I can see what he was trying to say but it was done so extremely poorly. I’m not surprised he’d get fired when it’s supposed to be his job to avoid snafus like that.
Yeah, to me it came off as a bit insensitive especially considering the tense relationship publicly SK and Japan have. In reality they have huge trade agreements and are happy to let the public side be used domestically.
Of course, I just want to say NBC probably went lowest bidder technically acceptable with their color commentators this year.
Yeah NBC seems to be going for the daring plan of having LOTS of commentary dominating the events, and have the commentary done by lol whoever.
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
+2
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
NBC coverage has been shit for years. Bob Costas is a smarmy asshole who talks down to all of the athletes.
Somehow we need to wrest an event as important as the Olympics away from one channel.
This is particularly hilarious to me, as i just noted in earlier threads that it's easier, on the whole, for Americans to overlook the fact that foreign occupations suck. Some do indeed suck more than others, but even the good ones are generally terrible at times (though if your occupier is smart, they'll learn to very efficiently suppress the bad news, since they have little desire to actually stop those bad tings--see the American occupation of Japan, for example). In East Asia, though their numbers are dwindling it's not hard to find elder people who remember one foreign occupation or another, by contrast in the United States, good luck finding someone old enough to have grandparents who're alive during a foreign occupation of the US.
Japanese Korea wasn't a really good one. Which goes to whether or not foreign occupations are improved whether or not the occupying power comes in with intentions at annexation, as with the US in the Philippines, the USSR in the Baltic states, etc. (is varies, I think). Japanese Taiwan, for example, is looked positively next to what came next--but aside from different treatment by the Empire, South Korea on the whole seems less comfortable with reconciliation with the first five republics.
I wouldn't call NBC a mouthpiece of the government (well, not a very good one right now at least), but it does sort of ring of the angrier, less-patient rhetoric coming out of the State Department for as many as ten years that the solution to unresolved historical grievances between South Korea and Japan (mostly in one direction) is to tell Seoul, "Bitch, suck it up. Next year in Pyongyang," and to generally come in on the side of whatever token efforts Tokyo makes on the most public issues (particularly the modification of the Comfort Women apologies/reparations). This would work if the vast majority of the South Korean electorate was actually happy with the Japanese response, but it doesn't look like that's the case. It's not as though South Korea can't simultaneously have normal economic relations with Japan and be extremely skeptical of it as a military partner.
Somewhat related--the tip-toeing around the Dokdo/Takeshima disputed islands has been kind of fascinating, at least to me. The Unification Flag featuring the islands isn't that new, apparently they started appearing on the design more than ten years ago (and Japan has previously complained about its use), but Tokyo was still distinctly displeased with its employment in the Winter Olympiad.
This is particularly hilarious to me, as i just noted in earlier threads that it's easier, on the whole, for Americans to overlook the fact that foreign occupations suck. Some do indeed suck more than others, but even the good ones are generally terrible at times (though if your occupier is smart, they'll learn to very efficiently suppress the bad news, since they have little desire to actually stop those bad tings--see the American occupation of Japan, for example). In East Asia, though their numbers are dwindling it's not hard to find elder people who remember one foreign occupation or another, by contrast in the United States, good luck finding someone old enough to have grandparents who're alive during a foreign occupation of the US.
Japanese Korea wasn't a really good one. Which goes to whether or not foreign occupations are improved whether or not the occupying power comes in with intentions at annexation, as with the US in the Philippines, the USSR in the Baltic states, etc. (is varies, I think). Japanese Taiwan, for example, is looked positively next to what came next--but aside from different treatment by the Empire, South Korea on the whole seems less comfortable with reconciliation with the first five republics.
I wouldn't call NBC a mouthpiece of the government (well, not a very good one right now at least), but it does sort of ring of the angrier, less-patient rhetoric coming out of the State Department for as many as ten years that the solution to unresolved historical grievances between South Korea and Japan (mostly in one direction) is to tell Seoul, "Bitch, suck it up. Next year in Pyongyang," and to generally come in on the side of whatever token efforts Tokyo makes on the most public issues (particularly the modification of the Comfort Women apologies/reparations). This would work if the vast majority of the South Korean electorate was actually happy with the Japanese response, but it doesn't look like that's the case. It's not as though South Korea can't simultaneously have normal economic relations with Japan and be extremely skeptical of it as a military partner.
Trying to connect what some idiot on NBC says to official government rhetoric isn't a stretch only because nothing in existence could possibly withstand that much stretching force and survive. The only thing it's a reflection of is general ignorance about east asian politics among the public.
