. I find the latter to be very unlikely.

I was in NYC a couple of weeks ago, and while at Reagan I picked up a copy of the New York Times that had a cover story about Kim, his family, and what he is trying to do in North Korea.

What I found most amazing is just how human (deeply disturbed and paranoid beyond belief, but just a man) Kim Jong Un actually is. Kim is a man trying to replicate what he saw from his father and, especially, his grandfather while at the same time attempting to obtain validation from the rest of the world while at the same time fighting a cold war with the world while at the same time trying to run his own country.

Analysts say Mr. Kim seems to be trying to tap into nostalgia for his grandfather, Kim Il-sung, who ruled North Korea from its establishment in 1948 until his death in 1994 and is still revered as a godlike figure. Kim Jong-un appears to have adopted his grandfather’s slow gait, beaming smile, closely cropped hair and even his way of holding a cigarette. Some suggest Mr. Kim even gained weight on purpose to mirror his grandfather’s stocky build.

At the end of the day, this is a man who is just attempting to hold it all together.

"It" being one of the three Axis of Evil... a totalitarian society that looks like they used 1984 as a blueprint.

But hey.... lets all be shocked that a human being displays human traits.

Yes, we should bomb them and we should bomb the citizens of NK with science books, history books, animal farm, orwell, current events, porn, etc.

We could overthrow him tomorrow and it would not make much of a difference because that society is already built around totalitarianism. Someone else would simply step in. We could help them, but this is something that needs to start with the people of NK.

I don't think their leader being overthrown would suddenly demoralize or demilitarize the people in North Korea.

Embargoes can be a good thing

but I don't think they work as China still profits from trading with North Korea and they don't really care about any of the embargoes.

I don't think there is an easy solution for North Korea. I really don't know what the best thing is to do. It certainly isn't what the US did in Iraq.

Few things...

1. It is an easy solution, its just not easily done. We know the pathway we need to take to change NK and there is really no other direction. The people need to want to change and we have to be willing to help south korea take it back. This is obviously easier said than done, but it really is the only solution.

2. I wouldnt compare Iraq and NK.

With Iraq we knew the second we would leave, these fundamentalist groups would take over. That was a situation that we never should have left and better efforts by the world should have been in place. If NK was free'd, the first thing that would happen is north and south would combine again to simply be Korea. South Korea is very stable, could very easily expand north with every kind of job, NKs minerals under SK government would be a massive boom to their economy, city expansion would take place, the farming room would be a huge boost, etc.

These are two very different situations and even if we went into NK guns a blazing like we did with Iraq, we wouldnt see the same problems. Different ones might arise, but not anything like Iraq.

You make it sound much easier than it is. We know that NK has a lot of weapons pointed towards SK, we know Kim has A-Bombs and we know that Kim is very unstable. We have no idea what happens when he starts to lose his country. Are you certain he wouldn't bomb SK to ashes? Are you sure he doesn't destroy his country before giving it to someone else? And that's ignoring China and Russia who don't want the US or SK as US partner as a nightbour. There are so many factors and unknowns that noone can make a definitie guess. It's all about whether or not we try something and risk millions of lifes while doing so... or risk millions of lifes if we just do nothing. I don't think there's an easy solution, this is a huge gamble.

Possibly, but no one in the US intelligence apparatus seems to know what comes next. Overthrowing Kim Jung Un is the easy part (relatively) of it, the hard part is figuring out what to do with the power vacuum.

I don't think aything would change. Nothing of what he says or does makes any sense...suspiciously so. He knows his nation is about as big as a postage stamp compared to the US, and as far as public relations go, every superpower has declined to support him. I mean, if he decides to attack anyone they'd wipe North Korea off the map, at this point it shouldn't even be complex politics, it should be sheer survival instinct that tells him to back the f*** down. There's more at play here than what is being shown.

No one's going to attack North Korea. Not with a million-man army standing by.

Im not suggesting it would be an easy task, im simply saying that we know the actions that need to take place. Its like a fat guy and losing weight. The path to lost weight might be difficult or "easier said than done" but he knows what he has to do.

SK? No. Not at all.

Japan... maybe.

Its possible but doubtful. That is an action that does not seem to be in his deck of cards.

The only issue China and Russia have with US involvement in NK is resources. Basically consider China and Russia America and NK Saudi. Its the same relationship, an exploitation of resources.

If it came down to it im pretty sure both Russia and China would have our backs, or at least be neutral, simply because it would be better for them to keep some resources, than losing them all.

Its a totalitarian society. IMO there is no "if", but "how" and "when".

