T2K Today: Korea

[Raellus]

Some possible scenarios leading up to another shooting war between the Koreas.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2010052...08599199192800

[headquarters]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I know that Pyongyang is one of the world's best sabre rattlers and that this will probably go nowhere. On the other hand, N. Korea is a rogue state and is capable of just about anything.

If the North launched an attack on the South, the U.S. would be fully committed to providing direct military assistance. Although the situation has improved somewhat over the past two years, the all-volunteer U.S. military is still stretched pretty thin as it is. A war in Korea could conceivably lead to a reactivation of the draft.

With the U.S. preoccupied in Iraq, Afghanistan, and then Korea, I wonder what Iran would do. How would China react to a N. Korean invasion of the South? I doubt they'd support it. What if the N. Koreans started getting rolled back like in first Korean War, though? Would China intervene on its behalf?

Anyway, there are a number of ways one could extrapolate the current "crisis" into a T2K scenario. Although it sounds like a great game system, I think the Twilight 2013 should have gone the Second Korean War route in setting up Armageddon. It seems much more plausible than the convoluted scenario they presented.

I have sort of an answer - to involve another major power could happen by accident .

Pardon my forgetfulness - but I did see some T2K scenarios based on another Koraen war on the internet - " something Dragon something " - I just cant remember where and who has written it.
Not very helpful..

As for in game scenarios - and of course - this is only meant as a suggestion to a " timeline " and NOT intended as a political comment of any sort nor is it in any way intended to anger any particular group -save possibly the criminals in Pyongyang

What about a tit for tat scenario where the border skirmishes that the Norks love go wrong , and serious shooting starts .( there are so many border incidents on land,in the air and at sea that it resembles assymetrical warfare already any tangible escalation might trigger this incident in RL).

The instability of the Nork leadership and circumstance leads to "the Sea of Fire Scenario" ,where the Norks shoot Seoul and environs to smitherens and kill app 1000 000 ROK citizens ,crippeling the countrys economy , and in an already hampered global economy,trigger a downward spiral that rapidly leads to major instability in the industrialized world.(Think Greece only on a larger scale ).

The ongoing barrage in Seoul ( stopping it with conventional weapons might take weeks or months ) and major raids -possibly coupled by some surprise defeats for the ROK/US forces in the conventional war adds to the doom and gloom and whips up a frenzy in public opinion .

This in turn leads to a perception of the legality of answering with tactical nuclear weapons -which in turn leads to a well planned and executed infiltration attack on the US by Nork agents using some sort of WMDs and devestating attacks on critical infrastructure and symbolic targets - if indded it wasnt already in the works once the war went loud at the .38th parallell.

To involve any of the other major powers against the US would take some conjuring imho - but the terrorist route that 2013 has taken might be one approach - possibly with a powerful super villain faction not aligned with the official goverment in Beijing or Moscow or indeed Riyadh as the cloacked force behind the attacks,backing a faction that takes advantage of the chaos and open up a second front against the West..If this is discovered by any allied intelligence agency I dare say the mess would be of such proportions that only blowing the kitchen up will suffice as a cleaning operation .

A lot of ifs and maybes - I know .

[pmulcahy11b]

This a tangent, but I always thought that a good name for a Korea Sourcebook would be Morning Calm -- the full name of Korea (can't remember the full name of Korea, though) means "Land of the Morning Calm."

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

This a tangent, but I always thought that a good name for a Korea Sourcebook would be Morning Calm -- the full name of Korea (can't remember the full name of Korea, though) means "Land of the Morning Calm."

I think that's a brilliant suggestion...

[Jason Weiser]

http://www1.voanews.com/english/news...-95004154.html

http://www.informationdissemination.net/

The one about the Nork midget subs is particularly enlightening.

http://www.businessinsider.com/china...h-korea-2010-5

And this short piece, says a lot when the Chinese are that nervous.

The links keep coming: This paragraph is especially enlightening:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7138002.ece

A US aircraft has been sent from the Japanese island of Okinawa to spy on the North, and the Japanese government has been informed of an unusually high level of troop movements on the northern side of the inter-Korean border, The Times learnt today. Meanwhile, Pyongyang announced that it will nullify a communications arrangement set up to prevent conflict between the two countries’ navies.

[pmulcahy11b]

I'm watching the crawler under Obama's press conference on MSNBC right now -- the Chinese say they're going to join the US and South Korea in condemning North Korean actions as of late. Interesting.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

I think that's a brilliant suggestion...