I don't no much about how the Chinese government is organized. How much official and unofficial centralization to one person has occurred there over the last few years?
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I don't no much about how the Chinese government is organized. How much official and unofficial centralization to one person has occurred there over the last few years?
Xi is perhaps the most powerful person since Deng. He is modeling himself as the next Mao, political stature-wise.
I don't no much about how the Chinese government is organized. How much official and unofficial centralization to one person has occurred there over the last few years?
So there is a lot of historical factors in here but a brief overview.
After Deng and Mao the Politburo, the oligarchy that runs mainland China, rebuilt the succession system with both term limits to move away from a cult of personality leadership to maintain sustainability.
This worked out well as there wasn't any singularly powerful personality. Kind of a rotation of folks from the politburo and helped maintain succession stability for about 20+ years.
When Deng came into power he started an "anti-corruption" campaign that has been one of the most successful peaceful purges in CCP history. His rivals were removed on corruption charges or forced to step out of public life. He was able to stack the middle bureaucracy with allies. Top it off China during this time has had decent economic growth with minimal inflation though a lot of it is a house of cards on shoddy loans but that hasn't imploded. Externally China has stood up more of a calm stable force, thank you 2016, and has been able to stretch its arms in the South China sea. Basically Xi made a case and set up the system to stay in power.
The big move was the change to the constitution last year. Xi was added next to Mao and Deng as a father of Chinese communism and Xi Thought is now enshrined. This was a single to a lot of China watchers Xi has moved the system back to the cult of personality model from the oligarchy system put into place after Deng. There really is nothing to stop Xi staying in power for the rest of his life, officially or unofficial like Deng did towards the end when his only title was head of the CCP Chess Club.
This has been about 6 years in the making but there also no successors either. Xi was pretty much prepped 3+ years in advance as the next president.
Overall as a day to day change it isn't much. But it is a shift away from the idea of stable succession which was a key reform in the 90's.
This is particularly hilarious to me, as i just noted in earlier threads that it's easier, on the whole, for Americans to overlook the fact that foreign occupations suck. Some do indeed suck more than others, but even the good ones are generally terrible at times (though if your occupier is smart, they'll learn to very efficiently suppress the bad news, since they have little desire to actually stop those bad tings--see the American occupation of Japan, for example). In East Asia, though their numbers are dwindling it's not hard to find elder people who remember one foreign occupation or another, by contrast in the United States, good luck finding someone old enough to have grandparents who're alive during a foreign occupation of the US.
Japanese Korea wasn't a really good one. Which goes to whether or not foreign occupations are improved whether or not the occupying power comes in with intentions at annexation, as with the US in the Philippines, the USSR in the Baltic states, etc. (is varies, I think). Japanese Taiwan, for example, is looked positively next to what came next--but aside from different treatment by the Empire, South Korea on the whole seems less comfortable with reconciliation with the first five republics.
I wouldn't call NBC a mouthpiece of the government (well, not a very good one right now at least), but it does sort of ring of the angrier, less-patient rhetoric coming out of the State Department for as many as ten years that the solution to unresolved historical grievances between South Korea and Japan (mostly in one direction) is to tell Seoul, "Bitch, suck it up. Next year in Pyongyang," and to generally come in on the side of whatever token efforts Tokyo makes on the most public issues (particularly the modification of the Comfort Women apologies/reparations). This would work if the vast majority of the South Korean electorate was actually happy with the Japanese response, but it doesn't look like that's the case. It's not as though South Korea can't simultaneously have normal economic relations with Japan and be extremely skeptical of it as a military partner.
Post-Trump the State Department is practically being held together by duck tape, due to deliberate sabotage, veterans quitting in growing numbers and purging and the fact they don’t really communicate with White House leadership. They don’t have an influence over the media’s covering NK like they did in governments like Obama’s and W.’s. Whatever they do think of Asia right now is irrelevant. Whatever NBC’s coverage is supporting during the Olympicd is more likely they are doing it on their own.
Post-Trump the State Department is practically being held together by duck tape, due to deliberate sabotage, veterans quitting in growing numbers and purging and the fact they don’t really communicate with White House leadership. They don’t have an influence over the media’s covering NK like they did in governments like Obama’s and W.’s. Whatever they do think of Asia right now is irrelevant. Whatever NBC’s coverage is supporting during the Olympicd is more likely they are doing it on their own.
