November 30, 2006

Kimmy my boy, WTF

This whole situation with our Nuclear weapons testing has been a complete disaster for me, my family and my community. For the past ten years we have been struggling dearly to find enough food to eat even with the aid from the U.N.. Kim has made this situation worse by banning any private market exchanges of grain. I don't have much money, I can barely support my family as it is. Even the rich families are struggling to barter enough goods to find enough food. With this whole import ban thing in effect stimulated by the Nuke testing, we can't get enough supplies to grow our crops, leaving many of us to flee illegally to China or South Korea. China, please help us and allow us to enter your country as refugees.

Sincerely, Korean Man Toso

Do you feel lucky punk? (North Korea)

Its now or never. China is prepared to par-take in a military push provided all parties and UN back the proposal. The more time that this is allowed to continue the further along the North Korean nuclear program developes. We have to make some sort of threat to North Korea now. In waiting we might as well accept the fact that North Korea is going to be a nuclear nation. This might set off the arms race with countries like Iran. So China is saying now or never America.Lets Roll.

US Ambassador Bell (China)

The World needs to join together, not send America alone

Dear Readers,

As the Chief Administrator of the European Union I would like to wish everyone well for the upcoming elections tomorrow. The past few weeks have been a great opportunity for the world to converge on such an important issue in our world today. I have learned a lot from the citizens of the United States to Kim Jong-Il himself about the contrasting opinions on this issue. As we head into the elections tomorrow, I would like to address everyone with the European Unions final stance on the issue of the United States involvement in North Korea in this memo.

The European Union believes that it is in the best interest of the United States and the world if they did not enter this conflict under their name alone. An issue involving nuclear weapons involves the global community since the safety of the global population would be at risk. It would be wise for the United States to push its efforts to actually supporting the United Nations in all of its potential. The European Union is growing bored with the lack of negotiations coming from North Korea despite all of our efforts so we have weakened our connections. Action needs to take place, but at the correct time and with support of the global community.

The European Union plans to continue the humanitarian assistance that we offer to the citizens of North Korea currently. For those who are unaware the EU has been providing assistance ever since 1995 when devastating floods struck the country. We provide the citizens with medicines, water, food, and we provide a better option for sanitation, winter clothes and hygiene. It is in the best interest of the world to support the people of North Korea but oppose the regime in power. We must look out for the millions of people who are actually suffering under the regime and will be affected by any actions we decide to take.

I hope the European Union will be supported by others reading this memo. With your support we are already a step closer to global cooperation. I thank you all and I bid you a pleasant evening and a good nights rest for the elections tomorrow morning.

Thank you,

Diane Galatowitsch, The Chief Administrator of the European Union

A Senator's View

In response to Kim Jong-Il's "compromise," I do not think that a proposition like this will ever work. In an ideal world, this would be a great solution and promote only peace. However, we don't live in a perfect world and it is necessary for nations to have means of protection. The United States of America will not disarm and other nations will likely follow. Why would the U.S. or any other nation give up its power to defend itself to a nation that has threatened the world? Sure, we all want world peace, but I don't see that ever being a realistic situation. Peace can only be minimized.

The fact still stands that North Korea has nuclear weapons and is not exhibiting the ability to control them or remain in a peaceful state. It is clear how the UN and various other countries feel about North Korea and this blockade will remain until North Korea decides to be realistic. We need to continue working with the UN and other nations to resolve this issue as peacefully as possible. In the coming months, a timetable should be set up for North Korea. If this is still unable to persuade Mr. Il, military force will be used. The United States will stand with this issue and not give up because of Mr. Il's inability to work with everyone else in the world. The U.S. will not be disarming its nuclear weapons and will continue to work to rid North Korea of its nuclear plans.

