flat flat buy apartment

flat flat buy apartament

nedvizhimost sdayu tomsk nedvizhimost sdayu tomsk nedvizhimost sdayu tomsk nedvizhimost sdayu tomsk nedvizhimost sdayu tomsk nedvizhimost sdayu tomsk

muzey kvartira akterov samoylovyh sdayu kvartiru sankt peterburg posutochnaya stroitelstvo kvartir tolyatti kvartiry kirovogradskaya 24 kvartira elevatornaya snimu kvartiru odnokomnatnuyu kuzminki moskva kuplyu kvartiru obyavleniya g yubileynyy sdayu kvartiru kuplyu kvartiru caricyno

Good site! I'll stay reading! Keep improving!

For several days, I have attempted unsuccessfully to respond to some of these comments; unfortunately, there have been problems with the software here.

One disclaimer: I didn't write the title, and am not sure it's a completely accurate reflection of my point.

The most amusing comment was Karim's, which drags up the tired "old man's war" saw. For the record, I didn't go to Harvard and have never worked for a think tank. I did serve in the military, however, on active duty with the Army for over seven years. I spent four of those years in Korea. I have never been a part of any political elite. I'm a guy from South Dakota with a blog. I would be interested in knowing whether Karim has served.

I don't intent to defend every U.S. policy of the last century, as raised by the first comment, particularly those that (a) I don't agree with, or (b) have little logical relation to the specific ideas here. True, some people have proven less adept at self-government than others. Sometimes, there is trial and error in the process of democratization, especially when that process doesn't start with widespread agreement on the balance between order and tolerance. Maybe Algeria and Palestine aren't ready to agree on those answers, but this isn't a post about Algeria. It is a post about how to lay that foundation in the world's most isolated and repressive society, something we would ordinarily dismiss as impossible but for imperatives of this crisis and the absence of alternatives.

More generally, the subject here is how to solve the North Korean crisis at a minimum cost in human suffering. I think that part of the answer to that is to break down the wall of opacity between North Korea and the outside word, if nothing else, to improve the woeful state of our knowledge about events there, and their lack of knowledge about events elsewhere. I'm not proposing that we arm a resistance movement, because there isn't one to arm (yet). One could argue that we shouldn't have given arms to the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto because their struggle was suicidal, and because our exploitation of Crow Indian scouts denied us the moral authority to do so. Of course, we didn't help the Jews of Warsaw, and that is a far greater shame to America than anything you've cited.

The cost of action must always be measured against the cost of inaction. Let's consider the humanitarian status quo in North Korea:

* An estimated 2.5 million North Koreans starved to death during the Great Famine of the 1990's. During the same period, World Food Program appeals to donor nations were approximately $200 million per year, and North Korea's defense budget is approximately $5 billion per year. North Korea could have fed all of those people. It made a conscious decision to let them starve instead.

* Numerous NGO's report that North Korea discriminates against those who are disfavored in its complex 51-tiered political caste system (see previous link; more here). What I conclude from all of this is that the famine may have been, at least to a degree, more a case of political cleansing. At a bare minimum, it was preventable.

* North Korea's gulag system holds an estimated 250,000 inmates, including thousands of children. A large percentage of them die of starvation and disease each year.

* North Korea enforces the racial purity of its population by killing the (suspected) half-Chinese babies of refugee women China sends back to North Korea.

* In 2004, a BBC documentary alleged that North Korea uses a gas chamber to test its chemical weapons on gulag inmates. Specifically, the documentary quotes a former guard who described the gassing of an entire family of four. This prompted calls for further investigation by the Simon Wiesenthal Center (and complete silence from the U.N.).

For moral, humanitarian, and demographic purposes, North Korea is already a nation at war. That war has been so deadly to the North Korean people because it has been unilateral, and because North Korea has been able to maintain control through terror without much fear of dissenting views.

