Well, I hold out hope that *something* will happen, eventually.

The Kim's do hold power based on two things, intimidation and information. They control information flow in and out and intimidate their way though rebellion. However, their grip on information is starting to crumble and the fabric of their control over information is fraying around the edges so the Kim's have to step up the intimidation part of the game which they still control. Eventually there won't be any intimidation left to ramp up and the information part will play out.

You are right that the military is the key because it is a double sided blade. Kim is walking a fine line and should the officers start to get tainted by the information that is more and more freely flowing in the country, he will be forced to eliminate the upper ranks at a quicker and quicker rate to stay ahead of it. The harder he presses, the more likely he is to force an armed rebellion.

Kim is caught between a rock and a hard place, he must maintain the appearance of absolute control in the face of mounting internal pressure for change and free market reforms which are already (illegally) taking place inside his country in some places. He can start ramping up the killing, but that will eventually be his undoing. Once the country tips and Kim is removed from power, the resulting violent struggle will happen quickly, but the problem is, nobody will really be able to tell you exactly when the tip will take place.

I think your defector is likely correct in that the *current* conditions are not yet ripe for this tip and Kim will stay in power for the foreseeable future. However, I think change will eventually come to NK though internal forces, barring it being forced into change though external forces. Will it be a decade, two or three? I don't know, but it's pretty clear that change is coming to NK and that change will likely happen while the current Kim is alive..

We wish.... Actually NK is one of the few places the CIA is unlikely to have that much influence over. The time to get assets into the country was long ago and where I'm betting we have *some* local help, the nature of NK society is going to make it really hard to have much direct involvement.

Of course, this leaking in of foreign entertainment and information via USB sticks is becoming harder and harder to control and once the Kim family looses control of the propaganda war, things will change on their own. I think we are actually pretty close to the tipping point in some places in NK, but for now the fear of the Kim family is keeping things under control. Once the country tips though, there will be a short and intense period of violence that I hope stays contained within the country, but I fear will spill out to the south. Once that is over, North Korea will be split into two parts, one unified with the south and a portion annexed into China. I have no idea where the split will be.

I'm sure we could if we wanted too, but ask yourself a few "what happens then" questions and I think it will be pretty easy to figure out why he's still alive. What's the point of killing this guy if his replacement isn't any better and in the fight to see who's left in charge a lot of people die? Then there is the question about what this means for the Korean War, which is technically still NOT over. North Korea might (Or likely would) see this action as a provocation and reignite the war. Now THAT would not be a pleasant turn of events, even if the conflict would likely be pretty short and one sided.

No, Kim lives.... As much as we might want change in NK, I don't think killing Kim is the way to get the change we want..

Charge Al Gore for inventing the INTERNET! Now that's a crime...

(Oh you ARE sarcastic....)

Java is not the Swiss Army knife of programming languages... There are things it just isn't well suited for... But generally, not a bad choice for most run of the mill projects where performance and foot print don't really matter. However, if you are on limited hardware or have tight response time constraints, Java is not for you (but you hardware and embedded guys know this already.)

I think you are over generalizing like the original poster that drew my comments.

I'm not saying that LOTS of religion isn't what you see from the outside, only that there are some people who hold very different views and that the practice of humility is *really* practiced. You don't likely see these people much because they are generally not about flashy shows or in your face about it like the people you DO notice. In other words, take the time to look past the flashy and see what's really going on. I think you might be surprised.

I'm making the argument that this "power structure" you see is not universal, not that it doesn't exist anywhere.

I was arguing that the "all" statement wasn't true and the original author would be more accurate to use "most" instead.

It's your choice to believe or not, I cannot force you or debate you into it. As long as you are alive, God won't either. Google Josh McDowell and look at his research. He started out with the same idea you currently have...

Free gifts must be accepted as offered, so no. Salvation is NOT universal.. But you already knew that right?

It's a concept called "free will" which says YOU have a choice, and although God *could* force you to do anything He wanted, He lets you decide for yourself. Eternal life, or death, what will it be?

