i think we've really got to hand it to kim jong il.i mean, the man must have balls so big, they have their own balls.
yesterday the highest court in north korea sentenced two american journalists to 12 years of hard labor, without possibility of appeal, for unspecified hostile acts against the state, and crossing the border illegally. first of all, if you're going to incarcerate someone for 12 years, i think you had better specify. second, illegally crossing the border gets that kind of punishment? you know, usually when you wander over the border of most countries, the response is either, "hey, my friend! you want smoke marijuana? come to my club. free drinks! sexy ladies!" or "you're not supposed to be here. go home" depending on the economic situation of the country you wandered into, and the one you wandered from.
well, apparently that's not how north korea rolls. north korea's policy seems to be based on that creepy old man who lives next door. you know the guy. every time your frisbee goes over the fence, he runs out and snatches it, "it's mine now you little brats! and you ain't getting it back! i told you to quit fucking around near my fence!"
i guess the upside here is that these ladies got off light. it could have been far worse in a country that invites south korean tourists to stay at fancy resorts, then shoots them twice in the back for walking around the grounds too early in the morning. then again, in the past north korea was known to punish journalists by sending them to "re-education camps". who can speak ill of free schools? and if it's anything like the re-education camp in a clockwork orange...
but what are we surprised about? north korea has been posturing for decades now. and kim jong is clearly having daddy issues with the other world leaders. while we were busy searching for saddam hussein's invisible weapons of mass destruction, and liberating the iraqis from whatever he was doing to them, kim jong il was literally broadcasting to the world that he was developing nuclear weapons and he planned on using them. any one who has ever taken care of a kid, or seen a kid around, or heard of children before, knows that this kind of behavior is unfounded in sound logic. a child who is known to act out will often make threats of bad behavior simply to get attention, but when it illicits no response, often the child will go through with it, or at least see how close he or she is going to be allowed to get before daddy or mommy finally pays some attention.
ok, so north korea isn't a child throwing a tantrum at the supermarket. it's much worse. it's a nuclear power throwing a tantrum in the political sphere. why are we playing the parent who just wants to let them "scream themselves out"? it isn't really a matter of dealing with the embarrassment of being the parent with the unruly child, then taking them home and putting them down for a nap. the UN's best idea so far has been to write resolutions condemning north korea's actions. and when, years later, that doesn't work, they simply write another one, using firmer language. oooooh, so scary. the UN doesn't approve of their behavior? big bad UN is writing a letter to your parents, mister!
this is not kindergarten, people! these are the leaders of the world, and they have serious weapons and militaries (the "good guys" and the "bad guys", both), and economies, and legal power. in fact, they have the most serious all of the above, in the world. the actions taken at this stage don't make or break snack time for a handful of toddlers. they affect the lives of 6.5 billion people, most of whom are innocent bystanders.
why are we screwing off on this issue? this is a man who ignores all UN censure of a nuclear weapon program that has been publicly acknowledged as being in development and testing for years. a man who named a 25 year old kid as his successor, not because of his proven skills or intellect, but because his eldest son embarrassed the family by trying and failing to take a vacation at tokyo disneyland (for god's sake, if clark griswold can do it...), and his second eldest son was deemed too effeminate to be a dictator. too effeminate? i know no less than 6 elderly (most older than kim) women who strike me as more threatening and powerful than kim jong il, based on appearance and behavioral affectations alone (this is a man who was singled out on october 3, 2007, by menwholooklikeoldlesbians.blogspot). a man who has been in a cold war with south korea since the 50's. a man who is still pretending the rest of the world is stuck in the cold war. a man with no allies.
we sent our special forces in to hunt and kill somali pirates so that we could save a cargo ship. we have had our troops in iraq basically straight through since bush senior to keep an eye on, and then remove from power a man who wasn't half the threat kim jong is. we dropped not one, but two atomic bombs on a country that, all indications are, was moments from surrendering anyway (i guess kim jong gets to drop one more before he's a bigger threat to the world than we are), simply because we saw a cold war with the soviet union in the cards, and we ourselves wanted to do some posturing. we went to war in vietnam and the philippines because we were getting a little rusty. yet, for 8 years we ignored a man who regularly broadcast video of himself or his underlings making blatant and explicit threats to our country, and who, in fact, successfully followed through on one very painful threat.
