Great news for travelers out there, as North Korea will be opening its borders to international tourism. Sure, cell phones will be confiscated and you will have two government "chaperons" following you everywhere; but you will finally get the opportunity to experience this beautiful utopia in the flesh. Who wouldn't want to golf the same course where Dear Leader famously shot 11 holes in one in a single round? The amusement park "POW Land" is still in the planning stages...
All joking aside, it is a step in the right direction that the North Koreans will start letting people in; but it remains unclear how many they are going to let out. I'm sure most tourists will be allowed to leave, but question how many North Korean citizens will be permitted to vacation abroad. Anyone planning to visit North Korea should go to great lengths to memorize all of their laws inside and out. The last place you want to end up is in a North Korean prison without your phone.
Today's poll question; are you interested in taking a vacation to North Korea?
Showing posts with label Korea. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Korea. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Friday, December 30, 2011
12 Predictions For 2012
Every year I attempt to make some predictions for the upcoming 12 months. Last year at this time I predicted a spring federal election, a Conservative majority, and that Ignatieff would be ousted as Liberal leader. While those predictions came true, roughly 70% of my forecasts were wrong. With that being said, what do I think is going to happen in 2012? Today's poll question; which of these predictions is most likely to happen?
1. Planet outlives Mayan Calendar
2. Assad regime ousted in Syria
3. Putin remains in charge of Russia
4. Few if any emerge to challenge Rae for Liberal leadership
5. Allison Redford will be defeated in pending election
6. Sidney Crosby plays fewer than 30 games in calendar year
7. Romney defeated by Obama
8. Republicans take back Senate
9. There will be no war with North Korea
10. There will be hostilities with Iran
11. The NDP will be polling below 20%
12. Irwin Cotler will not retire, even if he had previously been considering it.
1. Planet outlives Mayan Calendar
2. Assad regime ousted in Syria
3. Putin remains in charge of Russia
4. Few if any emerge to challenge Rae for Liberal leadership
5. Allison Redford will be defeated in pending election
6. Sidney Crosby plays fewer than 30 games in calendar year
7. Romney defeated by Obama
8. Republicans take back Senate
9. There will be no war with North Korea
10. There will be hostilities with Iran
11. The NDP will be polling below 20%
12. Irwin Cotler will not retire, even if he had previously been considering it.
Monday, July 11, 2011
North Korea To Chair UN Conference On Military Disarmament? What?
The United Nations never ceases to amaze me in the absolute ridiculousness of some of their decisions. North Korea has now been chosen to chair a UN Conference on military disarmament, and Canada will be proudly boycotting the work of this body as we should. North Korea is one of the worst perpetrators in the development and proliferation of nuclear weapons who frequently fires missiles, torpedoes, rockets, and bullets at their sovereign neighbours. This conference should not be taken seriously and any policies produced by it should be soundly rejected. N.Korea is the worst possible country that could have been chosen to chair this conference, short of maybe Myanmar. Previous ludicrous appointments include Muamar Gaddafi to the UN Council on human rights. You will be pleased to know that Gaddafi's membership on that council has been suspended since he began massacring his own people. We'll see, maybe NK's chair of this conference will be suspended the next time they sink a South Korean navy ship.
The United Nations has become a joke. Getting denied a spot on the security council was actually a great compliment when you examine the selection criteria for other appointments.
The United Nations has become a joke. Getting denied a spot on the security council was actually a great compliment when you examine the selection criteria for other appointments.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
A Tale Of Two Koreas
When I see North Korea launch a major artillery attack on South Korea with a building pattern of aggression, my first thought is what the hell are they thinking? They can't possibly want to re-ignite the Korean war, which is technically still a war (cease fire, no peace agreement). Yet at the same time the leadership there is borderline insane, and I doubt it would take more than a puppet show to convince them that they could win another major conflict against an Asian Tiger (supported militarily by the USA).
It would seem that the most likely scenario is that North Korea is using a show of force in an attempt to scare the international community into a better extortion deal. The question is, how much more should South Korea be expected to endure in order to secure a "golden parachute" for Kim Jong Ill?
What's China saying? Only Beijing has sway over Pyongyang.
It would seem that the most likely scenario is that North Korea is using a show of force in an attempt to scare the international community into a better extortion deal. The question is, how much more should South Korea be expected to endure in order to secure a "golden parachute" for Kim Jong Ill?