It does have sort of an ironic touch in a T2K world.

[Jason Weiser]

http://english.chosun.com/site/data/...052701263.html

Looks like we're really paying attention....Watchcon 2. And that a/c from Okinawa? Probably Rivet Joint or whatever they're calling her now.

[pmulcahy11b]

Watchcon 2...not a good indication at all...

[simonmark6]

I know it's random but I love the fact that the site Jason linked to has an advert for relocating to North Korea. Chances are at the moment that the only Americans relocating to North Korea will be riding tanks.

[Webstral]

There are so many variables. I've just read a piece by a USAF pilot who thinks we'll finish it all in two hours. I hope he's right, but the Greeks taught us the dangers of hubris.

All of the planning that has gone into this thing makes me think that for every measure there is a countermeasure and a counter-countermeasure ad nauseum. How much do the NKs know about our capabilities? What kinds of countermeasures have they taken at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels? To what degree is our firepower going to be so overwhelming that even the NKs can stand against it, and to what degree will our firepower be neutralized by imaginative and/or effective countermeasures? I honestly don't know the answers. In the mid-90's, I might have said I had a loose grasp on what was going on in Korea. Now, I just don't have any current information.

What I do know is that I am very, very wary of accepting the idea that we would destroy the DPRK's ability to wage war in the space of a few hours. That just seems too good to be true. It also implies that the NKs haven't thought this thing through. Comparisons between Iraq and North Korea have at least as many entries in the unlike column as the alike column.

Hopefully, it's all just posturing. Hopefully, something won't go terribly wrong somewhere as everyone runs around playing their part during the posturing.

Webstral

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Webstral

Hopefully, it's all just posturing. Hopefully, something won't go terribly wrong somewhere as everyone runs around playing their part during the posturing.

The Watchcon went to 2 when Kim Il-Sung died and Kim Jong-Il took over. We were worried and closely monitoring the situation in North Korea for about a month. We were ready to go at any moment. That managed to resolve itself; hopefully this will too.

[Matt W]

Apologies if someone has already linked to this
http://www.washingtonspeakers.com/pr...Game.07.05.pdf

It's a report on a wargame/brainstorming session held in 2005 by "The Atlantic" magazine. The results (and opinions) make interesting reading. Incidentally, the pdf also mentions a 1961 treaty that - if NK is invaded - obliges China to commit troops in support of North Korea.

[Webstral]

What I like about the paper Matt linked us to is the idea that war in Korea is not simply a matter of dropping some, or a slew, of precision munitions on NK conventional forces as they strike south across the DMZ. It's not even about firing a ton of cruise missiles and other precision munitions at targets in the PDRK to wreck the North Korean ability to wage war. Even if we achieve a smashing conventional victory in defeating Northern aggression against the South, we are confronted with the North's possible NBC actions, possible ongoing infiltration and sabotage, possible attacks on shipping by NK submarines, and the ongoing existence of the regime. If the loss of a conventional war in Korea leads to the collapse of the Kim regime, the crisis takes on a whole new dimension that is not amenable to solution by JDAM. If Iraq and Afghanistan have shown us anything, it's that we can't skimp on occupation forces. Where are a half-million (or more) riflemen supposed to come from? I'm past the point where I'm going to volunteer for a year of peacekeeping in Korea, and I'm too old to be drafted.

Not all problems can be solved with high explosives.

Webstral

[headquarters]

Originally Posted by simonmark6

I know it's random but I love the fact that the site Jason linked to has an advert for relocating to North Korea. Chances are at the moment that the only Americans relocating to North Korea will be riding tanks.

or they are incredibly optimistic - I mean - come on...relocate to sunny North Korea ???

LOL!

[headquarters]

Originally Posted by Webstral

What I like about the paper Matt linked us to is the idea that war in Korea is not simply a matter of dropping some, or a slew, of precision munitions on NK conventional forces as they strike south across the DMZ. It's not even about firing a ton of cruise missiles and other precision munitions at targets in the PDRK to wreck the North Korean ability to wage war. Even if we achieve a smashing conventional victory in defeating Northern aggression against the South, we are confronted with the North's possible NBC actions, possible ongoing infiltration and sabotage, possible attacks on shipping by NK submarines, and the ongoing existence of the regime. If the loss of a conventional war in Korea leads to the collapse of the Kim regime, the crisis takes on a whole new dimension that is not amenable to solution by JDAM. If Iraq and Afghanistan have shown us anything, it's that we can't skimp on occupation forces. Where are a half-million (or more) riflemen supposed to come from? I'm past the point where I'm going to volunteer for a year of peacekeeping in Korea, and I'm too old to be drafted.

