We all see and hear what goes on over there. Kim will execute kids if they don’t cheer hard enough at his birthday party or something? He’s always threatening to nuke countries and is probably has the highest domestic kill count out of any world leader today.

So I ask? Why don’t any other countries step in to help those people. I saw a survey asking Americans and Escaped North Koreans would they migrate to North Korea and to the US if given the chance (hypothetical for the refugees). And it was like <0.1% to 95%. Obviously those people live in terror.

Why do we just allow this to happen in modern civilization? Nukes on South Korea? Is just not lucrative to step in? SOMEONE EXPLAIN TO ME PLEASE!?

  • OceanSoap@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Because China.

    China sees NK as a buffer to the US, sort of a little brother that’s a bit too crazy so they have to tug on the leash to get them to chill every now and then.

    We’ve already got bases in SK, but the Yellow sea separates us from China. NK is the land barrier.

  • susurrus0@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    We all see and hear what goes on over there.

    Do we? We only get a little bit of news from there, and I wouldn’t be sure how reliable it is.

    Why don’t any other countries step in to help those people.

    Help how? Go to war and slaughter most of their population? They are already heavily mobilized, and no doubt they’d conscript a lot more in case of a conflict. Not to mention they have nukes.

    Why do we just allow this to happen in modern civilization?

    Who is ‘we’? No offence, but this sounds like some oblivious American patriot asking why America hasn’t saved the world yet.

    Is just not lucrative to step in?

    Most countries don’t have their own nukes, so they will never even consider getting into a conflict with a country that does have them. Most countries don’t have even a fraction of the resources needed for any sort of operation.

    Plus, North Korea has powerful allies (like China) and is technically a member of the UN, so you can’t just disregard everything and conquer it.

  • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    china is the only reason why NK doesnt collapse right away, the ccp uses NK as a buffer against SK and the west. NK is a true vassal state of china, and ccp has recently begun making headways into russias natural resources.

      • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        yea thats why ccp is so friendly with NK, its a good buffer against South korea and the asian neighbors and eu and usa. i think they are the only ones that have major trade with them, russia is probably only convenient right now.

  • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    iirc one of the issues is that even if things go perfectly on a military front no one is quite sure how to handle and de-program/rehabilitate 25.5 million people a large quantity of which likely lack any skills that would be useful in western economies.

    • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      a large quantity of which likely lack any skills that would be useful in western economies.

      What an alarming thing to say…

      • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m not saying its a good reason, just a reason. We could easily afford it if we took some of that magic money that goes into military funding blackholes or magical infastructure projects that never get built yet somehow break records on cost. Sadly the decision is being made by people with no sense of empathy or value for human life.

        • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          No, the alarming part is that you view North Koreans as subhuman animals with no skills.

  • the_wiz@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Why should we, as the collective west, spend soldiers lifes and money on “liberating” a population that hates us? Oh, and please mind: “Liberating” a country normally also includes killing a shitton of civilians in this process.

  • scarabic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 days ago

    NK could not defeat the US or China militarily but it could do quite a bit of damage to SK before anyone could stop them. This is a big reason the US doesn’t intervene.

    China is concerned about the population of NK suddenly becoming millions of refugees they’ll need to recuse and deal with. So they would rather the regime not collapse.

  • Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Oh absolutely the west would love to effect regime change in North Korea. Morale win, keep the military industrial complex going, grow the economy, get rid of some pesky poors in combat, maybe hoover up some natural resources.

    The problem is China, NK is strategically important to them as a source of said natural resources and as a buffer zone against South Korea. Plus lots of slave labour, global economies can never have enough of that.

    So yeah, messing with North Korea means messing with China. Despite some real grade A morons in power nobody has been that stupid yet.

      • Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Don’t worry! There’s this new little number called ‘Iran’ coming up. Plenty of opportunity to get rid of them there.

  • Deflated0ne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    We see and hear what the US state dept wants us to hear. And nothing more.

    As to the core of your question. The answer is nukes. Nukes are the only way to fend off the imperial aggression of the United States and its imperialist partners.

  • Leet@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    America was never about helping the people of the world. Many who believe that are mostly victims of propaganda. It’s all about American interests. If it’s in their interest they will give some reason like liberating a people as a pretence to enable military action.

    Also to directly answer the question, they have nukes trained on Seoul, have the backing of China which considers it a buffer against western influenced south kr

  • JustARaccoon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    136
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    4 days ago

    Generally countries in the west only get involved in conflicts if they get something out of it, be it directly via getting wealth from the country, or indirectly like curbing successful non-capitalistic economies before they catch on and their own people start questioning the billionaires. The “we’re there to liberate people” is just marketing speech.