Senator Austin


The United States does not agree to the compromise brought forth by Chairman Il regarding a complete nuclear disarmament because nothing will be gained of it. The United States relies not on nuclear weaponry and hasn't since 1953 nor do ANY of our ready-planned offensive military scenarios in the Marine Corps and Army contain anything about using nuclear weaponry solely because they will never be used in an offensive situation; also see the unilateral non-proliferation cooperation movement between Russia and the United States with removing all nuclear artillery shells in 1991-2003. Our position as a "sole super power" is merely relative and is in no way proportional to our quantity nor quality of nuclear weaponry but is more a function of our technology and versatile abilties. However the light on our status with relation with the rest of the world is entirely irrelevant as well as this silly "compromise". That is all the United States will share on the issue at this time.

Secretary of State Mark DIlle

China is all like What? What?

China feels this disarming is a ludacris idea. Its in total agreement with UN. After what the nations went through to secure nuclear weapons it would be a huge waste of their money to simply throw it all away. On top of that this would almost surely cause the US's title of the so called "super power" to diminish in some way. China can't seriously believe that the US would let that happen or consider this. It also needs to be brought up that North Korea proposed this. North Korea is an unstable country and isnt in any positions to be making such requests. China will put away its nuclear weapons when everybody else does first, and their positive everyone else feels the same way.

US Ambassador Bell (China)

November 29, 2006

UN Response to Disarmament

Citizens of the world,

North Korean Chairman Kim Jong-Il recently proposed a "compromise" to the international community. It called for total disarmament of all world powers in exchange for the word of the Chairman that North Korea would also follow suit. In an attempt to re-open serious communication channels with the Democratic Republic of North Korea, I, as UN Chief Administrator, proposed the compromise to the Security Council. Needless to say, the compromise failed to reach a vote, much less any sort of serious debate.

The powers of the world wish to compromise with North Korea on different levels that do not involve total disarmament. It has been noted that such trust in a terror-ridden world can be catastrophic, and there is no international institution powerful enough to force nations to reach 100% compliance, a height unreachable without constant surveillance by certified weapons inspectors. There is also the matter of accounting for EVERY SINGLE nuclear technology on the planet. Not only is it unfeasable to numerate such a grand amount of personnel an operation, the monetary costs of such an undertaking would be astounding. The case stands for developed nations holding nuclear arms as well, where hundreds of millions of dollars were spent or are being spent to develop these technologies, a commitment no person would turn back on.

These factors, of course, mean nothing so long as the international community fails to cooperate as a event unseen after thousands of years of civilization.

UN Chief Adminstrator Siegel

Citizens: Does the U.S. Disarm?

Citizens of the United States of America,

It has been brought to our attention that a compromise has come forth between the U.S. and other nations of the world, including North Korea. As a representative of this great nation, I call upon all citizens to voice their opinion on this key decision in American history. I think that it is vital to the success and happiness of the country for the representatives that you elect into office to be presenting the opinions of their districts and states they represent. Please, use the democracy that we are so fortunate to have and speak up for your opinion so congressmen and women can work for the people. How do I know where I stand if my citizens don't know where they stand?

North Korea has agreed to disarm all of their nuclear weapons if the rest of the world community will do the same. I would like us to consider this topic very seriously. Is this the solution that we have been waiting for? Is it possible to rid the world of nuclear weapons? What would we do as a world community if these rules are broken? Or maybe is it ok for us to have a limited number of these weapons to control terrorism and war. Perhaps nuclear weapons only provoke war? Would you feel safe if the United States had no nuclear weapons to protect itself?

Citizens, please let your congressmen know what America wants.
I trust Americans will make the best decision.

Senator Austin

November 28, 2006

China on the Block


China has made the decesion to back the UN in its efforts to form blockades. But it also wants to make clear that it is only in favor of these circumstances if the innocent people of North Korea are still kept in good help. It can't be held accountable for starving innocent people. Though it does applaud this peaceful means of action by the UN and the United States.

US Ambassador Bell (China)

A Compromise

The Democratic Republic of North Korea has decided to present to the UN a compromise that all member nations will be unable to turn down.

We will abandon our quest for a nuclear program under the conditions that all members in the United Nations, and even those outside of it (with pressure from members), completely disarm and dismantle all atomic armament, including ceasing production of all nuclear arms. The ultimate goal: removal of all atomic arms from the planet by 2015.