Yeah, NBC was practically tripping over themselves to praise the 'unified' Korean Olympic team, without pointing out any of the issues it created. I somehow don't think that position is coming from official US pressure.
On a more anecdotal note: my Korean in-laws were OUTRAGED by the S. Korean government's concessions to N Korea regarding the games. Like to the point they were actively not rooting for the Korean athletes (until women's curling). There's a definite generational divide among Koreans on this issue. The generations who lived through the war or its immediate after-effects are much less 'generous' about the prospects of reunification, or the terms under which (or even if) it should occur.
Post-Trump the State Department is practically being held together by duck tape, due to deliberate sabotage, veterans quitting in growing numbers and purging and the fact they don’t really communicate with White House leadership. They don’t have an influence over the media’s covering NK like they did in governments like Obama’s and W.’s. Whatever they do think of Asia right now is irrelevant. Whatever NBC’s coverage is supporting during the Olympicd is more likely they are doing it on their own.
Yeah, NBC was practically tripping over themselves to praise the 'unified' Korean Olympic team, without pointing out any of the issues it created. I somehow don't think that position is coming from official US pressure.
On a more anecdotal note: my Korean in-laws were OUTRAGED by the S. Korean government's concessions to N Korea regarding the games. Like to the point they were actively not rooting for the Korean athletes (until women's curling). There's a definite generational divide among Koreans on this issue. The generations who lived through the war or its immediate after-effects are much less 'generous' about the prospects of reunification, or the terms under which (or even if) it should occur.
That's interesting. I would have thought the older generations would be closer to people/family on the other side. For younger generations I assume its much more abstract.
A similar phenomenon happens with Cuban émigré in Florida (considering the fact, obviously, that far more Cubans live in Cuba than in southern Florida).
I've read that something similar happens in Cuba (in that the older generations who were first-hand witnesses to the Bay of Pigs or US blockade are more opposed to dialog with the Americans than their children and grandchildren), but that's a little harder to study given the much larger population and the norms of political discussion in Cuba anyway.
NK is sending out giant flares about wanting to talk. Not their usual style so there might actually be substance to this. Now the question is will the Trump administration do anything. Last I heard their only negotiator the Kush was out a clearance.
NK is sending out giant flares about wanting to talk. Not their usual style so there might actually be substance to this. Now the question is will the Trump administration do anything. Last I heard their only negotiator the Kush was out a clearance.
edit: though in a way he may be the driving force behind peace in that region. I get the feeling South Korea hates trump just as much as north korea.
Hate is a very strong word. But, when Trump made clear that he wasn't to concede anything to Kim, and he didn't cared about what happened to Seoul, there's only so much places where this conversation can go.
Sucks if you are Seoul, but if you are Guam or Japan or the US coast, you just take the win.
edit: though in a way he may be the driving force behind peace in that region. I get the feeling South Korea hates trump just as much as north korea.
Hate is a very strong word. But, when Trump made clear that he wasn't to concede anything to Kim, and he didn't cared about what happened to Seoul, there's only so much places where this conversation can go.
Sucks if you are Seoul, but if you are Guam or Japan or the US coast, you just take the win.
The real key factor here is Xi. I think the bigger thing is how exposed the goods laundering is after a few recent exposes in the press and the specific targeting of those ships.
I do wish we had a permanent ambassador to SK. Or you know a functioning state department with the ambassador assigned to this very problem.
Diplomacy is how you make concrete long term victories.
edit: though in a way he may be the driving force behind peace in that region. I get the feeling South Korea hates trump just as much as north korea.
Hate is a very strong word. But, when Trump made clear that he wasn't to concede anything to Kim, and he didn't cared about what happened to Seoul, there's only so much places where this conversation can go.
Sucks if you are Seoul, but if you are Guam or Japan or the US coast, you just take the win.
The real key factor here is Xi. I think the bigger thing is how exposed the goods laundering is after a few recent exposes in the press and the specific targeting of those ships.
I do wish we had a permanent ambassador to SK. Or you know a functioning state department with the ambassador assigned to this very problem.
Diplomacy is how you make concrete long term victories.
Yeah, Xi is also a factor. Xi and the rest of the CCP mostly want to keep counting their money, which is why they have been mostly playing ball. Unlike Russia, they don't seem to be willing to throw good money after bad money, and supporting these unstable regimes that are a problem for everybody else is very bad money.
There had been lots of reports from Chinese sources that NK was basically running out of money. Missile tests are expensive and NK really doesn't have many sources of income.
