North Korea: 2012-2016

[TristanAbbey]

Folks may be interested in this summary of the NK succession reportage:

http://bellum.stanfordreview.org/?p=316

Would appreciate comments from the more informed, in particular about whether I'm right or wrong about the big story being the succession, not the missile test, saber-rattling, etc.

[Ron Humphrey]

Folks may be interested in this summary of the NK succession reportage:

http://bellum.stanfordreview.org/?p=316

Would appreciate comments from the more informed, in particular about whether I'm right or wrong about the big story being the succession, not the missile test, saber-rattling, etc.

But if the kids competent at all there are probably quite a few in the hierarchy that might not mind the change at all.

Good indicator of this would be to look at why O originally "fell from grace" in the first place

[Ken White]

With four trips to Korea South -- and few incursions into the North (long ago) -- between 1950 and 1975, I know enough about North Korea to be mildly annoying; I do not even approach the danger level. However, I've watched them fairly closely for about 58 years now and I'm firmly convinced you're correct.

The succession is / will be a big event and I suspect the jockeying is bitter and ferocious. As for the rest of the noise, they have played the west like a second hand Ukelele since 1951. They are masters of the bluff and have manipulated every US administration since Eisenhower to get this or that break.

They constantly approach but generally do not cross the line Though they sporadically (mostly through miscalculation) step on the line just to see if we're paying attention. They are concerned with three Nations; China and Russia for obvious reasons -- and us; even Japan and South Korea are 'also rans' with them. They can be irrational and unduly bellicose but they are not crazy. That said, the worst thing we could do is ignore them -- that would drive them into a perhaps irrational frenzy...