Support NeoGAF

[Aztechnology]

The only even tiny thing I could have against this is the fact no person should have to be banned or even told not to go to North Korea. Anyone who does who isn't an Ambassador sent by the United States Government or explicity invited like Dennis Rodman is an absolute idiot. Even if you were invited, you're probably still an idiot.

For non Humanitarian/aid reasons that is. Some people are allowed in to give medical care, like Mass cataracts surgeries etc.

 

[Shiggy]

How do they want to enforce this?

 

[Valtýr]

I personally don't want my tax dollars going to paying the ransom for a bunch of knuckle draggers.

I mean I get where you're coming from, but I feel this sets a weird precedent of the government dictating what a citizen can do when the citizen leaves their borders. I'm not all about that.

 

[sasimirobot]

This sucks, now how can I "one up" people on Facebook with my travel photos? Guess I need to look into a canoe to Antarctica...

 

[slit]

Do they generally forbid americans from going to other dictatorships like Saudi Arabia, Russia and China? There was obviously the last guy that died but generally speaking NK isn't particularly dangerous to US citizens.

When those countries gov't's start holding American citizens hostage on a semi-regular basis you'll have a point. Otherwise, no it's not the same thing. It wasn't just that "last guy", there is a pattern.

 

[Kthulhu]

If it's about sanctions, it's fine.

If it's about safety, they should let people make their own decisions. If they really wanted to prevent citizens from taking risks with their personal safety abroad, they would punish people for trying to climb Everest.



Bizarre question. Do you ask people going to London if they are cool with a terrorist hitting them with a truck?

If you live your life based only on whether you can accept the worst-possible outcome, you can't do anything. At some point the probability of that worst-case scenario occurring has to enter into the decision-making process.

As I mentioned in my previous post. I don't want my taxes funding a totalitarian dictatorship that kidnaps people.

If you want to go to North Korea and risk getting locked up and are morally content to support them, be my guest. But if you want the US to bail you out of your stupid decision, then I say you deserve what you literally asked for.

 

[Chittagong]

I really don't think this is about safety of US citizens. The government guns down 1000+ of its own citizens every year, 20x more than UK for example, so one tourist getting manhandled to death in ten years can hardly be a concern.

I believe this is more about negotiation leverage, whenever DPRK has US citizens as bargaining chips it makes it hard for USA to go all in with its sanctions and other measures, it becomes a PR problem for them to be tough as it's perceived it's to the detriment of the detained US citizen.

 

[LostCaress]

When those countries gov't's start holding American citizens hostage on a semi-regular basis you'll have a point. Otherwise, no it's not the same thing. It wasn't just that "last guy", there is a pattern.

NK is horrible, no arguments there. But they don't randomly detain american citizens just for kicks. Wikipedia actually has a list of detained american citizens : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_nationals_detained_in_North_Korea

Fair point, but that doesn't make those countries dictatorships.

I suppose you could make the argument for Russia, but Saudi Arabia is a theocratic monarchy and China is a single party socialist government.

Russia, China SA and NK are dictatorships. Just because some might be more benevolent (and it seems to me that of the 4 Russia is possibly the more lenient one), doesn't mean they are free countries.

 

[slit]

NK is horrible, no arguments there. But they don't randomly detain american citizens just for kicks. Wikipedia actually has a list of detained american citizens : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_nationals_detained_in_North_Korea

.

Yeah, you're really going to try and justify those detentions? Also, that's not a full list.

 

[LostCaress]

Yeah, you're really going to try and justify those detentions? Also, that's not a full list.

Do you know where I could get a more complete list? My point isn't that NK is a good place, or a safe place, just that they don't usually detain tourists for no reason, and there are many other horrible places in the world where such a ban doesn't exist. Are americans banned from traveling to Syria?

 

[MUnited83]

Good. Fuck funding an actual tyranny.

This ban doesn't just affect tourists. It affects humanitarian aid workers too.

 

[slit]

Do you know where I could get a more complete list? My point isn't that NK is a good place, or a safe place, just that they don't usually detain tourists for no reason, and there are many other horrible places in the world where such a ban doesn't exist. Are americans banned from traveling to Syria?

I can make up a bunch of reasons why a foreign national should be detained, whether true or not, and justify it. It doesn't just effect the person detained because now the U.S. gov't has to try and figure out a way to get them out of there. Also the Syria comparison is laughable. It is a war zone and there are Americans going there for humanitarian reasons.

 

[JettDash]

You have to be a moron to go there anyway.