Not all problems can be solved with high explosives.

Webstral

Firstly - these are just opinions that I want to share to see what others think of them - and since the thread is somewhat political - there is no intent to provoke etc etc .Just saying - giving my 2 cents ,I would be happy to read a reply that proves me wrong as I care not for any dictatorship,but as of late has concluded that the situation seems bleak for the good guys.

As it stands today - the US/ROK could not satisfactorily win a second Korean war .I will explain what I mean by "win" - but in essence what Web says - you might kill most of their troops,down their MIGs and get three major damage results to each T-55 they have .They will still need to be invaded and pacified at a cost geater than Iraq and other operations combined.there is little in the way of natural resources to help pay the bill .And drastic measures such as a draft AND/OR an enthusiastic coalition of allies with big contributions is needed.In todays economy this doesnt seem possible.

That USAF pilot who said it would all be over in a matter of hours cannot be expected to be taken seriously .

The NK forces has had over 50 years to dig in ,stock up and prepare for round two .Whereas the west and the UN lead coalition has tried to avoid the war sparking up again ( its not formally over ) and opted for a hope for peace ,the NK has thrived on the policy of tension -indeed their main rationale for keeping the elites in power over there has been the image they have created of the West as a dangerous and unthrustworthy enemy that needs to be guarded against at all times - lest "paradise" be lost .

A North Korea on the offensive in traditional terms is higly unlikely .There is little chance of hordes of NK troops crossing the DMZ .In the open , the allies have the upper hand.

To expose the army to the USAF and other branches airpower would be folly - the Norks know this , and in my opinion they have tailored their military to oppose the US and ROK forces in a defensive manner that is laid out in a way that the conflict will drag out and become a stalemate or war of attrition .
In a defensive battle , the relative superiority of the US/ROK/UN forces would be canceled out to some extent - I believe to the extent that it would in effect be a huge gamble to try a military solution with the NK.

A win will not be assured -even in terms of beating their military forces conventionally .( Wow- western militaries loosing a conventional all out war /or a draw - a situation unheard of for a long time .)

If they can achieve this protracted battle , the political situation in the ROK and the US will turn to their advantage and the war will simmer down and new talks will be held and the cease fire will once again take effect .

Only now , the North Koreans will have a galvanized populace behind them ,the leaders will have been proven right .

The tribulations that the sanctions and economic mismanagment has caused the civilians will not lead to popular uprising or regime change - they will only lead to continued suffering for the populace and strengthen the position of the Kims or the junta that will follow them once they are gone .

As for the Chinese intervening on "our " side - it is possible given the close economic ties between the West and China - but they face the exact same military problem at the nothern border and in its hinterland as the west does at the 38th parallell.The Norks have fortified this direction too - north of Pyongyang is a major fortified area etc .

Add into the equation that the Norks have the possibility to strike against international shipping lanes,possibly have wmds,that they have Seoul and 10 million South Koreans in range of their artillery, the fact that the US would need 12 months -probably much longer - to build up a force to overthrow the regime .

I dare say that the reason that they havent already been hit by us is the fact that it just isnt possible to win unless you get the world to accept millions of dead and major disturbances in global economy as a price.

all in my humble opinion of course .

[General Pain]

enter the north north-korean jungles with one missile - and fire it away against the Nork elite - hopefully hitting the target. Any GM will probably say the elite was at a tea/torturing party at one of their slave-camps so the fight must move there.

Obstacles include loads of Norks in various combat effectivnes in jungle warfare, ending in a glorius stealth mission in one of the palaces of the Nork Elite. Ramafacations would include anything from global economic instability , increased oil prices to all out global war.

...puts ideas to my mind it does

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by headquarters

As it stands today - the US/ROK could not satisfactorily win a second Korean war .I will explain what I mean by "win" - but in essence what Web says - you might kill most of their troops,down their MIGs and get three major damage results to each T-55 they have .They will still need to be invaded and pacified at a cost geater than Iraq and other operations combined.there is little in the way of natural resources to help pay the bill .And drastic measures such as a draft AND/OR an enthusiastic coalition of allies with big contributions is needed.In todays economy this doesnt seem possible.

