Sensationalism or real information?

While looking for an article for my last submission I stumbled across this one."Amid Soldiers and Mines in the Korean DMZ, School Is in Session" and I thought it was really interesting, plus I have a bit of a fascination for the North and South Korean issues so…. Here we go again…
The Korean War took place between 1950-1953. At the end there was a Demilitarized zone set up as a buffer between the two countries, it’s about 2 and a half miles wide. Within this DMZ there lies two towns, Kijong of North Korea and Taesung Freedom village for the south. A long time ago these two villages were used to compete between the countries. When South Korea built a tall flag pole the North outdid them by putting up the tallest one in the world. Over the years the propaganda war died down after South Korea obviously won the competition and the North Korean village, Kijong in now deserted. The Taesung Freedom village however, is up and running. In between 2 million troops stationed on either side of the DMZ is this town that people are given incentives to inhabit. The residents don’t have to do the countries mandatory military service or pay taxes, farmers are allotted ten times as much land as they would anywhere else and the town is riddled with little “gifts” such as a new movie theater. The Article is mostly about the elementary school in this town and I think its ironic that the article would cover the elementary school and not something more pertinent to the tensions this region is feeling. After decades, children have grown up and the student body dropped to as low as 6 students. New students are now being driven across the boundaries of the DMZ, passed the miles of barbed wire and minefields, every morning to attend the school which is guarded by 80 military service men 24-hours a day. The school is very well funded, as most of the town is, it has a wide screen TV in every room and 18 teachers for 30 students. This article explains more of a place and not as much of a new issue of event, at least on a macro-scale. The main issues involved here are inherently social. As children have been attending school here for decades, many have graduated through the years and I am sure that once they leave the town to head toward the cities and start their careers, that their status is elevated because of their home town. Also, there is now a waiting list of 18 names of children that are waiting to fill the vacancies that will be left by graduating kids in the future. This, I would also think, could become a status symbol for those who are accepted not only because of the minute numbers of children that have the ability to go to this school but also because I’m willing to bet that the families of these children are also taken care of financially for allowing their child to cross the fences of the DMZ every morning and go even further towards the dangerous North Korean Border. The mere existence of this town and its school is a symbol of the decades of weary peace that the two countries have been balancing for so long. It is imperative that South Korea continues to keep this village populated and running smoothly simply to continue to show the North Koreans that the Southern Koreans are still prospering and enjoying their democratic, capitalist system.

New York times on Korean water control

here is another article from the New York Times, it describes the burst of water flow that came out of North Korea’s Hwanggang Dam in September. The water came rushing into South Korea killing a handful of civilians who were camping near-by a river. The article covers South Korea’s response, in which it has demanded an apology from the North and a full explanation. Apparently they have already received an explanation saying that the dam workers had to act quickly because the water behind the dam was building up to fast but the South doesn’t buy into that and wants a more detailed response. One reason that the article points out is that North Korea has built many dams controlling rivers that head into South Korea and they believe one motive could be the ability to wage a “flood war” by releasing large amounts of water and sending it down stream all at one time. Personally this doesn’t seem to me to be far beyond possibility. North Korea has been very devious in the past and it would surprise me even if I found out that this flash flood has been on purpose, possibly to test their ability to inflict damage with this strategy. The control of water can be extremely hazardous to bi-lateral relations between political entities, as we have seen in many places around the world and even in our own back yard, in a few states surrounding us. This type of issue could become one of serious significance specifically because of the flowing tension that the two Korea’s have been trading for so long. The political implications are obvious and the article references them directly; President Lee Myung-bak in South Korea is keeping a hard line on Pyongyang even though it could undermine North Korea’s recent diplomatic acceptance. I believe that this is the best way to handle it. We have seen time and time again that North Korea responds to international pressure by rebelling, as secretary of state Hillary Clinton put it, like an attention seeking teenager. However, that is no reason to back down, North Korea may not weigh their international credibility at the top of their priorities list but the fact remains that Mrs. Clinton was exactly right and North Korea deserves the actions that are constantly taken against them. As for social implications, I believe there will be none in the North, mainly because I doubt that the majority of the population will even hear about the incident, and if they do it will certainly be a calculated release in Pyongyang’s favor. Economically though, North Korea’s control over water resources flowing into South Korea could most certainly create chaos. Before reading this article my thoughts would have surrounded a possible shut off of the water which could ruin crops and lower South Koreas available drinking water reservoirs but now, I could also invasion a “water attack” which could also wash away crops and fill drinking water reservoirs with thick sediment but also create civilian devastation by tearing away homes and businesses and killing mass numbers of South Koreans near the border and even downstream. This could easily have been an accident, and mostly likely it was, but either way it is a testament to the irresponsibility that we find in North Korea.

russian train crash... terrorism?

an article in the new york times describes a crash involving a 20 car luxury train on its way from Moscow to st. Petersburg. apparently the crash was begun by a bomb, 15lbs. of TNT, that had been laid on the tracks and exploded once half of the cars had passed. a five foot crater, multiple fatalities and even more injury's are all that is left on the scene now. the article says the crash happened in a very inopportune location for emergency personnel to reach quickly, apparently all the roads to that part of the tracks are unpaved and full of ditches. the train itself is known as a means of travel for the "higher society" in Russia, a few public officials were among the fatalities.