 

[LostCaress]

I can make up a bunch of reasons why a foreign national should be detained, weather true or not, and justify it. It doesn't just affect the person detained because now the U.S. gov't has to try and figure out a way to get them out of there. Also the Syria comparison is laughable. It is a war zone and there are Americans going there for humanitarian reasons.

So your point is that all those detentions are made up? There are americans going to North Korea for humanitarian reasons as well. If safety is the issue here, I think it's reasonable to say NK is safer than Syria right now, no?

 

[Marvel]

Good, everyone should ban it.

 

[SummitAve]

I really don't think this is about safety of US citizens. The government guns down 1000+ of its own citizens every year, 20x more than UK for example, so one tourist getting manhandled to death in ten years can hardly be a concern.

I believe this is more about negotiation leverage, whenever DPRK has US citizens as bargaining chips it makes it hard for USA to go all in with its sanctions and other measures, it becomes a PR problem for them to be tough as it's perceived it's to the detriment of the detained US citizen.

Another captured citizen amidst the current tensions could escalate things and present a risk to many nations and Americans abroad. I do think it's about safety regardless of your weak attempt to conflate police violence with geopolitics. The government does not gun 1000 people a year.... approximately 10,000 different local and regional departments contribute to that number.

 

[Vicetrailia]

Good.

 

[iPaul93]

This is for the best.

 

[LiK]

Fuck NK.

 

[Bollocks]

I thought this was America, land of the free?

 

[SuperBanana]

How do they want to enforce this?

They can't. Getting a NK visa is super easy and they don't stamp your passport. However, tour companies will probably reject you.

 

[MUnited83]

I can make up a bunch of reasons why a foreign national should be detained, weather true or not, and justify it. It doesn't just effect the person detained because now the U.S. gov't has to try and figure out a way to get them out of there. Also the Syria comparison is laughable. It is a war zone and there are Americans going there for humanitarian reasons.

You do realise that North Korea also has Americans going there for humanitarian reasons right?
A ban on tourism to North Korea is understandable, but humanitarian aid people should still be allowed to go.

 

[slit]

So your point is that all those detentions are made up? There are americans going to North Korea for humanitarian reasons as well. If safety is the issue here, I think it's reasonable to say NK is safer than Syria right now, no?

In North Korea? Yes, since they have an axe to grind with the American Gov't. Syria is under the control of different factions so it depends on where in the country and anyway being safer isn't the only point. The NK gov't is under the control of one person who has made arbitrary decisions on these detentions. You honestly think the people detained are on a one person crusade to undermine/destroy the NK gov't? They are paranoid delusions and we should not have to rescue people if it can be avoided because of that regardless if it's for humanitarian reasons or not.

You do realise that North Korea also has Americans going there for humanitarian reasons right?
A ban on tourism to North Korea is understandable, but humanitarian aid people should still be allowed to go.

NK is under the control of someone who on a whim of paranoia can decide to detain so no even humanitarian reasons would not justify it.

 

[WorldofMiku]

I don't support the notion of a government telling me where I can or cannot go after I leave said country.

This is actually good. This move is actually protecting you and fellow citizens from getting detained and having hard labor. Unless you want that of course.

We are talking about North Korea, one of, or maybe THE worst country in the world.

 

[Tregard]

 

[Somnid]

I'm not sure why this wasn't always the policy. Not only for safety because of their constant saber rattling and capture and torture of detainees as well as political leverage the gain from them. But also because of awful tourists who think it's cool to give the regime money to look at propaganda towns and are openly funding terrorism.

 

[Dehnus]

Of course not, and don't you think that might be juuuuuust a little bit of a false equivalency you're drawing there?

Wweeeeeelllll...
the only difference with Saudi Arabia is that the U.S. likes them. They bomb the crap out of Yemen, have slaves and slave labor, and torture people all the time. They also export a dangerous version of a religion. A version that killed millions already and tortured even more.


I also don't like governments telling people where to go. That's how the iron curtain started.

 

[Lazy vs Crazy]

How do they want to enforce this?

This is a CYA move so that when an American gets thrown in jail or worse the government can say "not our problem, going there is against the law."

 

[TatteredHat]

Let's save the slippery slope discussion for when the US government starts banning people from traveling to countries that aren't run by oppressive regimes.

 

[SuperBanana]

Probably the most appropriate usage of this gif possible.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

Tourism sure, should be an exemption for aid workers though.

 

[Kthulhu]

Wweeeeeelllll...
the only difference with Saudi Arabia is that the U.S. likes them. They bomb the crap out of Yemen, have slaves and slave labor, and torture people all the time. They also export a dangerous version of a religion. A version that killed millions already and tortured even more.


I also don't like governments telling people where to go. That's how the iron curtain started.

That's a huge false equivalent.

