5 ms·

Pyongyang Blusters, and U.S. Worries About Quieter Risks

15 points by kurtable 14y ago

grandalf 14y ago
The real punchline of this article is a subtle appeal to American vanity intended to make Americans proud of their own military and commander in chief. The idea that KJU cares what the US thinks of his posturing is silly. It's intended for the N. Korean audience. The key insight for the critical HN reader is to realize that the NYT article is propaganda aimed at American readers intended to make us proud and supportive of US military technology and power in the midst of an era where the US is the most belligerent military force in the world by a large margin. Most stories posted under the guise of foreign policy reporting are actually pro-American feel good stories intended to promote messages of American superiority and exceptionalism.
- mathieuh 14y ago
  Exactly. It really is something else seeing North Korean propaganda on the news being followed immediately by Western propaganda showing how the West is unequivocally correct.
- corresation 14y ago
  I find your arguments an incredible reach. Firstly, the people of North Korea have zero access to international media. They aren't reading their government's releases on CNN and puffing their chests in pride. Instead this really does seem like it's intended for the West (or moreso for the people of the West, hoping that fear can be instilled by the general population that the government must retrench). Hamfisted, hilariously ill conceived puffery, but it's not hard to imagine someone being in a space where this could be conceived as the best available option. Secondly, is there anyone who actually doubts the overwhelming, multi-magnitudes US military supremacy? Do they really need propaganda to push what is an enormous, rest-of-the-world-combined military spend (building up year after year)? The only rational complaint about the media is that it often grossly overstates the military might of the enemy.
  - grandalf 14y ago
    Not sure how your remarks rebut any of the arguments I made.
    - corresation 14y ago
      "It's intended for the N. Korean audience." Fundamentally ignorant comment that sets the tone for the rest of your commentary, which by and large is the sort of facile contrarianism common among outsider teenager looking for angle to feel superior over the commoner, however ill conceived.
      - grandalf 14y ago
        The NYT article asserts that KJU's actions are targeted at his domestic audience: “We’re convinced this is about Kim solidifying his place with his own people and his own military, who still don’t know him,” one senior administration official said Friday. My point was simply to put the NYT coverage in context. I think you misunderstand my intentions. Most Americans take seriously the kind of foreign affairs coverage the NYT article exemplifies, and I just wanted to point out the common themes to help immunize HN readers from it in the future. Yes it's fun to poke fun at KJU but that does not mean his foreign policy actions are irrational or that the adjectives used to describe him don't also apply at least as much to US leaders.
- JunkDNA 14y ago
  While the posturing might have an internal purpose, its primary audience is not internal. North Korea has learned time and again over at least the last three US administrations that when the US, UN, and allies start to turn the screws, all it needs to do is get belligerent and the other nations fold and start giving concessions (food, fuel, relaxed sanctions, etc...). Their new leader is just trying this out for himself this time around.
  - grandalf 14y ago
    I agree that his actions are rational. The NYT article paints a picture of him as an unstable person who can't hire a decent special effects team and essentially mocks him, while implicitly lauding the US's own belligerent leaders and actions. It's just not news reporting.

15 points by kurtable 14y ago

The real punchline of this article is a subtle appeal to American vanity intended to make Americans proud of their own military and commander in chief. The idea that KJU cares what the US thinks of his posturing is silly. It's intended for the N. Korean audience. The key insight for the critical HN reader is to realize that the NYT article is propaganda aimed at American readers intended to make us proud and supportive of US military technology and power in the midst of an era where the US is the most belligerent military force in the world by a large margin. Most stories posted under the guise of foreign policy reporting are actually pro-American feel good stories intended to promote messages of American superiority and exceptionalism.

mathieuh 14y ago
Exactly. It really is something else seeing North Korean propaganda on the news being followed immediately by Western propaganda showing how the West is unequivocally correct.
corresation 14y ago
I find your arguments an incredible reach. Firstly, the people of North Korea have zero access to international media. They aren't reading their government's releases on CNN and puffing their chests in pride. Instead this really does seem like it's intended for the West (or moreso for the people of the West, hoping that fear can be instilled by the general population that the government must retrench). Hamfisted, hilariously ill conceived puffery, but it's not hard to imagine someone being in a space where this could be conceived as the best available option. Secondly, is there anyone who actually doubts the overwhelming, multi-magnitudes US military supremacy? Do they really need propaganda to push what is an enormous, rest-of-the-world-combined military spend (building up year after year)? The only rational complaint about the media is that it often grossly overstates the military might of the enemy.
- grandalf 14y ago
  Not sure how your remarks rebut any of the arguments I made.
  - corresation 14y ago
    "It's intended for the N. Korean audience." Fundamentally ignorant comment that sets the tone for the rest of your commentary, which by and large is the sort of facile contrarianism common among outsider teenager looking for angle to feel superior over the commoner, however ill conceived.
    - grandalf 14y ago
      The NYT article asserts that KJU's actions are targeted at his domestic audience: “We’re convinced this is about Kim solidifying his place with his own people and his own military, who still don’t know him,” one senior administration official said Friday. My point was simply to put the NYT coverage in context. I think you misunderstand my intentions. Most Americans take seriously the kind of foreign affairs coverage the NYT article exemplifies, and I just wanted to point out the common themes to help immunize HN readers from it in the future. Yes it's fun to poke fun at KJU but that does not mean his foreign policy actions are irrational or that the adjectives used to describe him don't also apply at least as much to US leaders.
JunkDNA 14y ago
While the posturing might have an internal purpose, its primary audience is not internal. North Korea has learned time and again over at least the last three US administrations that when the US, UN, and allies start to turn the screws, all it needs to do is get belligerent and the other nations fold and start giving concessions (food, fuel, relaxed sanctions, etc...). Their new leader is just trying this out for himself this time around.
- grandalf 14y ago
  I agree that his actions are rational. The NYT article paints a picture of him as an unstable person who can't hire a decent special effects team and essentially mocks him, while implicitly lauding the US's own belligerent leaders and actions. It's just not news reporting.