Even if you're trying to do this with the mathematics of lost lives, you will never be able to murder more NKians than will be murdered under decades of Totalitarian rule.

China would hate it. They do not want a US friendly nation next to their border.

Actually South Korea is not that USA friendly.

So a unified Korea would not be the worst thing for China, problem is tho does the South Koreans want that, considering the state of the north and the amount of money it might cost. If unification is not the solution and the two keep their separate status, my bet is that the new government wont be US friendly but stick to China and Russia and just remove all the nuclear and military rhetoric and work on rebuilding their status in the world.

But no one is going to overthrow the Kim , he will stay until his death and then it will be a new chapter.

Read the article. "it" is a grasp on a country that is, at any time, oh so close to complete revolt due to hunger or extreme poverty or a general lack of human decency.

It's less that. They don't want a refugee crisis.

I think we should fat shame him to death.

You mean a totalitarian society that has been built around hunger and extreme poverty and it really wouldn't matter who was at the helm at this point. Yah, that's kind of what i said. And no, NK is no where near revolt and its very sad that its not.

But i think you missed my point.

Forgot who said it (probably John Oliver...), but let's just think about the brainwashed population for a second and his massive standing army that is 110% loyal to him even if he dies...

...can anyone say North Korean "Al Qaeda" loyal to a martyred leader? How freaking terrifying is that idea? You think they're bad now, what about when we kill their currently relatively stable isolationist leader and they decide that striking out internationally as a terrorist group is a good idea.

Because why build one or two good missiles for national defense when you are willing to sacrifice 100% of your country to smuggle in dozens of dirty bombs to blow up millions of Western citizens? That's a possible alternative we face if we depose the current leader and leave them in turmoil.

The US messing around with other countries, "regime change" I believe we call it, rarely works out well.

Guys, if you're going to talk NK and China, you should at least understand the situation.

China does not give a shit about a refugee crisis.... South Korea would be in far more trouble with that unless they were able to expand north asap. China, it wouldnt affect at all.

Its also not about a "Us friendly nation"..... im not quite sure where you guys get these things but whatever. Maybe you should check how many US friendly nations are around China and... oh yah... check China on their stance with the US.

Again, i keep trying to tell people who seem to think the situation is something other than... its all about resources. NK has tons of minerals and right now the only two countries exploiting that are China and Russia.

No need, Trump beat Kim and Kim backed down. Problem solved amirite?

That's right! Round 2 coming up!

Not really. Kim still throwing a hissy fit.

That's the tough part, and our economy is pretty reliant on China as they are with us.

China says we can't have first blood, but then they say they wouldn't support Nork if they strike first. I guess we'll just have to wait and see them kill a couple hundred thousands for us to do anything.

That's not true at all.

SK loves America for the most part. They are actually a lot like the Japanese in how they idolize a lot of western and American culture. When you do hear of problems with SK and America, its typically due to trade deals. So like.. .maybe a decade ago this happened, but there was a big deal about how America was not supporting SK manufacturing the way we did Chinese and Taiwanese.

They do tend to dislike how American people tend to be more aggressive and loud. But you know.... most of the world dislikes this and the younger SKs specifically are moving in that direction themselves.

That is because they want to keep NK as a exploited resource as long as possible but at the end of the day because of our economic relationship, there would be no way they could or would support NK if they did something first. That would be a situation of them understanding the need to solve a problem and then deal with the resource thing. Id say Russia would be the bigger hiccup here because they are the only ones aside from China exploiting NK.

Yes, it´s true

Also the current South korean President does not share the predecessors love for the US, not to mention he has a idea of a much closer tie with China.

While the US is still their strongest ally , Time is a changing , particular among the younger generation.

Tell me, what have i missed that has not had to do with trade deals or possibly how bad of a president Trump is?

And again, the younger generation is more Americanized than ever and they very much idolize much of American culture.

EDIT:OHHH i see it. He says that he would be against Trump doing a first strike........ Yah okay, that makes sense. NK and SK was a civil war, we are talking about millions of people who related to one another. That is not the Korean people changing their view of America dude, or them changing their political stance... they never wanted anyone to bomb NK or attack first. Its their family man. This has not changed, this has been the case 50 years.

You have to stop trying to conflate things.

China does not like the idea of a first strike on NK because they are exploiting resources from NK. A first strike changes that scenario.

SK, does not like the idea of a first strike on NK becasue it puts their grandparents, mothers, fathers, brothers, uncles, aunts, sons, daughters, friends, etc. in the line of fire. And again this stance is nothing new.

