It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


US 'not withholding food aid from North Korea'

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:27 AM

US 'not withholding food aid from North Korea'

US officials have denied an accusation from former President Jimmy Carter that the US is withholding food aid from North Korea.

A state department official said the North Korean government was responsible for the plight of its people.

US food aid was suspended two years ago after the North said it was not wanted.

North Korea has warned of severe food shortages this year as a result of the harsh winter. The UN has announced plans to distribute emergency food aid.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:27 AM
Here we have a cover-up, seems to me this needs to be on BAN.

Former POTUS Carter went to Korea (both N and S) over the last week. We have seen before that there are millions of N Korean citizens in danger of starvation.

The US state officials are claiming it is the N Korean government at fault. There are claims that authorities are not giving the aid they are receiving to the people.

This seems to me like finger-pointing while the lives of millions are at stake.

So, is the US "sanctioning" N Korea for K J Il's bad behavior? Why is the US not invading N Korea just like they've intruded in Middle Eastern and North African human rights violations? April 2011 - 05H02

N.Korea to run out of food in June: aid group
AFP - Parts of North Korea are expected to run out of food in less than two months due to a poor harvest even if foreign donors agree to provide assistance, a US relief group has said.
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 30-4-2011 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:29 AM

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:31 AM
reply to post by NakNok

i don't have the "436" on the map. Cover-up ?

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:33 AM
Accepting any kind of foreign aid would go against the whole juche thing.

I imagine if they were accepting aid the officials would have to lie to the people about it to reconcile that with their national pride.

As in announcing to the world they will not accept any aid while accepting the aid and claiming it as procured by their great leader somehow within the boundaries of the country. Maybe by claiming it was always on site stored for a rainy day or something.

But openly taking any aid at all would be bad for the propaganda unless it was spun completely to satisfy juche.

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:34 AM
reply to post by NakNok

While I appreciate you taking the time to respond, your illustration does not "speak for itself" - are these nuclear missile targets from a N Korean strategy put on a US map? If so, are the starving people who are eating grass, leaves and tree bark the ones with their bony, shaking fingers on the "GO" button?

Please explain your point of view - I am curious.

edit on 30-4-2011 by wildtimes because: clarity

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:35 AM
reply to post by LaTouffe

it was only about 10 minutes back when i saw it on

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:38 AM
reply to post by wildtimes

i'm sorry that ive post it here has nothing to do with the subject. I only whant it to share it with you.

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:50 AM
reply to post by NakNok

And again, I appreciate your doing so. But surely you have a comment to add to the picture? Is it that Americans are also in grave danger from radiation?

I am certainly a protester of the US govt for not looking after its own, because it doesn't. Personally I don't believe the US govt should be the butt-inskys that they are going broke to be. That is my point:

The US govt intrudes where it feels it has "interest" in doing so, wearing the cloak of "Human Rights Violations", but also reserves the right to say "Ok, you don't want help? We won't give you help. Fine."

AND YET - Gadaffi said "We don't want your help." Did that stop NATO or the US from "helping"?

The point being, who decides which oppressed population "deserves" US "aid", and which population does not?
Gadaffi is no less a madman than N Korea's leader. (In fact he's been mad for a looonnnng time - they both have). But just because a corrupt dictator says "get off my city wall" (in South Park accent of $*itty Warr),
is that okay?

If someone came to distribute food to the people going to bed hungry in the city in which I live, and the Mayor ran out of his manor house and said "Nono, please, no, don't help these people.", would it be right for the humanitarians trying to feed those people to say "Oh, obkb...never mind."

OR - would they say "What the he[[ is wrong with you? These peoplea are starving!"

It's as though the US govt is saying "Fine. Don't come crying to me when your people are all dead! You big dummy."

Hypocrisy, thy name is government.
edit on 30-4-2011 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-4-2011 by wildtimes because: typos as usual

edit on 30-4-2011 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 09:36 AM
reply to post by wildtimes

As much as I want to help the NOrth Korean people, I think we are doing more damge to them by giving the North government aid. It prolongs their grip and the people continue to suffer because of it.

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 11:38 AM
reply to post by Xcathdra

sounds a bit like terrorism to me.

y'know, kick kim out and become a "democracy" or starve.

using food as a weapon.

just my 2cents, not getting on your case.

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 12:28 PM
A few things.

The US and SKorea have been giving NKorea millions of tons of food aid for years. Back in 1993-1994, about a million NKoreans died from starvation, even if there were hundreds of thousands of tons of food stocked for the army in reserves, and there were reports of up to 10 000+ cases of cannibalism during those times.

The NKorean government doesn't give a flying turtle about their citizen. In the past, even as people were starving, the NKorean government took the food from the food aid the US-SK were giving them and were stashing it for their army reserves or SELLING IT to China.

Giving NKorea recompenses (food aid, talks) for their behavior (reckless provocations killing people, basically acts of war) has been tried for years and it didn't work. Time for a new approach of not recompensing them for their behavior.

What is important now is 2012, the year Kim Jong Il is claiming that NKorea will be prosperous and a land of plenty. It is also the big propaganda move for the succession. Thing is, most NKoreans don't like Kim Jong Un...

So... don't give NKorea food... and when Kim Jong Il die, the chances of the regime being overthrown/collapsing are very high.

Yes, people will die from hunger. But what should be the price of getting rid of this regime? If you say war is better than the starvation of a few thousands, think again, from military analysts back in November, they said that if war broke out, it would take a few months and at least a million dead to take out NKorea. And that is if NKorea doesn't use chemical/biological/nuclear weapons.

Yeah I know it's cruel... but there's really a chance for it all to collapse in the next year or so. Giving them food would be killing that chance.

