what is wrong with north korea? is it run by psychos!? (disposal, military)

[maritza1010]

like seriously, why is the government there the way it is? does kim jung un have a mental health probem? seriously, the government there is sooooooo ****ed up that when the rulers die, they make everyone fake cry at his funeral just to "honor him". WE NEED CHINA AND SOUTH KOREA TO MARCH INOT THERE, DRAG ALL THOSE RULERS OUT, AND TAKE THEM TO THE NEARTEST PYSCH WARD IN SEOUL, OR BEIJING! anyone agree?

[Mouldy Old Schmo]

If you try that, North Korea will launch an artielry barrage against South Korea and invade it, leading to thousands of casualties.

[Blondebaerde]

*Sigh* An answer was provided, in-detail, for the question posed couched in language similar to the original, for ease of OP's understanding. Second time through, I will attempt to translate to the Queen's English from the original difficult-to-track vernacular and hyperbole (paraphrasing below). My first version seems to be difficult to follow, presumably.

"Why don't the Chinese and SOUTH KOREANS GO IN THERE AND HANG THOSE NORTH KOREAN LEADER-TYPE PSYCHO PEOPLE FROM THE NEAREST YARDARM BLAH BLAH..." I didn't read the rest, honestly, and didn't need to.

My three (3) points to answer the question were as follows: if incorrectly translated last time, into language I considered down to earth and in words anyone could understand, I'll be more explicit:

1) Military action against the regime is problematic due to Seoul...the Capital of South Korea...being effectively held hostage by thousands of heavy artillery and rocket pieces within range. Even if decapitated, from a war gaming perspective there are multiple moves such a rogue regime might take causing thousands to millions of casualties in both South Korea and Japan. NBC (nuclear, biological, and chemical) weapons at the DPRK's disposal are blunt instruments, not scalpels, and almost any use leads to a massive destabilization of a military "proportional strike" calculus.

2) Dischord and threats to the United States and our geopolitical interests are in the best interests of the People's Republic of China. When the United States and our allies are focussed elsewhere, the PRC tends to march in another direction to serve their own interests. The nascently rising Russian Empire behaves similarly, as did the Soviet Union before them, though the latter was more aggressively (and explicitly) expansionist. So far. China is a smiling, smirking enemy, not a partner in solving a Korean crisis.

Lastly:

3) A problem insufficiently addressed in the past has come back to haunt the now. There are few good options outside of direct military action at this point, with a direct threat to the homeland being made by the DPRK already. "Containment" may be an outside possibility, with sufficiently robust missile shield, but as-previous that strategy fails to address the nature of the evil, corrupt DPRK regime. They are not "psycho," which I assume refers to DSM V's Psychotic Disorders? I challenge if OP could supply a rational, diagnostics-based definition of either "psycho" or "psychosis", else the question may have been asked quite differently. Suffice to say "psycho(tics)" do not build highly sophisticated intercontinental ballistic missiles or play complicated brinkmanship games with superpowers. Effectively, too, I'll add.

I sincerely hope the above is more enlightening, re-written as an analysis in standard English.

[PJSaturn]

This thread quickly went south. Several personal attacks and off-topic posts have been deleted. The thread is now closed.

.