These are two very different situations and reasons and you cannot.... absolutely cannot say "not to mention he has a idea of a much closer tie with China."

I am not talking about the obvious , that of course South Korea who is the first to meet the retaliation , is against a us first strike.

North Korea is combat ready and before they are defeated, it will cost million of South Koreans their lives. Not to mention other neighbours

What i am talking about is the general attitude towards the US, which is not just a issue after Trump got elected, but have been growing in South Korea. And have been strengthen with the new President Moon who is a lot more progressive than his predecessor.

No, it probably wont cost millions of SK lives, SK would not be their first target. Japan would.Aaannndddddd they don't really have other neighbors aside from China.

Again, pay attention. One of the major concerns is that over half of south koreans still have family members in north korea.

Right, they dislike Trump. This is not a change to how they view on America or the American people, its that they dislike Trump. As pretty much the entire world does.

Moon, simply stated that a first strike would not happen without the approval of SK and he said this in response to Trumps very poorly worded stance. He has said nothing of value beyond that and the Korean people are still very envious of western society. And btw they've always taken this position. Of course the reason they had to come out and issue the statement they did was because the orange box of rocks sounded very much like GeeDubYah with Iraq.

And just as a reminder, i responded to you saying "Actually South Korea is not that USA friendly." and telling you how this is not even remotely true. The only thing you've brought up is that their president said there would not be a first strike on NK without SKs permission, which is super understandable if you understand that situation in the least or the know the history of this always having been the position of SK. NOTHING you brought up demonstrates your claim. Even if i was unable to read the events you're referencing and had no idea what they actually said, it would show at worst wanting to avoid a massive war on their border. As for the very vague claim that youve not even began to detail or touch on... well my ex's mother and father still live in Seoul (and we were there for nine months), so if you'd like ill give them a call and see if these attitudes have changed. I do generally keep up with SK and Thailand... odd i know, but ive lived in both places. And i do know i do not have to do this in order to accurately state what i have.

China does care about refugees pouring in and they are close enough for it to happen.

My point was that refugee's are nothing on their list of concerns for this situation.

The resource thing is the overwhelming issue, the only real concern they have. NK (and parts of Africa) is a hotbed for most of the minerals they use to make cheap devices and with the deal they have in place, its almost like they're getting it for free, creating these items, shipping them across the world, and seeing a boom in their economy that can only be comparable to the US in the 40s. Those cheap minerals are a big reason as to why theyve basically taken on American capitalism.

Ehmm, so you disagree with every single military strategist who all say that a military solution will attack SK first. And what are you on about the concern is not about family members in South Korea as to military action, while that may be a concern for the involved in SK.

Why did i know you would bring it down to a question of Trump and continue like any other trump-hating sheep. Moon is not anti Trump , he is a progressive who happens to feel it will benefit them more to distance themselves a bit from the us and turn more towards China.

I know what you responded to and your comment is wrong. You may want to pay attention to the world around you and the media´s reports on South Korea.

No, that is not what i said was it? I said that for SK, one of the biggest reasons they do not want a first strike against NK is because its their family... pay attention. This might shock you, but when you have empathy for other people, it becomes a top concern. No one said that they didn't understand that they too are at risk, its simply that Japan would be the first target unless they intended on taking over SK. Which most likely wont happen given the DMZ situation there.

You brought it up, i didnt. And its the only recent "news" or "news" if you didnt know that was their position to begin with. And again since you cannot seem to grasp this, no matter what party, this has always been the position of SK. He heard an idiot who is the head of the largest military in the world, make threats that put his country and the country next to him with his family members, at risk, and had to remind president dumbshit of their stance of no first strike without SK's permission. If you remember correctly, they had to say this to Bush too. In fact, the only time we hear it is when we have an idiot president who starts talking about taking the offensive.

As for your second claim of SK attempting to "distance themselves from the US and move more toward China"... Where do you see this? How do you know this? Why are you saying it? Because im saying this right now with 100% certainty and conviction.... you're lying, you made that up. Stop lying you liar, have an ounce of dignity. Prove this or shut the **** up about it. I want to hear nothing else on this bullshit unless its you actually proving it.