Choose carefully.

Yea, it was really when the apple was USED that things went badly for Adam.. "

He got thrown out of the garden and the life of ease where he was in charge and everything he needed was provided, where there was no sickness or death and into a world where he had to toil in the fields to eat, endure sickness to eventually die in a world ruled by another.

So where the fruit was "good for food" it was a bad idea to use it as such... "

Surface teachings... Sir, I believe you are *confused* about the level of the teacher being quoted. This was a quote from THE teacher, head honcho, primary authority etc. Others may assume to speak for him, but if what they do or say conflicts with what HE did or said, they don't represent Him accurately. HE is teaching that if you want to be first, you must serve others. What's more HE demonstrated this by taking on the role of a servant multiple times, and it is His example we look too. So if somebody is telling you to submit to them and their teaching they are NOT students of or followers of this same teacher.

That may be typical, but I can assure you it is NOT universal. The person who you would consider to be "in charge" in the church (Head Pastor/Elder) I go to is often heard to say "Don't take MY word for it! Go figure out what it means to you on your own. I want you to be INDEPENDANT seekers of truth!" Which is not what you are describing. This person does teach, but the students are expected to be independently looking at things themselves and making up their own minds not just swallowing the opinions of the teacher.

I really don't agree with you on this part. Where sin is indeed inborn and we earn punishment for sin, the story does NOT end there. You also misunderstand the means of salvation to be somehow feeling sorry enough or do enough good to meet some kind of standard. This is incorrect thinking, which is inconsistent with both the historical tenants of Christianity and with the declarations of the Apostle Paul who said: "The wages of sin is death" (you got that part, but you miss the next part) "But the free gift of God is Eternal life though Jesus Christ our lord." So salvation is not earned, it is free. And something given for free does not require the receiver to pay by word, deed or even cash to receive it so it cannot be about what you claim, control or power.

Further, this free gift which comes at no cost to me and you was actually purchased for us at GREAT cost. Legally, death is the required payment for sin, any sin, so the free gift being offered cost the purchaser death, and not just any death, but the death of the sinless. What would motivate someone to die for me? After all, I am a sinner, worthy of death.

Which leads me to my objection to your "self esteem" statement. What kind of value must I have if someone was willing to pay such a high price for me? You see, it's like I was a slave, old and weary, having nothing left and somebody comes up to my owner and offers to trade for my freedom. I know I'm worthless, but how does that slave feel when this somebody offers to become a slave and take my place? That's not a blow to one's self esteem. Neither is Christianity a blow to self esteem. Somebody paid MY debt for me, they must care about me! How would that make YOU feel? Bad about yourself? I don't think so.

This is a common misconception. There is no "focus on virtue". I have NO virtue of my own to offer, nor can I conger up enough virtue by doing good things to be worthy of more than just death. "All have turned away, all have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one." You and I are both part of the all. We cannot do anything to become worth of the previously mentioned free gift we just have to accept it. The Apostle Pal put it this way: "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast." It's not about trying to be good, or doing the right things, it's about the acceptance of the free gift so I don't get what I've ALREADY earned by my sin (which is death as you will recall from before).

As I 've sad before, free is free, and that precludes this idea of yours that all churches/religion is about power. Fundamental Evangelical Christians (which is not a denomination or a church but a description of what is believed) is therefor NOT what you claim all religion is.

Not exactly...Well, not ALL of them anyway.

Generally Fundamental Evangelical Christians teach humility and service to others and subscribe to the view that others are more important than me. That's exactly opposite to what you claim "ALL" religion is.

To Quote Christ on this: "You know that those who are recognized as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them; and their great men exercise authority over them. But it is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant; "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many."

So if you would mind allowing for a few exceptions to the "ALL" part and say "MOST" instead I think your sentiment would be more accurate.

For the plot line of course.... Queue "Q"!

Yea, but things REALLY got messed up when Apple came along...

Take it easy... It's a joke...