The United Nations must create an organization with the sole purpose of maintaning this international state. This organization will have members from all participating nations, and must requre the full compliance of the international intelligence community.

I should hope the United States and her influence will be the first to endorse this program and lead the way to a New World Order.

Kim Jong-Il

Do we really have to go to war?

I don't know what is being said at the negotiating table. Hopefully it is looking positive and moving away from war. I have a question though about what could happen. Is there anyway that we could monitor North Korea and their nuclear ability through China, South Korea and spies? After North Korea blew up their first bomb the French were able to fly over the area and test the radiation levels. Could we, with Kim Jong-Il agreement of course, test radiation and consider war if they start using the energy for things other then energy? One of the harder ways to avoid war is to get rid of the leader. The country is so deep in poverty that I think the only way we are going to get Kim Jong-Il out is through the people and their decisions and one way to do that is to allow them to continue to have energy.

November 26, 2006

To: Kim Jong-Il

The United States of America, the UN, and other supporting countries have no desire to begin any kind of action against North Korea using force. However, you have not complied with any of the efforts that we have tried to resolve the issue using strictly diplomacy. Therefore, the blockade as been put into place. In the future it is absolutely critical that you comply with the UN and supporting countries before the issue escalates and military force is needed. I don't see how a military conflict with many nations of the world will help you become a world power. Isn't that your ultimate goal? How will North Korea with a struggling economy and limited resources be able to support this conflict if you don't comply ???

Senator Austin

November 25, 2006

North Korea's Reaction

This message is for all UN delegates, and, more importantly, the United States of America.

It has been made all to clear to the Democratic Republic of North Korea by the UN backed blockade of our ports, the polarizing of surrounding nations support by the United States and their economic blackmail, and the downright silly stance taken by US represenative Austin that we have been left no choice but to defend the very lives of our citizens by whatever means neccessary.

Let this statement be made clear to all the world, I repeat, all the world: The Democratic Republic of North Korea WILL NOT take any offensive measures to remove the downright uncivilized and irresponsible blockade on our ports. We WILL NOT take the measures neccessary to remove the blockade that is starving our children and needlessly destroying our economy. We WILL NOT act on any so immaturely stated "uncivilized hostility" that the US Secretary of State seems certain is built up within our small country. We have no wish for conflict of any kind. However, it is certain that not only the United States, but China and Russia all wish to partake in the imperialistic merry-go-round; why else would they station hundreds of thousands of troops on our borders?

I repeat, to Secretary of State Dille, Senator Austin, and Administrator Siegel: The Democratic Republic of North Korea does not wish to partake in any offensive maneuvers. If you answer any question of mine, answer this one:

Where are your threats grounded? Where?

If they are in your silly nuclear arms "threat", why haven't you invaded, disarmed and abandoned Pakistan, who is fueling the insurgency in Afghanistan. Or China, who refuses to make so called "reform"? Why does Russia, who quietly released to the world that they are "pretty sure" they have "all" their nuclear arms trusted with such power?

When did Korea ever threaten the United States with nuclear arms or otherwise? When did we plan to invade the United States Senator Austin? When did we look to increase the size of our country by military means anytime in the last half century Mr. Dille?

Yet whose battleships and aircraft carriers are sitting not but miles off our shores?

To the American people I have but one plea: Realize what situation your leaders have put you in. Your military is already stretched too thin in Iraq, even though the bulk of your entire might is there, over 250,000 troops. Ever since President Clinton gutted the CIA, you have been unable to safely assert the size or combat effectiveness of other nation-state's military. You are on the very eve of an absolute and catistrophic mistake, for even with Russian and NATO armies added to the puny 35,000 man American force occupying the DMZ, you do not come within sight of 1/4 the size of our military force.

Finally, to the President of the United States:

You have lost all faith in a diplomatic solution to the "situation" that you have so delicately constructed as a means to further the American Empire. We will await your offer to remove the blockade and allow us to carry ourselves as a proper nation.

We WILL NOT carry our any offesive maneuvers in the meantime. Rest assured this will not stay the case if the United States and its partner in crime, the UN, do not remove the blockade and put affiliated military forces on stand down. The clock is ticking.