To me, this doesn't seem to be in question... it was a terrorist attack, parts of the homemade bomb were found, along with the crater and given that the location was so remote, and the train was a viable means of transportation for important government officials i couldn't see how anyone would argue otherwise. the article goes on to explain Russia's more recent history with terrorist attacks, mentioning multiple times the Chechnya's and their past terrorist activity against Russia. personally, i don't believe that there will be much in the way of investigation, at least i doubt we will find out who planted it unless some group claims responsibility. but once again, a needless attack has taken innocent lives in the name of some movement that probably has very little to do with anyone on board that train.

the nixon movie

hello everyone... i sat to do my blog and personally, i just don't feel like talking about the news. i get pretty tired of the media in general so i wanted to talk about the movie we watched in class, Frost Nixon. now personally, i dint really know much in the way of details when it comes to Nixon's presidency but i can imagine from watching the movie, the type of chaotic phenomenon that must have been going on in America during that time. we have all seen what the country does when mass popular opinion relinquishes its support of an American president and Nixon's case must have been much of the same, which brings me to my next point... although GW bush's presidency cant be followed parallel to Nixon's i would still like to make a few comparisons. simply, if i were GWB i wouldn't want to take part in any interviews, talk shows or even pictures. after all the mass criticisms during his presidency i wouldn't want to come out of the house for a few months. the same goes for Nixon, it was to my surprise that he was interested in taking part in those interviews to begin with but what i really don't get is why he answered the tough questions like that. the movie made it very clear that the two parties had a contract and also that Nixon was a man of conversational genius. so then... why, after all of the heat he felt in washington and the months he had to let it settle down a bit would he feel inclined to tell the truth to an interviewer who he viewed as "below him"? what i would like to know, is exactly how accurate is the movie in comparison to the real life events, on and off of the interview cameras... just a thought...

border patrol?

id like to pose a question, something that i have wondered for a while; maybe someone can shed some light on the topic. in january of 2008 i took a trip to san diego for my 21st birthday to visit a friend. during the trip my friend and i went along with a few of his friends to Tiawana mexico for a night to celebrate. now what confused me, and has become more and more perplexing as time has gone on is that during our excursion i didnt see any thing involving a border control. there was no booth, no toll area and no gates. we drove right into mexico and later that night drove right out on some highway only to see a "welcome to the united states" sign and literally nothing else.

my confusion comes into play everytime i see something on the news about how border patrol is so strict and that they have been ramping up their protection. how can this be possible if not to long ago i was able to enter and exit as easily as i would drive to school and back. i could have brought 20 mexicans and a hundred pounds of cocaine with me if i had desired and so everytime i hear about border patrol i wonder if i just happened to go there just before the border began to close or if tiawana is some type of non sanctioned area or what... if anyone has any ideas id love to hear them

is obama safe?

i got on yahoo today and saw a little story about a mishap that the secret service had while protecting the president. apparently, a couple by the name of the salahis were cleared to enter the white house during a dinner in honor of the Indian prime minister. they were not on the guest list and were allowed to enter anyway after passing through the metal detectors. no harm was done. the spokesman for the secret service commented however, that they should get the job done 100% of the time and although they have screened 1.2 million people for over 100 functions, even a single slip is too many. the salahis are now expected to enter a criminal investigation. what is interesting however is that there are pictures showing them with the president in multiple other events including in the glass case that the president and his family were in during the inauguration.

i think this is a pretty interesting story. its true, the president should always be protected completely. with all of the public functions that he attends the odds of someone trying to harm him are great, especially with all of the dramatic politics that have seemed continuous since the election. whether you like the president or not, it is never a good thing for the country to loose one to an assassination. my question concerns the fact that they have been seen with Obama before, and during the inauguration, in the glass case, i cant imagine this slipping so many times before. i would think that this could only mean that they have been cleared by the secret service before and were simply not invited to this particular event. this seems to be more of a misunderstanding than a criminal case.
it is difficult to make these assumptions however, at least without knowing more about the couple; but the article says they are participating in the new show, housewives of Washington DC. All of these facts lead me to believe that the couple are not a threat to the president but the fact still stands that these types of things should never happen. luckily, i believe this is the first time i have ever heard of this type of thing