What's China saying? Only Beijing has sway over Pyongyang.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Korean War Games
Now we know what South Korea and the United States will do in response to the North Korean sinking of a South Korean Navy vessel; they are going to hold war games to show off their military capabilities to Kim Jong Il. In addition they will toughen already tough sanctions, to try and serve some sort of punishment in addition to the military show deterrent. Will it make any difference? I have absolutely no idea how that nut will respond to this strategy. Part of what makes that little person so dangerous in this big world is that he is pathologically insane and completely unpredictable.
For Canada's part, we really don't engage in any trade with North Korea, so we don't really have anything to pull from the table. The best we can do is publicly support South Korea and condemn the actions. I did some recent polling on this matter, but I did not include war games as an option. There are a lot of nerves over a potential North Korean full scale attack on the South if there is a military retaliation. Perhaps the concerns are justified and this strategy will work, I just can't predict a rational response from an unpredictable despot.
What is the most appropriate response to North Korea sinking a South Korean navy ship?
Military Strike (64%)
Tougher Sanctions (20%)
Tough Diplomacy (9%)
Pretend it Never Happened (5%)
For Canada's part, we really don't engage in any trade with North Korea, so we don't really have anything to pull from the table. The best we can do is publicly support South Korea and condemn the actions. I did some recent polling on this matter, but I did not include war games as an option. There are a lot of nerves over a potential North Korean full scale attack on the South if there is a military retaliation. Perhaps the concerns are justified and this strategy will work, I just can't predict a rational response from an unpredictable despot.
What is the most appropriate response to North Korea sinking a South Korean navy ship?
Military Strike (64%)
Tougher Sanctions (20%)
Tough Diplomacy (9%)
Pretend it Never Happened (5%)
Monday, May 24, 2010
Who Is Earth's Most Evil Leader?
Who do you think is the most evil leader in the world? There are two metrics to consider, 1) total amount of evil, 2) capability of causing harm. As Conservatives we all agree that the world is going to be destroyed by an anti-Christ in the near future, so who is that ultimate bad guy most likely to be? Being a Conservative has nothing to do with personal freedoms and small government, it is about preparing everyone to die. I don't know about you, but that's why I'm a Conservative. (that's sarcasm by the way)...
Here is my starting list, am I forgetting anyone? I am looking for leaders currently leading a country. Obama doesn't count. I don't believe he's evil, just wrong.
1) Kim Jong Ill (North Korea)
2) The Ayatollah (Iran)
3) Hugo Chavez (Venezuela)
4) Vladimir Putin (Russia)
5) The Burmese Military junta
6) That guy in the Sudan
7) Qadaffy (Lybia)
Here is my starting list, am I forgetting anyone? I am looking for leaders currently leading a country. Obama doesn't count. I don't believe he's evil, just wrong.
1) Kim Jong Ill (North Korea)
2) The Ayatollah (Iran)
3) Hugo Chavez (Venezuela)
4) Vladimir Putin (Russia)
5) The Burmese Military junta
6) That guy in the Sudan
7) Qadaffy (Lybia)
Thursday, May 20, 2010
North Korean Act Of War?
If what the news is reporting is true and a North Korean submarine sank a South Korean navy ship, then that is an act of war. The question is will anybody even do anything about this? I would be shocked if Barak Obama responds with any action more forceful than a stern speech. I don't think anyone (other than maybe a few North Korean Generals) wants to see the resumption of war in the Korean peninsula, but how do you respond to acts of war with anything other than war? Are further sanctions beyond the ones already in place going to deter this kind of unprovoked violence? Is a really stern speech going to scare Kim Jong Ill?
I would like to see a military response, because frankly the tough diplomacy route has been tried in the past, sanctions have been tried in the past, and we still have North Korea attacking the South Korean navy! What else is there? Is there a bright idea out there that I haven't thought of yet?
I would like to see a military response, because frankly the tough diplomacy route has been tried in the past, sanctions have been tried in the past, and we still have North Korea attacking the South Korean navy! What else is there? Is there a bright idea out there that I haven't thought of yet?
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Funding Olympic Sports
There have been some magnificent stories during these Winter Games, and it has been exciting watching the scattered successes and Canadian pride on parade every day in Vancouver. I am delighted that we have had the opportunity to host these games, and now I am trying to make up my mind on future federal funding of Olympic sports. I supported the "Own the Podium" campaign because I am a fan of the Winter Olympics and I wanted to increase our probability of winning medals through increased funding. But having watched what our increased spending has yielded on the field of battle, I'm not satisfied, and I am not willing to spend more.