A decaying regime that refuses all appeals to reform will not last forever. Its end is likely to be bloody and chaotic, and it is both right and in our interests that we prepare for, mitigate, and hasten that as much as possible. One way to do that is to sow the ideas upon which any successful society must be based: tolerance, pluralism, and free markets. North Koreans are inherently less worthy of exposure to these ideas, or the chance to live a life worth living, than Canadians.

If you want to help, I can recommend three reputable and effective organizations: Liberty in North Korea, the North Korean Freedom Coalition, and the U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Korea.

http://www.rfa.org/english/about/listenercomments/comments_korean/

Ally? How about the Army in South Korea. All they need is for a few North Korean generals to stand down and they could move in. That would fix the problem.

10 million children are dying every single year in the world, with about 4 million of them in Sub-Saharan Africa alone, from preventable diseases and from hunger.

People care more about waging wars for the alleged purpose of saving lives by taking out more lives (current example in Iraq).

Millions of lives can be saved without bombs, tanks, killing and destruction, yet that's not important, worth lobbying or researching among the think-tanks.

With all due respect to the author, what did the article bring to the table? I think nothing.

We are told of the same excuses that were used against Iraq in order to justify the invasion and the occupation.

I urge people to question their government stand on this issue that may lead to some war again.

I urge people to specially question these neo-fascist think-tanks who dictate from their offices in Washington and else where what should be done to other countries/regimes/people.

Many congressmen are quite ignorant of world affairs; many can't even locate North Korea on the map. It is mainly the think-tanks run by "educated" people who direct them (and the white house), and convince them to wage these wars.

When faced with some war-mongering Harvard PhD from some think-tank vs some constituent from some small town, who wins most of the time in congress? You bet it is the Harvard guy. The constituent is given some weight when he is called to sacrifice his life for the Harvard guy plan.

That's what we are dealing with people. If the think-tanks or whatever they are want wars, let them fight them themselves.

This article was incredibly naive.

Kim Jong Il, Osama Bin Laden and Hugo Chavez and Amedinijahd all suffer the same delusion that The "West" is the cause of all the world's problems. They cry loudly Oh if America was not in thier way then they would be free to offer their Utopia to all mankind and all the people would live in peace and harmony. The 2 million citizens of North Korea who died of starvation in the last year and the teenage girls who had their fingernails torn off their fingers with pliers by the Taliban give us a glimpse of the paradise we can expect if the West does not continue to stand up to these barbarians. We can fight them now when they are small and weak or do nothing and take them on in a WWIII.

Aren't the people starving so badly that, oh, I dunno, kinda preoccupied with mounting a rebellion? I'm all for the North Koreans doing it themselves--shame on us for being the World Police--but can they actually do it? Do they have that capability? To me, it's dubious at best.

The adjustment of East Germans to a life without Communism has been difficult, and the weight of Communism has burdened North Koreans longer and far more comprehensively than it did East Germans.

What can we learn from this? One thing about all, I think, namely that a transition from Kim Jong Il's regime to anything else will of necessity be a lengthy and arduous process, probably one stretching over many years or even decades. As the unification of Germany was primarily a responsibility of the then-West German government, so too must reunification of Korea be the responsibility of the government in Seoul.

The United States can help in some ways, but we cannot look to the long-oppressed North Korean people as the solution to any of our problems with the regime in Pyongyang. Whether the regime remains secure, starts to totter, or collapses outright, the North Korean people will have too many problems of their own.

I'm sure that small uprisings have been attempted and more are probably to follow, but with such a lack of outside information for the general population, it's hard to believe that a real ground swell could exist for a popular uprising. These people are brought up being tought stories of Kim and his father that portay them as deities. You now have an entire generation that knows nothing other than the propoganda.

Well, there are several ways I can respond to that, to the extent I can untangle it. I haven't the time or the inclination to defend every U.S. policy of the last century, particularly those that (a) I don't agree with, or (b) have little logical relation to the specific ideas here. True, some people have proven less adept at self-government than others. Sometimes, there is trial and error in the process of democratization, especially when that process doesn't start with widespread agreement on the balance between order and tolerance. Maybe Algeria and Palestine aren't ready to agree on those answers, but this isn't a post about Algeria. It is a post about how to lay that foundation in the world's most isolated and repressive society, something we would ordinarily dismiss as impossible but for imperatives of this crisis and the absence of alternatives.