I would assume Kim's gonna start fishing for some sort of economic assistance again, same as what NK always does periodically. They act bad and try to turn that into an income stream, rinse and repeat in a few years.
On the positive(?) side, it may be that NK sees this as an opportunity to drive a division between their enemies SK and the US, and they'll try to be good for a few years.
At any rate it makes it harder for Trump to push for war, which is a win for everyone.
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
There had been lots of reports from Chinese sources that NK was basically running out of money. Missile tests are expensive and NK really doesn't have many sources of income.
I would assume Kim's gonna start fishing for some sort of economic assistance again, same as what NK always does periodically. They act bad and try to turn that into an income stream, rinse and repeat in a few years.
On the positive(?) side, it may be that NK sees this as an opportunity to drive a division between their enemies SK and the US, and they'll try to be good for a few years.
At any rate it makes it harder for Trump to push for war, which is a win for everyone.
An outcome where nukes aren't flying around is a win, I agree. That said, Trump is fucking doveish compared to the usual DC-brand of crazy, as depressing as that sounds. See: Every time that Lindsey Graham is on CNN.
North Korea has been looking for a meeting with a president for more than twenty years. Suspending nuclear missile testing isn't a big deal for NK as they can always just resume it and it doesn't remotely eliminate them having nukes.
Looks like it's just an offer for Kim Jong Un and Trump to meet
The senior US official said North Korea has offered to suspend their nuclear missile testing alongside their invitation for talks.
Looks like peace to me.
Its not guaranteed. And they have done this before. But if the out of money thing is true then we might be able to do some work, if we have a good negotiating team and this isn't just another way to reduce sanctions and then have them restart after a bit.
South Korean officials in front of the White House just thanked President Trump for helping us get to this point, that his hardline stance was helpful, and that North Korea wishes to pursue denuclearization, and that Kim Jong-Un wants to meet with Trump.
South Korean officials in front of the White House just thanked President Trump for helping us get to this point, that his hardline stance was helpful, and that North Korea wishes to pursue denuclearization, and that Kim Jong-Un wants to meet with Trump.
Posts
It doesn't seem that he was.
Of course, I just want to say NBC probably went lowest bidder technically acceptable with their color commentators this year.
Somehow we need to wrest an event as important as the Olympics away from one channel.
Japanese Korea wasn't a really good one. Which goes to whether or not foreign occupations are improved whether or not the occupying power comes in with intentions at annexation, as with the US in the Philippines, the USSR in the Baltic states, etc. (is varies, I think). Japanese Taiwan, for example, is looked positively next to what came next--but aside from different treatment by the Empire, South Korea on the whole seems less comfortable with reconciliation with the first five republics.
I wouldn't call NBC a mouthpiece of the government (well, not a very good one right now at least), but it does sort of ring of the angrier, less-patient rhetoric coming out of the State Department for as many as ten years that the solution to unresolved historical grievances between South Korea and Japan (mostly in one direction) is to tell Seoul, "Bitch, suck it up. Next year in Pyongyang," and to generally come in on the side of whatever token efforts Tokyo makes on the most public issues (particularly the modification of the Comfort Women apologies/reparations). This would work if the vast majority of the South Korean electorate was actually happy with the Japanese response, but it doesn't look like that's the case. It's not as though South Korea can't simultaneously have normal economic relations with Japan and be extremely skeptical of it as a military partner.
At the same time, not everyone on the Korean team is anxious to press the matter, such as a figure-skating team that change the lyrics of their routine to remove reference to Dokdo. It's a pretty insubstantial matter next to the anti-DPRK protests, but still a reminder of all these unresolved issues.
Trying to connect what some idiot on NBC says to official government rhetoric isn't a stretch only because nothing in existence could possibly withstand that much stretching force and survive. The only thing it's a reflection of is general ignorance about east asian politics among the public.
China moving from a one party state to a dictatorship.
Xi is perhaps the most powerful person since Deng. He is modeling himself as the next Mao, political stature-wise.
So there is a lot of historical factors in here but a brief overview.
After Deng and Mao the Politburo, the oligarchy that runs mainland China, rebuilt the succession system with both term limits to move away from a cult of personality leadership to maintain sustainability.
This worked out well as there wasn't any singularly powerful personality. Kind of a rotation of folks from the politburo and helped maintain succession stability for about 20+ years.
