It’s likely that a government in that situation would prefer to use these less lethal weapons. Mowing down the crowd en masse with something like firearms would magnify problems at home and abroad, whereas turning them back with something like a sonic cannon would cause less complications.
Let's suppose Kim, Jung-un has a problem with people crossing over into SK. Do you think he'll use less than lethal weapons, or do you think he'll go for the assault rifles?
Parent Post implied that had the DDR had these sonic weapons the Berlin Wall would not have fallen... as if The DDR would not have had the willingness to put a stop to it if they wanted to. What happened is they announced publicly that they had a change of heart and would let people cross. And so people did.
If you're leading a country as a stong[man] and you want to retain control, it is imperative you use strong tactics --anything less is seen as a weakness by (good or bad) adversaries, and rightly so.
I think that the reason the DDR did that was because of their power was already slipping. If they massacred a lot of citizens, they would probably have a revolution on their hands… They practically already did.
It’s a difficult comparison to North Korea because the regime is not in that situation. The situation is more nuanced than that. I elaborated on possible motivations for using nonlethal force earlier... In the case of North Korea, they also might prefer to not kill citizens who they use for labor.
I wasn’t intending to discuss specific events or political situations, though. I meant to merely touch on the political dynamics of non-lethal crowd control.
I find it fascinating that in North-Korea, even though they where starving, the system itself did not deteriorate. To be honest, the moment my life is slowly ending, due to missing calories- the politics of survival should kick in and vote for freedom (aka food) with theire feet.
North Korea would have collapsed long ago were it not for external influence. The country is like that alcoholic uncle that we keep enabling. Every time he throws a tantrum we give in to his demands because we don't want him to hurt his kids or burn the house down or attack the neighbours.