More generally, the subject here is how to solve the North Korean crisis at a minimum cost in human suffering. I'm not proposing that we arm a resistance movement, because there isn't one to arm (yet). One could argue that we shouldn't have given arms to the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto because their struggle was suicidal, and because our exploitation of Crow Indian scouts denied us the moral authority to do so. Of course, we didn't help the Jews of Warsaw, and that is a far greater shame to America than anything you've cited.

The cost of action must always be measured against the cost of inaction. Let's consider the humanitarian status quo in North Korea:

* An estimated 2.5 million North Koreans starved to death during the Great Famine of the 1990's. During the same period, World Food Program appeals to donor nations were approximately $200 million per year, and North Korea's defense budget is approximately $5 billion per year. North Korea could have fed all of those people. It made a conscious decision to let them starve instead.

* Numerous NGO's report that North Korea discriminates against those who are disfavored in its complex 51-tiered political caste system (see previous link; more here). What I conclude from all of this is that the famine may have been, at least to a degree, more a case of political cleansing. At a bare minimum, it was preventable.

* North Korea's gulag system holds an estimated 250,000 inmates, including thousands of children. A large percentage of them die of starvation and disease each year.

* North Korea enforces the racial purity of its population by killing the (suspected) half-Chinese babies of refugee women China sends back to North Korea.

* In 2004, a BBC documentary alleged that North Korea uses a gas chamber to test its chemical weapons on gulag inmates. Specifically, the documentary quotes a former guard who described the gassing of an entire family of four. This prompted calls for further investigation by the Simon Wiesenthal Center (and complete silence from the U.N.).

For moral, humanitarian, and demographic purposes, North Korea is already a nation at war. That war has been so deadly to the North Korean people because it has been unilateral, and because North Korea has been able to maintain control through terror without much fear of dissenting views.

A decaying regime that refuses all appeals to reform will not last forever. Its end is likely to be bloody and chaotic, and it is both right and in our interests that we prepare for, mitigate, and hasten that as much as possible. One way to do that is to sow the ideas upon which any successful society must be based: tolerance, pluralism, and free markets. North Koreans are inherently less worthy of exposure to these ideas, or the chance to live a life worth living, than Canadians.

If you want to help, I can recommend three reputable and effective organizations: Liberty in North Korea, the North Korean Freedom Coalition, and the U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Korea.

What about them (north korean people) being slaughtered at the thought of revolt...that's what has stop them for hundreds of years just like what stopped the German people who thought Hitler was a lunatic...and the Iraqis and so on and so on..It will always take the brave to stand up for cowardly people...the brave meaning the only people willing to die for others...AMERICANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mr Stanton's profered solution sounds reasonable, except for the tiny flaw that the record of the USA in backing promised "popular" uprisings and or democratic elections is rather unreliable, to say the least.
Perhaps Mr Stanton should consult with the Shiites in Iraq, perhaps he could check the history of Algeria, when "unfriendly democratic elections" took place. Further he should check on praised democracy in Lebanon, and the consequent damage by US made bombs [and friendly cluster bombs] delivered by US made helicopters, airplanes etc.
Were he in need of some further investigation into the idea of "democratic elections" and USA consistency perhaps he would review the problem to HAMAS caused by UNCLE SAM, the problems of Iran and Venezuela in the present [other countries which were certified to be honest elections]. If the present is not enough, perhaps the review of US policy and democracy in the past would elucidate the consistency and reliability of USA: fields of study without doubt will be Iran before the Shah, Peru, Chile, Nicaragua, etc ad infinitum.

In other words, for NK citizens following the proposed propaganda assult quite likely would lead to state assited Suicide for any who took action based on such information.
Thank you for your interst in the above.