I am trending to the opinion that I think any federal spending on athletics should be at the youth level, aged high school or younger. Building and maintaining facilities for them to compete, ensuring that young people have the opportunity to participate in recreational competition. I think that benefits us as a society. But I'm sorry, the story "26 year old Johnny just wants to ski jump all day every day to pursue his dream of an Olympic medal, but he can't ski jump all day and make enough money to support his lifestyle" it's not pulling at my heart strings anymore. I support spending on youth programs and athletic infrastructure to promote healthy living, but am turning my back on the idea of federally subsidized salaries for adult athletes.
As a consumer and a sports fan I will purchase products endorsed by amateur athletes. I will pay money to attend events or to use various recreational facilities and put money back into the system. But I have become more skeptical of government funding for the adult programs. I will have to investigate further exactly how much money is being spent, and where cuts could be made. To start, I would like to pull any and all funding for our alpine ski program, even if that draws the ire of Nancy Greene. Sorry guys, it's not working out for me. If we are going to knock down Kevin Page's "structural deficit" then we will have to make some difficult choices. Some choices are a lot easier than others.
There once was a time when I believed that we should model the Australian system and spend the money. But now I only want to provide young people with the opportunity to compete, and once you grow up you are not entitled to a career. I'm sure that athletics represents a tiny fraction of our total expenditures and that we won't be saving an enormous sum of money by cutting funding, but a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single DNF.
And why is it that I am now required to feel empathy when an athlete wipes out? Is it now politically incorrect to say "dude, that sucked"? That ski cross guy today was a spectacular failure. Now we have fallen behind Switzerland and Korea in the medal standings.
I am trending to the opinion that I think any federal spending on athletics should be at the youth level, aged high school or younger. Building and maintaining facilities for them to compete, ensuring that young people have the opportunity to participate in recreational competition. I think that benefits us as a society. But I'm sorry, the story "26 year old Johnny just wants to ski jump all day every day to pursue his dream of an Olympic medal, but he can't ski jump all day and make enough money to support his lifestyle" it's not pulling at my heart strings anymore. I support spending on youth programs and athletic infrastructure to promote healthy living, but am turning my back on the idea of federally subsidized salaries for adult athletes.
As a consumer and a sports fan I will purchase products endorsed by amateur athletes. I will pay money to attend events or to use various recreational facilities and put money back into the system. But I have become more skeptical of government funding for the adult programs. I will have to investigate further exactly how much money is being spent, and where cuts could be made. To start, I would like to pull any and all funding for our alpine ski program, even if that draws the ire of Nancy Greene. Sorry guys, it's not working out for me. If we are going to knock down Kevin Page's "structural deficit" then we will have to make some difficult choices. Some choices are a lot easier than others.
There once was a time when I believed that we should model the Australian system and spend the money. But now I only want to provide young people with the opportunity to compete, and once you grow up you are not entitled to a career. I'm sure that athletics represents a tiny fraction of our total expenditures and that we won't be saving an enormous sum of money by cutting funding, but a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single DNF.
And why is it that I am now required to feel empathy when an athlete wipes out? Is it now politically incorrect to say "dude, that sucked"? That ski cross guy today was a spectacular failure. Now we have fallen behind Switzerland and Korea in the medal standings.
Monday, April 6, 2009
North Korea
Here we go again; North Korea is testing its long range missiles. In 2006 the Taepodong missile that they tested blew apart seconds after launch. This time it reached far into sky and several thousand miles past Japan before crashing into the Pacific Ocean. When I see something like this happen, my immediate reaction is why do it, and what do they have to gain? Clearly the N.K leadership can’t wipe its own ass without say so from Beijing, so evidently China calculated that it had something to gain by testing the resolve of the United States, Japan, and South Korea. It is as Joe Biden predicted, that enemies of the United States would “test his mettle” in the first year of his administration.
But to what end? I don’t think that anyone would deny that China hates Japan (read the book the Rape of Nanking), and that it fears the thriving democracy in South Korea. While North Korea is by every standard of measure a failed state, and evidence of the folly of a communist dictatorship; if that regime were to collapse and be absorbed by South Korea, that would be a domestic public relations nightmare for communist China. They cannot use their proxy in Pyongyang to invade South Korea, because the 50,000 or so American troops stationed at the DMZ would drag America into the war. I seriously doubt that China wants another fight with the United States.