we actually let osama bin laden off the hook long enough for him to walk across europe, learn russian, and start a pub and trading post on a remote siberian highway where he could have wacky adventures with anthropologists and international treasure hunters (did that seem a little complicated? that's how much time we gave him. enough time to get complicated).
we spent so long with our thumbs up our asses looking for iraqi WMDs that weren't there, then making excuses for why we couldn't find them (he musta hided 'em real good. like under his bed er sumthin') but we didn't seem to think it was important to follow up on north korea's nuclear program they were telling us they had.
i could have found north korea's WMDs in about 5 seconds. just follow the sounds of the 100 megaton explosions, you fucktards!
so now here we are. still sitting around the halls of congress, jerking off and trying to figure out what we can rename our army in iraq so nobody will be mad that we aren't going to be pulling them out of there any time this side of 2012. still posing for photo opps and giving pretty, flowery speeches about how we sure are gonna go get that taliban, maybe, possibly, someday in the future, we've been thinking about probably discussing it. talking about two state solutions, and how we really wish we could help out the palestinians, but boy, we sure would look stupid if we voted to create a country that turned out to be a bunch of violent, greedy, bigoted, religious fanatic, war mongers that decades of violence, decades of attempted diplomacy, a people's militia, multiple treaties and summits, and two nobel peace prize winners couldn't bring anywhere near a peaceful coexistence (oops! our bad).
i'm a peaceful man. i don't want to go to war with anyone, and i'm not suggesting violence is the answer to this north korea problem. but i think it might be high time to realize that our organizations and coalitions, and whatnots, are only as important as the people who give a shit about them. a bunch of people signing a treaty, or a constitution, or a declaration, or a censure, or a resolution, or an affidavit, is no more legit than me standing on top of a mountain and declaring myself all-powerful emperor and high priest of the universe. it's not lofty declaration that gets things done, it's action, even if that action is simply to go over there and have this out in person. you don't break up with your girlfriend with a text message, and you don't overthrow a dictatorial regime with a stern letter asking him to please stop, we'd really appreciate it. so why doesn't the UN stop writing letters to kim jong's mommy, and go over there and remove his regime from power? and we don't have to go to war with his country for 12 years to do it (of course we don't. north korea doesn't have oil). this is a government with no allies. this is a government that shares a border with an opponent that happens to be one of the largest, richest, most powerful countries in the world. this is a government that runs a regime that publicly beheads its citizens for petty crimes like having your elbows on the table during the dessert course. i think we might, possibly be able to use this opportunity to practice changing the world for the better using some new, improved tactics that don't involve stealth airplanes with ray guns attached (but perhaps sharks with frickin' laser beams!), or land mine resistant armored vehicles, or innocent human casualties...i mean, uh, negligible collateral damage.
perhaps now is the time to stop acting like kindergartners who are faced with one of two choices: be the bully stealing other kids' lunch money, or be the kid curled up in the fetal position, covering his face and handing over the money so he doesn't get hurt.
perhaps now is the time to stop being passive aggressive (oh, you have nuclear weapons? that's cool, or not, or whatever... due to your weapons of mass destruction that we may or not be able to prove that you may or may not have that you may or may not have explicitly told us that you did or didn't have, and plus some other stuff that we can't remember right now, we are now going to invade, or liberate your country and then occupy, or train and stabilize it for the next decade and a half, because your leader was a tyrannical dictator, or maybe he was just a jerk who wouldn't share his cookies...). perhaps now is the time to walk right in to north korea, and say, listen, this isn't going to work anymore, this is why, and we're going to do something about it right now. do any of the north korean citizens have a problem with this? it's awfully quiet in here. oh, i see. they've all been sentenced to life terms in labor camps for unspecified hostile acts against the state, and walking too briskly (it looks like they have a purpose. this is very threatening to the state).
so it's on you, world leaders. are you going to let this guy push you (but more accurately, the innocent citizens and prisoners of north korea) around? or are you scared your going to go all HULK SMASH! if you try to stand up for yourselves?
let's try this: let's try using our big boy voice, and going over there, and confronting mr kim jong il with our words, like adults. i promise, if you don't get locked up in a labor camp for 12 years, i'll take you out for ice cream, later.
No comments:
Post a Comment