Well, the ROK Army could quite successfully repel an invasion by the North. Reunification is quite another matter -- the primary unifying force would have to come from the North Korean and South Korean people themselves, just as it did in Germany. You can't force democracy on anyone -- that pretty much goes against the very definition of democracy, and democracy won't take root unless the people of a country are ready for it and want it. That's something Bush and Cheney didn't bother to think about during their ill-conceived and unnecessary invasion of Iraq, and it won't work in Afghanistan either.

[headquarters]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Well, the ROK Army could quite successfully repel an invasion by the North. Reunification is quite another matter -- the primary unifying force would have to come from the North Korean and South Korean people themselves, just as it did in Germany. You can't force democracy on anyone -- that pretty much goes against the very definition of democracy, and democracy won't take root unless the people of a country are ready for it and want it. That's something Bush and Cheney didn't bother to think about during their ill-conceived and unnecessary invasion of Iraq, and it won't work in Afghanistan either.

I agree. The ROK could repel an invasion- at great cost to their nation .So my statements will only be true if the war takes another form .If the NK come screaming across the DMZ in force ,and the USAF and USN could respond quickly enough ,they would be slaughtered.
Reunification through force would be another matter .

[Jason Weiser]

The latest:

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/nati...05600315F.HTML

http://www.businessinsider.com/chine...he-curb-2010-5

[Webstral]

For the moment, let's assume that the North Koreans have some understanding of what they are up against in terms of Allied (my term, for simplicity's sake) firepower. Let's assume that they either know they'll get their fourth points of contact kicked and therefore won't do much more than rattle sabers or that they have a game plan more nuanced than lining up their forces in neat rows on the MSRs to be pounded to hamburger and flaming ruin by the Allies. If I’m wrong, then the North Koreans are defeated in three days or less and everyone who thinks brute, albeit precision, fires will win the day can say they said so. If I’m right, we need to think about more than Tomahawks and F-16s lining up to hit the latest version of the Highway of Death.

If the North Koreans are just rattling their sabers a bit more vigorously than usual, we can go back to worrying about the economy in a little while. If there’s a different story, it may play out in a number of ways.

We don’t know a lot about what goes on inside North Korea. This lack of intelligence means that we don’t have a good grasp of power politics in the North. I’ve read that Kim Jong-Il is anxious about getting his son set up as the next leader. If there is a succession crisis brewing, a war is a wonderful way to unite the population—at least for the time being. A war of aggression may not be practical, but a defensive war—that’s gold. An escalation of incidents that leads to an Allied bombardment of the North could be just what the doctor ordered to get truculent but hard-to-replace Communists in line behind Kim’s son. Whether it’s a good idea or not is irrelevant. It’s about what the Dear Leader believes. As for provoking an Allied bombardment of the North, the People’s Democratic Republic has a wide variety of tools besides outright invasion of the ROK.

A series of escalating incidents, perhaps moving through the use of chemical weapons against the South, may provoke an Allied invasion of the North to put an end to the affair. In this arena, the Allies may find themselves hard-pressed. If Kim’s objective is to solidify his passing of the torch to his son, heroic defense of the homeland under the increasingly visible leadership of his son may fit the bill. Kim is a totalitarian dictator. He may be willing to countenance massive destruction and loss of life in his nation to secure his dynasty. I don’t know. I don’t know who knows, which is part of the problem.

Going forward, Kim may believe that massive casualties among the ROK populace and Allied troops may bring the Allies to the bargaining table when the northward offensive runs out of steam (assuming it runs out of steam). Maybe he’s right. Maybe he’s not. If he’s right, then he wins—despite whatever damage the PDRK suffers. If he’s wrong, then maybe he loses his head. Someone new takes control of the PDRK. Maybe the PDRK can’t be held together once the chocks have been knocked out. If it can, we’re stuck with an unknown in power in Pyongyang. If the PDRK collapses, the Allies are left holding the bag. There are many way for that to get quite ugly.

How much of this Kim has considered is hard for anyone to say. Ruthless dictators can be very tight-lipped about such things. How likely Kim considers any of the myriad of possible outcomes is also very difficult to say but absolutely crucial in predicting where all of this might be going.

Heck, it might not have anything to do with the Kim dynasty. Maybe the sub that fired on the ROK corvette didn’t mean to do it. Maybe Kim did mean it for some other purpose entirely. Maybe a replacement leader hopeful somewhere in North Korea ordered the action to discomfit the Dear Leader as part of the chess game at whose configuration we can only guess. Maybe Kim got bored. Maybe Kim is looking to leverage the West for more of something that he needs. So far, such a strategy doesn’t appear to be paying off, but that doesn’t mean the strategy can’t still pay off or that Kim hasn’t miscalculated badly.