So again the question must be asked, what is there to gain by firing rockets over Japan? The downside is that it scares Japan enough to encourage the re-militarization of an old rival. China does not want Japan to have a military again, especially now that it is closely allied with the United States. Japan clearly has the most to lose from a trigger happy N.K regime. If one of those missiles flames out and strikes Japanese sovereign territory, all bets are off. These rockets are hardly technological marvels, and when they are shot up into the sky the N.K military brass should clearly have their fingers crossed that they do not mistakenly strike Japan. Perhaps these tests could serve to scare South Korea, which I am quite certain has no intention of ever invading the North unless N.K troops cross the DMZ and invade South Korea. It is possible that they are motivated by scaring South Korea into increasing aid, but how likely that is to happen I do not know.
I think the answer to the motive lies in Ockham’s Razor; that after eliminating the most complicated hypotheses, the simplest explanation is most often right. With the hope and change anti-war President now in the Whitehouse, it is unlikely that North Korea wanted to flex its muscles to deter an invasion. Obama would never invade North Korea, unless of course that N.K invaded South Korea. It is possible that with the potential perceived weakness of the possible death or illness of the insane Kim Jong Ill, the goal was to frighten their own population and deter a potential civilian uprising. It is also plausible that the goal is to test the new President of the World Police. Will he respond to provocative threatening actions with toughness, or will he wither into appeasement? If Obama responds to threats of violence with appeasement, I strongly believe that will open a Pandora’s Box similar to what Neville Chamberlain did with Nazi Germany. If he responds by being as tough as he possibly can without actually declaring open war, I would hypothesize that it would send the appropriate message to insane dictators around the world.
It is now up to the President to decide how to respond.
But to what end? I don’t think that anyone would deny that China hates Japan (read the book the Rape of Nanking), and that it fears the thriving democracy in South Korea. While North Korea is by every standard of measure a failed state, and evidence of the folly of a communist dictatorship; if that regime were to collapse and be absorbed by South Korea, that would be a domestic public relations nightmare for communist China. They cannot use their proxy in Pyongyang to invade South Korea, because the 50,000 or so American troops stationed at the DMZ would drag America into the war. I seriously doubt that China wants another fight with the United States.
So again the question must be asked, what is there to gain by firing rockets over Japan? The downside is that it scares Japan enough to encourage the re-militarization of an old rival. China does not want Japan to have a military again, especially now that it is closely allied with the United States. Japan clearly has the most to lose from a trigger happy N.K regime. If one of those missiles flames out and strikes Japanese sovereign territory, all bets are off. These rockets are hardly technological marvels, and when they are shot up into the sky the N.K military brass should clearly have their fingers crossed that they do not mistakenly strike Japan. Perhaps these tests could serve to scare South Korea, which I am quite certain has no intention of ever invading the North unless N.K troops cross the DMZ and invade South Korea. It is possible that they are motivated by scaring South Korea into increasing aid, but how likely that is to happen I do not know.
I think the answer to the motive lies in Ockham’s Razor; that after eliminating the most complicated hypotheses, the simplest explanation is most often right. With the hope and change anti-war President now in the Whitehouse, it is unlikely that North Korea wanted to flex its muscles to deter an invasion. Obama would never invade North Korea, unless of course that N.K invaded South Korea. It is possible that with the potential perceived weakness of the possible death or illness of the insane Kim Jong Ill, the goal was to frighten their own population and deter a potential civilian uprising. It is also plausible that the goal is to test the new President of the World Police. Will he respond to provocative threatening actions with toughness, or will he wither into appeasement? If Obama responds to threats of violence with appeasement, I strongly believe that will open a Pandora’s Box similar to what Neville Chamberlain did with Nazi Germany. If he responds by being as tough as he possibly can without actually declaring open war, I would hypothesize that it would send the appropriate message to insane dictators around the world.
It is now up to the President to decide how to respond.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Put A Little Love In Your Heart...
During the final months and years of the Bush Administration, I recall many pundits and comedians on the left decrying that the destructive foreign policy of Bush and Cheney has bred a global environment of hatred against America. Sure Al Qaeda declared war on America halfway through the Clinton Presidency, but that spicy little slice of life is often overlooked by American Liberals. Popular culture on the left wing enjoys blaming all of the world’s turmoil on rich Republicans stealing from the world’s poor. During the campaign they pleaded and hoped for a candidate who could change global public opinion, put a little love in their hearts, and that the world would be a better place. Obama was elected, and the response across the Globe was that of jubilation and excitement.
For those who have been too consumed with events inside America to look out the window and see what has been happening around the world since President Obama was elected and need to be updated on just how much better the world is since that inspiring victory, here goes…
1) Islamic militants launched co-ordinated attacks at several crowded locations across India's financial capital, killing over 100 people and terrorizing a city with a prolonged hostage crisis at the Taj Mahal.