    • a new sad me@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      58
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      I wonder why you say “countries in the west” and not just “countries”. It’s not like, I don’t know, Banín is shouting about North Korea every day and nobody listens.

      • scarabic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        The US has invested a lot in its capacity to police the world (just look at how many bases we have around the world). So it’s logical to ask why the US would or wouldn’t police something. And usually before the US polices something with force, they start talking about it publicly.

        Benin has no such capacity or intentions and so neither polices anything nor telegraphs its opinions.

      • JustARaccoon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        People in power in the west are barely moving the needle for their own people sadly.

        Also even if they did, they’d still need a valid cause to start an international conflict I think, it’s why Russia tried the “it’s actually russians in Ukraine that are being oppressed and we’re liberating them” excuse

      • FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        It’s more that there’s little that can be done that doesn’t also risk making the situation much worse.

        Something like going to war to depose Kim would lead to mass death and risk spilling over into a much wider conflict since North Korea has the backing of China.

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        4 days ago

        It seems as though unfortunately any people with the capacity for empathy never end up in positions of real power… :(

      • cecilkorik@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        It’s not a lack of empathy as much as a kind of educated empathy. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, as they say. We historically have a notorious and awful track record of nation building, and I think a lot of people believe this boils down to the fact that it’s very difficult to impose a national identity on people from outside, even with direct, physical intervention. We have tried to get around this at times by only supporting what we believe are legitimate independence movements which clearly already possess a strong national identity. Unfortunately even those tend to devolve into ethnic cleansing campaigns and dictatorship as soon as we leave. And if we don’t leave, then we have to stay there forever and we have to keep interfering every time things threaten to go off the rails and then it becomes paternalistic colonialism.

        Keep in mind too that a lot of people living under oppressive regimes are genuinely damaged people and there is nothing but time that can heal those wounds. They are traumatized, they are angry, they have lost loved ones, they have been subjected to horrors we can only imagine and clinically document, without feeling the fear and emotional scars those things inflicted on millions of people. If you suddenly give them back power again, even small amounts of power, it is in human nature for many to seek revenge for what they’ve gone through (and not always against the right people). They’ve learned how to operate within the context of a deeply flawed and dangerous regime, and it is natural to adopt some of the same tools and practices. As resilient as the human spirit is it still is difficult to teach new ways.

        At some point, people have got to learn to stand on their own two feet and find a way to build an equal, fair and just nation for all of themselves, by all the people and for all the people. While we certainly can do a better job of supporting this, we can’t do it for them and our attempts to do so have typically ranged from highly questionable to disastrous and extremely counterproductive. We fought for our own freedom, and it is not out of selfishness that we tell them they must fight for their own too. It’s not that we enjoy the fighting, it’s that as awful as it is, it appears necessary to get that hostility out into the open and understood to be as awful as it is, for a successful outcome to be possible.

        On the other hand, even that hasn’t helped in Israel/Palestine where it seems like we’ve tried almost everything and failed. The fact is, nobody has the answers. We don’t know the way to fix this. We are always trying, even when it doesn’t seem like it, but we have to be abundantly cautious that we’re not making it worse, because we often are. For that matter, we have our own problems, and we haven’t figured those out either. Just because we’re doing much better than the worst countries in the world or even much better than average doesn’t mean we’ve got it all figured out or even that we’re doing anything right at all.

      • CalipherJones@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        It’s one of the most heavily fortified countries with an extreme nuclear power regime out in the mountains. How could a country like the United States help North Koreans without threatening intense military conflict?

        • Krono@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          I think the answer is simple: end the sanctions.

          McDonalds and Starbucks can take down the Kim regime much more effectively than B-2 bombers and Hellfire missiles.

  • Kitty Jynx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    One thing I have not seen brought up yet is that Seoul is within artillery range of North Korea. Even if North Korea didn’t have nukes they could bombard the city with conventional arms or even chemical weapons and kill hundreds of thousands in the first day or two.

  • AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    World powers typically let countries do whatever they want to their own citizens, it’s only when they do stuff to people of other countries that they get involved.

    • xavier666@lemmy.umucat.day
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Simple and to the point. WW2 didn’t happen just because the Nazis were killing Jews, it happened because Hitler decided to barge into other countries.

    • ximtor@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      More like when it threatens some status quo or be inconvenient for them to deal with or might cause a shift to some power dynamics.

      I mean nobody(western leaders) gives a fuck about whatever is going on in Africa and Asia. And it’s quite literally mindboggling how the shit in Urkaine and Palestine is still ongoing without any major consequences for the aggressors other than mayyyybe harsh words or hurrdurr sanctions. Soo…as long as it does negatively not impact then, world leaders don’t give a shit about what other countries do.