I bring all of this up because an intelligent discussion of where the current crisis might go should move beyond the idea that the USAF and the USN (with its tomahawks) are going to pulverize the southward-bound NK Army on the roads and destroy critical targets and infrastructure with precision bombardment. If Kim is a complete fool, we’ve got him. If not, or if he listens to his generals, then he’s got something more nuanced than lining up his troops and facilities like ducks in a shooting gallery.

Simply put, North Korea has strengths. If the NKs have been paying attention to their Sun Tzu lessons, then they will try to maneuver the Allies into choosing between giving the North what it wants or forcing the Allies to operate in the North’s area of strength and not the other way around. Since we’re all more-or-less in agreement that a straightforward invasion of the ROK is untenable, let’s think of what else could be in the works.

Webstral

[Eddie]

JFTR, North Korea continues to dig new tunnels daily. The Highway of Death Revisited is a pretty unlikely occurrence, IMO.

Like other nations, our intel might not be so good on the inside of his country, but his intel on the outside is fairly good. I'm sure he's realized that large masses of assets will make good targets.

That said, other than a two-hour briefing/lecture from MG Tucker that I mentioned in another thread, I don't have any more real answers than Web does.

[jester]

Here are two other things that I haven't seen mentioned, or have I missed them.

the Norths Nukes. How many do they have? Will they use them? Most likely. That is a deterent and as we have seen in the last few years a chip that is used to blackmail aid and to wratchet up the brinkmanship, so they crank it up, extort aid and then return to the status quo.

China; in reguards of Immigration.

I have read reports that China has as big an immigration problem with N. Koreans fleeing their own country and sneaking into China as we here in the US have with the states on our Southern Border.

So, if there were a confligration I would imagine that alot of civilians from the North would pour into China from N. Korea. Can China handle such an influx when they are having economic troubles of their own? And would they stand for it? An unstable N. Korea where they would have to pour more aid into than they already are, with a population that is flooding their country and provinces and most likely wreaking havoc there. Would they either send in masses of troops to lock the border down? Or would they send forces into Korea to establish their own puppet leader, or aid the North?

We must also remember that in Asia the idea of "Face" is important. And has been the cause of some of the issues that the US has had with China in recent years, 2001 the colission of the Electronics Survielance plane and the Mig, the shadowing of US vessels by Chinese Submarines, the "lost" Chinese Submarines operating in Japanese waters.

Those are efforts of China to expand their sphere of influence. Since they are making efforts to expand their industrial capacity and their military capacity. After all, the US and its bases are a bit of a slap in the face to China, as we were the big dog in the area, and a loss of face.

So, how does "face" come into play with the Chinese in the event of hostilities between the two Koreas? Would they take direct action aiding the North? Move in on their own against the North? Take a truly passive stance? Take a semi passive stance against the North? Take a semi passive stance against Western Support and intervention of the South?

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by jester

I have read reports that China has as big an immigration problem with N. Koreans fleeing their own country and sneaking into China as we here in the US have with the states on our Southern Border.

So, if there were a confligration I would imagine that alot of civilians from the North would pour into China from N. Korea. Can China handle such an influx when they are having economic troubles of their own? And would they stand for it?

This is a good point. Waves of refugees would give China a fait accompli to invade N. Korea, perhaps just to create a "buffer" a few miles deep. Presumably, this would include the seizure of that port Matt mentioned.

[headquarters]

Again I underline that these are only my speculations...

I believe that internal politics in Pyongyang might be a factor that can escalate the situation too.In a play to manouver their faction to remain in power, war against outside powers is tried and tested.

What form it would take is hard to say - artillery exchanges and the retaliation war from the allies by sea and air could serve as a useful tool for the KIMs to galvanize support behind them and stay in power -even though the military suffer sa hammering from the allies.

The highway of death scenario has been thoroughly analyzed by NK - they will likely make only small sallies across the DMZ .Their main force will be spread out in an in depth defense north of the DMZ-hoping that this will lead to allied reluctance to see a war through .Ousting the regime by air is nigh on impossible imho.

After the dust settles and the bombardments are over the Kims are still in power and their grip still firm .