Kim Jong-Il

November 23, 2006

UN Response to US Blockade

The United Nations would like to induce its support of the recent decisions of the United States State Department to put forth economic sanctions, especially the physical blockade of the majority of North Korean ports, as a step in the correct direction in the de-nuclearization process. These actions have garnered support from most, if not all, of the UN member nations and can depend on further support in a variety of forms in the coming weeks.

November 20, 2006

Will North Korea be Another Iraq?

Letter to the Editor of The New York Times

Dear Fellow Americans,
As a citizen whose taxes are, unwillingly being used to support a department of defense that plans a possible military invasion in North Korea, I feel it necessary to deplore the current administration's actions. Although all those talking heads up in Washington tout a policy of diplomacy, it is clear that "protecting out own interests" is the guiding policy

Exactly who do we think we are to attack a country that has nuclear weapons when we ourselves have nuclear weapons positioned and ready to fire on a variety of nations. Kin Jon ll, in his recent message to the public, was accurate to describe the US as an oppressive force wanting to colonize the world. How can Il even attempt "diplomatic procedures" when he is not given any options to choose from; His only option is to stop making nuclear weapons.

Call me a zealot, if you will. Perhaps I am misinformed on the issue. If so, where is the news/media coverage that is out there to tell me otherwise? Where are the "scholars" and "experts" with their finely polished analysis of the situation?

In the mean time, I urge my fellow American to examine the wider impact of a military invasion in North Korea.(view photo montage linked below). Look beyond the face of Kim Jon Il, who is presented as the prime "evil doer" to see the faces of North Korea's children, who start out life as innocent souls wanting only a future of opportunity, not one of destitution and poverty, like the children in Iraq now have.

Do we really want to breed another generation of terrorists?

Your fellow citizen,
Luis Wyn Hassim

The faces of our Enemy?:

November 16, 2006

UN Thoughts on North Korea, Part I

To the international community,

It is with great pleasure that I examine the events taken place regarding nuclear proliferation, chiefly the goings on within North Korea. The recent stances taken by nations willing to take the lead show true progress for a peaceful ending. The words of American President Bush and his strong views on the U.S.'s role in the process truly strengthen the united effort. I urge the members of the UN to follow the U.S. as it strides to find ways of stopping what may become a menacing North Korean peninsula.

The same can be said of the Japanese economic pressures. It is a good direction to head for, as Kim Jong Il becomes less and less willing to negotiate.

Motivation behind Kim Jong Il

When North Korea blew up the nuclear bomb the world was horrified and very upset with North Korea. But Kim Jong Il had to know that the world would respond negatively, so what was his motivation? I think that he is unable to fix his country by himself and is trying to get other contries to help him bring his to it's feet again. I think he is using the bomb as leverage to get what he needs to help his country which isn't good becasue he can continue to use this bomb to get what he needs and manipulate other powers. This could just be a far-fetched theory though.

November 3, 2006

North Korea Debate -- the roles and players

Should the US get involved in with North Korea ?


representative #1 -- Nick
representative #2 -- Alex
representative #3 -- Jon

media -- Elliot

Embassy representative for Japan-- Brandon
United Nation's Chief Administrator-- Jared
European Union Chief Administrator -- Diane
Secretary of State for U.S. Administration -- Mark
Embassy representative for China -- Dustin
Kim Jon Ill -- Joseph
U.S. Voter #1 (representing a specific group of the US population) -- Katherine
U.S. Voter #2 (representing another group of the US population) -- Mike
U.S. Voter #3 (representing another group of the US population) Vanessa

FOR WEDNESDAY -- Bring in an article, perhaps from your role's viewpoint, about this issue.
FOR FRIDAY -- Post a short biography on your role. (Remember to post under specific category: "Debate #2 --The Players)

Katherine, Mike, and Vanessa, you will have to think of a specific subgroup of the US population that you will represent. This will give you more power as constituents. For example, do you represent a group of middle-aged pacifists, construction companies, Korean-Americans? Identifying a subgroup identity, will also help when it comes to writing up your short bios.