When Deng came into power he started an "anti-corruption" campaign that has been one of the most successful peaceful purges in CCP history. His rivals were removed on corruption charges or forced to step out of public life. He was able to stack the middle bureaucracy with allies. Top it off China during this time has had decent economic growth with minimal inflation though a lot of it is a house of cards on shoddy loans but that hasn't imploded. Externally China has stood up more of a calm stable force, thank you 2016, and has been able to stretch its arms in the South China sea. Basically Xi made a case and set up the system to stay in power.
The big move was the change to the constitution last year. Xi was added next to Mao and Deng as a father of Chinese communism and Xi Thought is now enshrined. This was a single to a lot of China watchers Xi has moved the system back to the cult of personality model from the oligarchy system put into place after Deng. There really is nothing to stop Xi staying in power for the rest of his life, officially or unofficial like Deng did towards the end when his only title was head of the CCP Chess Club.
This has been about 6 years in the making but there also no successors either. Xi was pretty much prepped 3+ years in advance as the next president.
Overall as a day to day change it isn't much. But it is a shift away from the idea of stable succession which was a key reform in the 90's.
Post-Trump the State Department is practically being held together by duck tape, due to deliberate sabotage, veterans quitting in growing numbers and purging and the fact they don’t really communicate with White House leadership. They don’t have an influence over the media’s covering NK like they did in governments like Obama’s and W.’s. Whatever they do think of Asia right now is irrelevant. Whatever NBC’s coverage is supporting during the Olympicd is more likely they are doing it on their own.
On a more anecdotal note: my Korean in-laws were OUTRAGED by the S. Korean government's concessions to N Korea regarding the games. Like to the point they were actively not rooting for the Korean athletes (until women's curling). There's a definite generational divide among Koreans on this issue. The generations who lived through the war or its immediate after-effects are much less 'generous' about the prospects of reunification, or the terms under which (or even if) it should occur.
That's interesting. I would have thought the older generations would be closer to people/family on the other side. For younger generations I assume its much more abstract.
I've read that something similar happens in Cuba (in that the older generations who were first-hand witnesses to the Bay of Pigs or US blockade are more opposed to dialog with the Americans than their children and grandchildren), but that's a little harder to study given the much larger population and the norms of political discussion in Cuba anyway.
NK is sending out giant flares about wanting to talk. Not their usual style so there might actually be substance to this. Now the question is will the Trump administration do anything. Last I heard their only negotiator the Kush was out a clearance.
So far it seems that Kim blinked first, BUT, everybody is very skeptical of that. And with good reason.
edit: though in a way he may be the driving force behind peace in that region. I get the feeling South Korea hates trump just as much as north korea.
Hate is a very strong word. But, when Trump made clear that he wasn't to concede anything to Kim, and he didn't cared about what happened to Seoul, there's only so much places where this conversation can go.
Sucks if you are Seoul, but if you are Guam or Japan or the US coast, you just take the win.
The real key factor here is Xi. I think the bigger thing is how exposed the goods laundering is after a few recent exposes in the press and the specific targeting of those ships.
I do wish we had a permanent ambassador to SK. Or you know a functioning state department with the ambassador assigned to this very problem.
Diplomacy is how you make concrete long term victories.
Yeah, Xi is also a factor. Xi and the rest of the CCP mostly want to keep counting their money, which is why they have been mostly playing ball. Unlike Russia, they don't seem to be willing to throw good money after bad money, and supporting these unstable regimes that are a problem for everybody else is very bad money.
I would assume Kim's gonna start fishing for some sort of economic assistance again, same as what NK always does periodically. They act bad and try to turn that into an income stream, rinse and repeat in a few years.
On the positive(?) side, it may be that NK sees this as an opportunity to drive a division between their enemies SK and the US, and they'll try to be good for a few years.
At any rate it makes it harder for Trump to push for war, which is a win for everyone.
An outcome where nukes aren't flying around is a win, I agree. That said, Trump is fucking doveish compared to the usual DC-brand of crazy, as depressing as that sounds. See: Every time that Lindsey Graham is on CNN.
Well that
Hmmmm
Looks like peace to me.
Its not guaranteed. And they have done this before. But if the out of money thing is true then we might be able to do some work, if we have a good negotiating team and this isn't just another way to reduce sanctions and then have them restart after a bit.
Inquisitor77: Rius, you are Sisyphus and melee Wizard is your boulder
Tube: This must be what it felt like to be an Iraqi when Saddam was killed
Bookish Stickers - Mrs. Rius' Etsy shop with bumper stickers and vinyl decals.
They know what the Cheeto wants to hear.