2) Thousands protest the government of Pakistan, which has signed a treaty of surrender against pro-Taliban elements in the North, giving them self government, and losing control of a valuable piece of real estate roughly 100 miles from the capitol city of Islamabad.
3) Iran is demanding a public apology from Obama and announced that it is escalating its nuclear program.
4) The leader of the Sudan, now charged with war crimes by the International Court, has basically told the UN to go fuck themselves and expelled aid workers from Darfur.
5) The Chinese navy has been aggressively harassing American cargo ships in International waters; starting days after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited the country.
6) North Korea is mobilizing its military to the border with South Korea as it prepares to test long range missiles, threatening to invade their neighbor if anyone tries to stop them.
7) Comrade Hugo Chavez has forced through a mandate for life referendum, and has used his military to seize control of an American based food producer who failed to meet his unsustainably low price controls due to inflation caused by massive spending amidst declining revenues devaluing the Venezuelan currency.
8) Bolivia has expelled a senior American Diplomat
9) Civil war is once again escalating in Somalia, though personally I blame that cluster-fuck on Bill Clinton pulling out American troops after Blackhawk Down.
10) Mexico continues to be in a state violent warfare as the government continues its crackdown on drug cartels. Over 1000 police officers and troops were killed in the fighting over the past year, and the fighting is only getting worse.
Today’s Blog post was brought to you by Al Green and Annie Lennox, and their song “Put a Little Love in Your Heart” As a satirical juxtaposition for the change that Obama’s audacious hope has brought to the world…is the world a better place?
If you want the world to know
We won't let hatred grow
Put a little love in your heart
And the world will be a better place
And the world will be a better place
For you and me
You just wait and see
Wait and see
Take a good look around
And if you're lookin' down
Put a little love in your heart
I hope when you decide
Kindness will be your guide
Put a little love in your heart
And the world will be a better place
And the world will be a better place
For you and me
You just wait and see
Put a little love in your heart
Put a little love in your heart
Put a little love in your heart
Put a little love in your heart
Put a little love in -
Put a little love in your heart...
For those who have been too consumed with events inside America to look out the window and see what has been happening around the world since President Obama was elected and need to be updated on just how much better the world is since that inspiring victory, here goes…
1) Islamic militants launched co-ordinated attacks at several crowded locations across India's financial capital, killing over 100 people and terrorizing a city with a prolonged hostage crisis at the Taj Mahal.
2) Thousands protest the government of Pakistan, which has signed a treaty of surrender against pro-Taliban elements in the North, giving them self government, and losing control of a valuable piece of real estate roughly 100 miles from the capitol city of Islamabad.
3) Iran is demanding a public apology from Obama and announced that it is escalating its nuclear program.
4) The leader of the Sudan, now charged with war crimes by the International Court, has basically told the UN to go fuck themselves and expelled aid workers from Darfur.
5) The Chinese navy has been aggressively harassing American cargo ships in International waters; starting days after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited the country.
6) North Korea is mobilizing its military to the border with South Korea as it prepares to test long range missiles, threatening to invade their neighbor if anyone tries to stop them.
7) Comrade Hugo Chavez has forced through a mandate for life referendum, and has used his military to seize control of an American based food producer who failed to meet his unsustainably low price controls due to inflation caused by massive spending amidst declining revenues devaluing the Venezuelan currency.
8) Bolivia has expelled a senior American Diplomat
9) Civil war is once again escalating in Somalia, though personally I blame that cluster-fuck on Bill Clinton pulling out American troops after Blackhawk Down.
10) Mexico continues to be in a state violent warfare as the government continues its crackdown on drug cartels. Over 1000 police officers and troops were killed in the fighting over the past year, and the fighting is only getting worse.
Today’s Blog post was brought to you by Al Green and Annie Lennox, and their song “Put a Little Love in Your Heart” As a satirical juxtaposition for the change that Obama’s audacious hope has brought to the world…is the world a better place?
If you want the world to know
We won't let hatred grow
Put a little love in your heart
And the world will be a better place
And the world will be a better place
For you and me
You just wait and see
Wait and see
Take a good look around
And if you're lookin' down
Put a little love in your heart
I hope when you decide
Kindness will be your guide
Put a little love in your heart
And the world will be a better place
And the world will be a better place
For you and me
You just wait and see
Put a little love in your heart
Put a little love in your heart
Put a little love in your heart
Put a little love in your heart
Put a little love in -
Put a little love in your heart...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)