Their initial escalation will start much like the one we see now - agressive posturing ,incidents with loss of life and materiel and psy ops - this way they hope to coax the allies into "unfavourable political ( and geographical ) " terrain .Maybe sacrificing something like an airliner/cargoship that they sink themselves to have a tale for their propagandists to serve the world press etc.Assymetrial warfare type attacks are highly likely in a situation like this -indeed US soil and waters could be at risk of such.But this is ofcourse a knifes edge -it might lead to the US seeing no way out but winning outright at all costs.

I think there is a very real risk that this will occur in the next decade - as long as the Kims feel their power slipping .

But things could change - the US could get favourable results sooner rather than later in Stan and Iraq, and the economy could recover more rapidly than expected -leading to the odds for a coalition of Allies that actually will grit their teeth and see the war through rather than having to accept sort of a draw due to the enormous cost in life ousting the current regime will demand.Other factors would need to click into place as well of course .The NK populace might rise up and hope for outside intervention.

Distatseful as it may seem , propping up the regime until the Kims die off and a "new hand of leaders " is dealt might be the only alternative to a devastating war with hundreds of thousands dead -or indeed millions...

As for the "shooting range war" that some envision ,where the NK forces are eliminated enmasse by airpower alone seems highly unlikely .The massive columns that advanced on Baghdad would be the ideal scenario for the NK forces - provided their gamble onallied public support faltering holds water.

Just one guys opinion .

Wish I could see other options to get rid of the regime and liberate the people of NK .I think conventional war to topple it would entail battles on pair with the Korean War of 50-53 or possibly the second world war in terms of feriocity.

Not very optmistic prospects then from the Northern Branch of Twilighters United.

[kato13]

I had to login to move a thread from the archive and this thread caught my eye. I have lived in South Korea for about a quarter of the last five years, so this subject is obviously very important to me.

Some points. The South Koreans view the populace of the North as cousins held hostage. Everyone I have talked to desires reunification despite the monetary cost. The cost in blood is where people differ how reunification should be achieved.

Regarding manpower necessary to occupy the North, the ROK has a very capable army and massive reserves. As I mentioned above the motivation to unify is strong and I expect for at least a year all South Koreans (who are very duty bound) would make the sacrifices necessary.

Going into a little depth in to the duty they have towards their countrymen, I will tell you of one of the expectation of their hospitals. If someone is in long term recovery a family member is expected to come into the hospital and perform many of the duties that nurses would normally handle. If a person does not have a relative to help them, the family members of the other people in the room (their were 8 in the case I saw) will pull together to assist that person. It is not considered an annoyance, inconvenience, or hardship it is just their duty.

I have an anecdote about the brainwashing of the North Korean populace as well. While I was in Korea I happened to see a documentary about a North Korean woman who built a raft and floated something like 20km to the South. She was a 20 something widow with two children. From what I gathered she lived a simple agrarian life made much harder by the death of her husband. It was so hard in fact that while she worked in the market she would send her 3 and 5 year old children to look around the area of the market where rice was traded to pick up individual grains of rice which had escaped the bags.

Her five year old child was getting ill and she took him to the doctor. The doctors told her that he had leukemia and simply was going to die. They even went so far as to suggest that she give more of her meager food supply to the three year old since the five year old was a lost cause.

This woman, who in my mind seems to represent the average population, knew that the lives of her children would be better in the South. All that it took for her to overcome the fear she had of the consequences of an attempted escape was the pending death of one of her children. If you remove that fear I feel a vast majority of the North Korean population will be ecstatic about reunification.

To finish this post on a happy note the North Korean woman arrived safely and her son was successfully treated. She has a job and the last scene in the documentary showed them preparing for a substantial meal while the boy, now 8, was playing an X-box.

[Eddie]

Originally Posted by kato13

She has a job and the last scene in the documentary showed them preparing for a substantial meal while the boy, now 8, was playing an X-box.

So what you're saying is, capitalism can cure leukemia!

[Grimace]

Or perhaps he was indicating that things are a lot worse off in North Korea compared to South Korea and that the woman and her children's life is better in the South than in the North.

This whole Korea thing is kind of eerie as this is what T.R. and I came up with as the causal event that propelled the world towards our reworked "Twilight". It all depends on whether China works with or against North Korea as to whether our altered history ends up becoming a reality. Spooky.

[Eddie]

Originally Posted by Grimace

Or perhaps he was indicating that things are a lot worse off in North Korea compared to South Korea and that the woman and her children's life is better in the South than in the North.

In case you missed it, it was a joke.

[Abbott Shaull]

Maybe the joke was lost in delivery! I missed it too, then again I tend to ignore........