But in the end, this choice doesn't rest in our hands...
edit on 30-4-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 01:34 PM
reply to post by wildtimes

This is a most difficult question personally for myself. We have a nation hell bent on nuking america, with a leader so corrupt he would rather see his people starving them stop trying to destroy america hence receiving foreign aide. yet I also ask myself this, inlight of the worldwide disasters and war going on, should I consider my very own country first? we have not suffered a japan quake or drought like conditions china is experiencing, we have not yet expereinced the flooding level austraila has suffered. yet we see life killingktornadoes destroying the midlands, o ya isnt that a major grain belt? we have hurricane season jsut around the corner, and the possiblity of a major quake or two, so i ask myself, who comes first? I dont know just yet, because to send a precious resource to a man who wants us destroyed I just dont know.

posted on May, 1 2011 @ 07:37 AM
Thanks to both of the last respondents, your thoughts are much appreciated.

I don't advocate war against anyone. Let me make that clear.
I believe the USA should butt out of other countries' affairs, and - as I said - take care of our own. Your points are well taken, and very sensible.

Do I think despots should be removed from power? Yes.
By the USA? ummm.....

for the sake of debate, let's first take the POV of those who say Yes:

Yes, the USA, because of its might and influence for the time being, should do what's necessary to protect other countries' civilians from atrocious oppression by their leaders (self-proclaimed or whatever).

So - the USA goes into Libya, or Egypt, or Sudan, or Afghanistan, or Iraq, or wherever there seems to be unhappy people and inhumanitarian treatment of innocent civilians.

If that is the case, should the USA not go into EVERY country that needs help? What tips the balance between "Hell ya, America!" and "Naaaah. Their prob, not America's".

Now, the POV of those who oppose intervention in the sovereign affairs of other countries:

No, the USA should look after its own problems, get its own house in order, see to the housing and nutrition and wellbeing of its own citizens, first and foremost. AFTER that has been accomplished, and not ONE MOMENT sooner, should the USA step into other countries' business.

(And since that has not happened, and is not going to happen in my lifetime, or my kids' lifetimes, there's no point in discussing the "AFTER" situation at all....)


So - the debate boils down to two things as far as I can tell:
Economics v Human Rights
Money v Living Beings

What is the answer? It seems one of the great moral questions of all our known history as human beings. It seems that the human race is a warrior species. If that is so, can it ever be changed?

I honestly am not certain on this issue at all - and appreciate the opportunity to discuss it from an ethics perspective. Again, thanks to those who thoughtfully responded....
I'll keep an eye out for more if anyone is interested in furthering the discussion.

edit on 1-5-2011 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 1 2011 @ 11:04 AM

Originally posted by wildtimes

US 'not withholding food aid from North Korea'

US officials have denied an accusation from former President Jimmy Carter that the US is withholding food aid from North Korea.

US food aid was suspended two years ago after the North said it was not wanted.
(visit the link for the full news article)

U.S.: "You're out of food. Here have some."
NK: "We don't want it. Keep it."
U.S.: "Oh, ok then."
Jimmy C: "OMG the U.S. is killing North Koreans!"
Rational, sane person: OMG Kim Jong-il is killing North Koreans!"

Maybe JC should move to NK and feed some people.


posted on May, 1 2011 @ 05:55 PM
reply to post by The Old American

Hey, thanks for chiming in......
made me laugh. the world is SO screwed up.

posted on May, 1 2011 @ 08:51 PM
if the north koreans would allow the UN to distribute the food aid we wouldn't be having this conversation because food would be flowing into north korea to aid the pitiful citizens of that country. However, its the NK gov't that wants the aid directly. They'll give a bit to the people, they'll sell some so lil kim can have his whiskey, and the rest will go to feed his massive army. What little aid trickles down to the people will be sold to them, while propaganda spouts how the rest of the world gave them the food as an offering to how impressive the great leader is.

I think we should have left he Libyan thing alone, but North Korea and Lybia are worlds apart. North Korean constanly plays this game of brinksmanship to try and get what they want. They shell civilians, they starve there own people...all while Kim and his family are fat and happy and completely in control. It is not the united states obligation to feed the world. We donate millions of tons of food to the world, we donate money, expertise, and our unmatched ability to get emergency supplies to places that need them. That is not a right, its by the grace and generosity of the american people that makes that to happen.

Feeding north korea's army does nothing but prolong the whole rotten system. NOT feeding the people is a horrible thing to be forced to sit by and watch. I'm sure many south koreans weep at night to think of their distant relations in the north starving to death. I don't know what the answer is. War would cost both sides millions, and letting millions starve is a hard thing to bear.

posted on May, 1 2011 @ 08:56 PM
Here's the key to this arguement, it comes down to three crucial things - U.S. - North Korea - Former President Jimmy Carter. Apparently, this guy has never gotten over the beat down that Iran put on him, and how much the U.S. loathed him for that. Hey, Jimmy, grab a hammer and go pound some nails will ya, it will help you work out you hate for the USA !

posted on May, 1 2011 @ 09:11 PM
reply to post by outlander6436

It sounds like a good premise, right up until you used the term "Useless Now", oh, I'm sorry, the United Nations! If North Korea wants to eat, they should drop the whole hate card against South Korea, end the"war", reunite and come back into the world community. That's all it would take, and I think folks in both North and South Korea lay they're heads down to sleep every night praying for that dream to come true. South Korea has a good economy. North Jorea has bad economy. West Germany had a good economy. East Germany did not. It only makes sense. Why doesn't it happen, one word, China, who doesn't want to have to compete with a re-united Korea. It has always been that way since the war, and always will be!

top topics


log in