And until you show me evidence for a single claim you've made i cant take you seriously... its funny, you get tired of my rants, but you never seem to produce evidence to shut me up. All you do is weasel around the topic and attempt to avoid directly answering something at all costs. See, here's the fact of the matter little fella. Lets say you're 100% accurate in your claim. How does that justify when you said : "Actually South Korea is not that USA friendly."..... see, because even if what you're suggesting is true, it would be about trade deals and not how friendly one country is to another. Even if we take your nonsensical claim above of "trying to distance SK from USA" that is not an unfriendly act and again, as with every single statement you ever make.... there is not a single thing you can show that actually demonstrates this. You see him disliking what Trump said, as any sane person should, and you come to your nonsensical bullshit conclusions and create a fictional reality in your head. Someone calls you out on it and you have no where to go, so you change the topic, adjust what you said, ignore demands of evidence, the typical things liars do.

@n64dd: no, the question is what do you do afterwards? They join south korea and get along happily ever after?? Reality doesn't work like that...you get rid of kim jung il, and deal with all the consequences (ie kim launching nukes), then settle in for 10 years to re-establish whatevers left of the country, hoping that terrorist groups dont rise up and fight you at every corner. Meanwhile the koreans despise you, both north and south for disrupting things that were running reasonably well before then. Nothing to gain in north korea situation, unless of course its some geopolitical thing thats important for long term plans.

So.... in any other situation i'd agree. But the fact is SK and apparently most of the people in NK (not government, but people) simply want a reunited Korea. This is not a situation like the in the middle east. SK is capable enough to very quickly absorb north Korea and prosper doing so. People are not being unrealistic with this simplification. We knew terrorist groups would pop up in Iraq, in NK... most likely not and for so many reasons. South Koreans do tend to like Americans and IMO, having lived there and having family there, i think at the end of the day they would be grateful if we helped reunite Korea. A large percentage of SKians have family in NK still and its a major concern for them, its something they think about or "pray" about every day. My ex's mother is Korean and when we were there this was the thing she talked about the most. Her aunts and cousins being in NK and how concerned she is with them being okay and most people in Korea i heard talk about this subject or spoke with, really do want an undivided Korea.

@kod said: No, that is not what i said was it? I said that for SK, one of the biggest reasons they do not want a first strike against NK is because its their family... pay attention. This might shock you, but when you have empathy for other people, it becomes a top concern. No one said that they didn't understand that they too are at risk, its simply that Japan would be the first target unless they intended on taking over SK. Which most likely wont happen given the DMZ situation there.

Sure, and the fact that a huge army from the North will instantly attack the south and Seoul would be the target of massive bombings has of course nothing to do with South Korea's need to "accept" a a strike. It´s all about the north Koreans because some in the south have family. And of course North Korea would go for the South , it´s a strategy move to take the south. They may throw a few bombs at Japan but that will be nothing compared to what they will attack the south with.

"Most analysts agree that a military strike on North Korea could put the South Korean capital of Seoul -- which is only dozens of miles from the Demilitarized Zone separating the two countries -- in grave danger from a retaliatory strike from Kim."

@kod said: You brought it up, i didnt. And its the only recent "news" or "news" if you didnt know that was their position to begin with. And again since you cannot seem to grasp this, no matter what party, this has always been the position of SK. He heard an idiot who is the head of the largest military in the world, make threats that put his country and the country next to him with his family members, at risk, and had to remind president dumbshit of their stance of no first strike without SK's permission. If you remember correctly, they had to say this to Bush too. In fact, the only time we hear it is when we have an idiot president who starts talking about taking the offensive.

As for your second claim of SK attempting to "distance themselves from the US and move more toward China"... Where do you see this? How do you know this? Why are you saying it? Because im saying this right now with 100% certainty and conviction.... you're lying, you made that up. Stop lying you liar, have an ounce of dignity. Prove this or shut the **** up about it. I want to hear nothing else on this bullshit unless its you actually proving it.

And until you show me evidence for a single claim you've made i cant take you seriously... its funny, you get tired of my rants, but you never seem to produce evidence to shut me up. All you do is weasel around the topic and attempt to avoid directly answering something at all costs. See, here's the fact of the matter little fella. Lets say you're 100% accurate in your claim. How does that justify when you said : "Actually South Korea is not that USA friendly."..... see, because even if what you're suggesting is true, it would be about trade deals and not how friendly one country is to another. Even if we take your nonsensical claim above of "trying to distance SK from USA" that is not an unfriendly act and again, as with every single statement you ever make.... there is not a single thing you can show that actually demonstrates this. You see him disliking what Trump said, as any sane person should, and you come to your nonsensical bullshit conclusions and create a fictional reality in your head. Someone calls you out on it and you have no where to go, so you change the topic, adjust what you said, ignore demands of evidence, the typical things liars do.

