I suppose that's to be expected from the North Koreans, but it's rather funny, since the ship is actually very lightly armed. Wikipedia says it only has 2 M2 Brownings aboard, does the North Korean museum claim it was armed with more, or do they claim that's heavily armed?

I think they emphasized the weaponry because the US billed it as the capture of an environmental research ship in international waters, while the DPRK preferred to position it as a thwarted military incursion into sovereign Korean waters.

You visited North Korea?

Based on their spelling of “armoury” they don’t seem to be American. As far as I’m aware, the only country that forbids travel to NK is America.

I imagine the DPRK classifies all Americans and Europeans as simply "Western imperialist dogs", or something like that. The last thing I'd be worried about when planning a trip to Pyongyang is whether the US is cool with it. I would go to nearly any other country than go to North Korea. Just doesn't seem worth it. Wouldn't feel right putting my tourist $$$ directly in the pocket of the fascist Kim regime, for that.

> I imagine the DPRK classifies all Americans and Europeans as simply "Western imperialist dogs", or something like that.

They classify them as people that will pay good money to be taken on a Disneyland tour through their Potemkin villages.

I went in 2012; all the villages I saw exhibited poverty, failing and non-existent infrastructure, evidence of food scarcity and some interesting evidence of long-term solid fuel shortages. That said, we didn't specifically visit them. Drove by and through

You weren't supposed to look at the literal villages, you were supposed to look at the subway stations and the theatrical events.