 

[peteykirch]

My thought was that if you're brazen enough to go into a country like North Korea on your own accord, then it should be accepted if something bad happens to you, the US won't intervene on your behalf.

 

[Dehnus]

That's a huge false equivalent.

Nope. The iron curtain was started to keep:"the west out, and its opressed citizens from flooding paradise.".

Look it up that was the official propaganda stance. For that reason alone I'm against all walls and travelbanns. It is an individual right to move. It's however also in the community's right to not give welfare to everyone.

 

[Skellig Gra]

I can't really argue with this. I'm all for personal freedom and all that but sometimes people need protection from themselves.

Tourism sure, should be an exemption for aid workers though.

Fair point actually

 

[Kthulhu]

Nope. The iron curtain was started to keep:"the west out, and its opressed citizens from flooding paradise.".

Look it up that was the official propaganda stance. For that reason alone I'm against all walls and travelbanns. It is an individual right to move.

You have the right to move. The government wont bail you out of a shit situation if you go there.

 

[wumster3000]

Hate NK with a passion and would never go for a visit, but I don't like being told where I can go by the government. People go over there knowing about NK disdain for the US - that's their issue. People act like they can't read about a country before visiting? You have the internet people. You need to be told you can't go somewhere like a parent chastising their child.

 

[SolarPowered]

Actually surprised this did not come sooner, I just hope that this isn't Trump pulling civilians out because he is considering trying to take down the North Korean regime via military means. Because that would totally fuck over Japan and South Korea and lead to a costly and devastating war.

It will probably end with a war no matter what moves are made. That being said, I'd gladly kick the can down the road if it means Trump isn't overseeing a war.

 

[Kthulhu]

Hate NK with a passion and would never go for a visit, but I don't like being told where I can go by the government. People go over there knowing about NK disdain for the US - that's their issue. People act like they can't read about a country before visiting? You have the internet people. You need to be told you go somewhere like a parent chastising their child.

They know. They don't care because North Korea is "exotic".

Now a man is dead and taxpayer money has been wasted getting him out of North Korea.

 

[jakonovski]

America really seems to like restricting the movement of its citizens after Trump got in power.

 

[Somnid]

Hate NK with a passion and would never go for a visit, but I don't like being told where I can go by the government. People go over there knowing about NK disdain for the US - that's their issue. People act like they can't read about a country before visiting? You have the internet people. You need to be told you can't go somewhere like a parent chastising their child.

Yes in the perfectly idealistic individualistic society. But actually you have ties to other people and your government has obligations for you. At best it's preventing more tragedy and most cynically reducing political obligation, because even if you don't care what happens, others do.

 

[Goofalo]

America really seems to like restricting the movement of its citizens after Trump got in power.

I feel like this time its like when mom's tell their kids they can't go play in the yard full of rusty razor blades and dog shit.

 

[Domaje]

Hate NK with a passion ...

I wonder why it's ok to say this. It feels like it's cool to hate on NK. Like the song that says: "and you wonder why kids want to die for religion".

 

[wumster3000]

Yes in the perfectly idealistic individualistic society. But actually you have ties to other people and your government has obligations for you. At best it's preventing more tragedy and most cynically reducing political obligation, because even if you don't care what happens, others do.

I never said I didn't care. I have to be careful where I travel at all times. I read before I go, because I don't want to get my arse killed like dudes in Greece or NK. I wouldn't go to Russia either.

Taking away your ability to travel opens the door to preventing you from going more places. You mean to tell me that you can't read about NK before going? Woukd you travel to NK? I'm guessing no, because you have read about their hatred for the US. It's a dumb decision to go and we know it.

I wonder why it's ok to say this. It feels like it's cool to hate on NK. Like the song that says: "and you wonder why kids want to die for religion".

Don't know, maybe I should reexamine my thoughts.

 

[Goofalo]

I wonder why it's ok to say this. It feels like it's cool to hate on NK. Like the song that says: "and you wonder why kids want to die for religion".

My family has been hating NK since 6/25/1950. Street cred.

 

[EYEL1NER]

Seems like the US won't be telling the "I may not want to go there, but I should have the right to do it if I wanted) crowd where they can and cannot go, they are still free to go to North Korea. It's just that if you go, your passport may be cancelled and you cannot come back. So North Korea might wind up being the last place you end up going.

 

[Barzul]

Is this legal?

 

[jstripes]

Sets a bad precedent. It's one thing to warn your citizens, it's another to prohibit them from visiting another country.

Cuba?

 

[Goofalo]

Is this legal?

Yes. The US government has the right to grant and rescind passports.

 

[Trojita]

Been a long time coming. If you went there you are a dumbass.