You don´t follow world politics much do you? South Korea is so far the only us ally to sit shoulder to shoulder with the Chinese at Tienanmen Square, and up until South Korea being forced to accept the missile defense system, the relations was moving closer and closer.

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2108048/china-south-korea-vow-improve-ties-amid-missile-shield

Not forgetting that Moon a progressive is a lot more friendly to the idea of a friendship with the north and China.

And if you need to convince anyone you need to come with some actual proof other than your usual long winded posts , your word goes no where. Also the name-calling is just poor, at least try to debate probably and prove your points.

South Korea would get most of that I think.

So you've overthrown a dictator...

Now what?

The problem with this kind of wishful thinking is that people think it's easy to win the war. It is. Keeping the peace, on the other hand, is a different story. Looking back at Iraq during the Bush Administration and the Obama Administration's reluctance to keep American forces in, I highly doubt that the Trump Administration and the American public can stomach another war that will involve occupation, especially if it creates tension with the Russian and Chinese governments.

In addition, we would have to deal with millions of North Koreans, a possible refugee crisis that will flow to South Korea and China and possibly resistance from the North Korean military as well as insurgent groups. Also, even if we were successful, South Korea and Japan will most likely be in ruins courtesy of North Korean bombs.

Think long-term. The Bush Administration failed to do this with the 2003 Iraq War with inadequate manpower and lack of planning, and now Iraq is barely containing itself with the introduction of ISIL.

You can´t compare Korea to the middle-east.

Korea does not fight with a backwards religion and tribal conditions where Shia´s don´t like sunis and kurds are hated by most

Korea is luckily one people just divide because two world superpowers felt the need to duke it out by proxy instead of attacking each other countries.

Things haven't been reasonably well for north korea and south korea for decades. He's testing missiles and nukes and you're worried about something smaller taking it's place?

What planet are you from?

Most of the people of North Korea believe that Kim Jong Un is a god. And it's simplistic to suggest Korea is one people since you do have different cultural norms and dialects throughout Korea due to its separation in the 50s and 60s. In addition, while the Middle East is tribal, you still have two regional powers - Iran and Saudi Arabia -duking it out by funding allied governments and militant groups who fight for their interests. The divisions are still there: North Koreans vs South Koreans, and it's going to be difficult for North Koreans to realize that they're no better and that their "dear leader" is no God.

The Middle East was an example. Vietnam is also an example of U.S. intervention go awry courtesy of the Viet Cong, and the same will most likely happen in North Korea with loyalist factions forming into insurgent groups to attack U.S. forces, if we were to occupy North Korea. In fact, the same happened in Iraq when Saddam loyalists took advantage of the disbanded Iraqi army and used them to commit random attacks on U.S. troops.

So you think a violent and long-lasting war that will cost the lives of millions from both sides, displacement of people on both sides, disruption of economic activity on both sides, possible nuclear fallout, billions of dollars used to spend during the war to attack and after the war to rebuild and keep the peace, all the while dealing with the physical and emotional trauma of the people involved on both sides is a "small thing?" And this isn't just the Koreas. It's the countries allied with either North Korea and South Korea and the countries near them.

A bad peace is better than a good war. What the North Korean government is doing to its people is despicable but there are more risks than benefits. Even then, if you want a war, a preemptive strike on our part makes us look like an aggressor which makes our cause questionable and makes the other side sympathetic.

We've already been through two wars courtesy of the Bush Administration, with Iraq in shambles and Afghanistan becoming the longest war in U.S. military history. In addition, the conflict in Iraq has spread to Syria, creating one of the worst humanitarian disasters in the world. I highly doubt Trump or any other administration will do a better job in keeping the peace which is important for a post-conflict war.

Seriously, get out of the mindset that the U.S. can invade whatever country we like. It's romantic bullshit that costs the lives of millions while destroying the countries themselves.

I don't think it would be a long war at all.

and you actually think that every dictator and wannabe terrorist on this planet doesn't have a nuke. Its inevitable really, just buying time at this point. US has given nukes to saudis, and israel. Its a short distance from there to terrorists. You can probably get the blue prints for a nuke on the internet if you look hard enough.

You right wing nut jobs never think things through. Its become apparent with your invade first, ask questions later attitude. Then the whole climate change denial thing going on. Fact is the right is simply not suitable to remain in power, they are unqualified disgraces. The only reason they are in power is because of the ridiculous propoganda disguised as "free speech" to gullible masses. Something needs to be done to FIX the FIRST ammendment before anything else in the country happens.

No, not every terrorist or dictator has a nuke.