NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.comcast.net/News/INTERNATIONAL//XML/1104_AP_Online_Regional___Asia/8addf9ad-2383-4a2a-ae63-f5a78fe9cf78.html

Its about damn time someone stood up to the Bush administration.

You're a bit late, there are two topics on this already.

http://www.comcast.net/News/INTERNATIONAL//XML/1104_AP_Online_Regional___Asia/8addf9ad-2383-4a2a-ae63-f5a78fe9cf78.html

Its about damn time someone stood up to the Bush administration.
You mean it's about time some nation put a "nuke me" sign on its back?

"The claim could not be independently verified. North Korea expelled the last U.N. nuclear monitors in late 2002. It is not known to have tested an atomic bomb, although international officials have long suspected it has one or two nuclear weapons."

Haha, yeah right, I bet they have one or two for each state

We won't nuke them. If bush has any balls though he'll destroy all their airstrips and their air defenses just to show we can hit them anytime we want.

You mean it's about time some nation put a "nuke me" sign on its back?

No, but why should the US have nukes and nobody else? And what is Bush going to do about it now? If you think he would be dumb enough to nuke it, you're wrong. We would lose almost all of our allies and there would be riots. And if he sends an army in there its WWIII.

No, but why should the US have nukes and nobody else? And what is Bush going to do about it now? If you think he would be dumb enough to nuke it, you're wrong. We would lose almost all of our allies and there would be riots. And if he sends an army in there its WWIII.
Who really likes north korea? Nobody! And the U.S. has tried to seek a multilateral solution, and we can see what a fat lot of good that did anything. Instead of hitting them before they got nukes we dicked around and now they do have them. Go team world.

We won't nuke them. If bush has any balls though he'll destroy all their airstrips and their air defenses just to show we can hit them anytime we want.

Perhaps, just perhaps being president isnt about having balls and being a tough texas tiger. Just a thought.

We won't strike North Korea, even if Bush had the balls. North Korea has just pulled out the mutually assured distruction card. It is an excellent defense, and if you have seen The Fog of War with McNamara, you know that leaders have full intention of following through with it.

Perhaps, just perhaps being president isnt about having balls and being a tough texas tiger. Just a thought.
Actually much of the job of foreign policy is about having balls. Brains are just as important, but you won't get anywhere if you lack one of the two.

Who really likes north korea? Nobody! And the U.S. has tried to seek a multilateral solution, and we can see what a fat lot of good that did anything. Instead of hitting them before they got nukes we dicked around and now they do have them. Go team world.

Yeah, Bush is dumb, just not that dumb, first of all, he only talked to Iran while completely ignoring NK, now its his bad. So I agree with you on that. And sure, noone likes NK but if we nuke them noone will like US!

We won't strike North Korea, even if Bush had the balls. North Korea has just pulled out the mutually assured distruction card. It is an excellent defense, and if you have seen The Fog of War with McNamara, you know that leaders have full intention of following through with it.
MAD only works if you can actually destroy the other nation. NK has a handfull of atomic bombs, and no reliable delivery system that can hit the USA. The time to disarm them is now.

Perhaps, just perhaps being president isnt about having balls and being a tough texas tiger. Just a thought.

Like hell it isn't. When a country insinuates that our west coast would be a fine place for them to test a few nukes we kick their ass. The real issue here is what happens to South Korea in the process of this ass kicking? I don't think Seoul is very well prepared for the intensity of the artillery barrage they'd receive. There goes one of the world's largest economies, potentially.

Edit: I just realized that I don't know if they can actually hit the west coast of the United States. Can they? I don't know. But they could nuke our troops in South Korea or Japan. That'd be just as bad.

Actually much of the job of foreign policy is about having balls. Brains are just as important, but you won't get anywhere if you lack one of the two.
To an extent, but not if those balls are arogant like the Bush administration going into Iraq.

We won't strike North Korea, even if Bush had the balls. North Korea has just pulled out the mutually assured distruction card. It is an excellent defense, and if you have seen The Fog of War with McNamara, you know that leaders have full intention of following through with it.
Yeah, but they're playing with a pair. We have a few dozen decks. And where are their missiles going to hit? Alaska? I'm sure both eskimos that die will feel very sad.

To an extent, but not if those balls are arogant like the Bush administration going into Iraq.
Yeah, he seems to lack one of the two requirements I posted earlier.

Like hell it isn't. When a country insinuates that our west coast would be a fine place for them to test a few nukes we kick their ass. The real issue here is what happens to South Korea in the process of this ass kicking? I don't think Seoul is very well prepared for the intensity of the artillery barrage they'd receive. There goes one of the world's largest economies, potentially.
NK artillery can't get into SK because of the DMZ. Landmines were never mechanized infantries' friends.

Who really likes north korea? Nobody! And the U.S. has tried to seek a multilateral solution, and we can see what a fat lot of good that did anything. Instead of hitting them before they got nukes we dicked around and now they do have them. Go team world.

We can't prevent the world from obtaining nuclear weapons. That opportunity has passed and if we invade more nations based on the proliferation of nuclear weapons we are wasting men and money. We have to concentrate on nuclear defense systems. That should be done as a joint project with massive amounts of research and testing, not by simply building billions worth of untested equipment on the coast.

NK artillery can't get into SK because of the DMZ. Landmines were never mechanized infantries' friends.
The North can keep their artillery in their own territory and still hit seoul. The problem is they can't establish air supperiority, so US planes will wipe out the artillery before too much damage is done to the south.

Even if NK planned to hit us, what could they do? They couldnt even launch it at us, they have nothing to deliver it, they dont have top of the line technology, they have airplanes, and all they can do with planes is fly a bomb over to us, our radar would pick it up right when they took off and our intelligence would indicate something, than their plane sinks in the middle of the Pacific.

We can't prevent the world from obtaining nuclear weapons. That opportunity has passed and if we invade more nations based on the proliferation of nuclear weapons we are wasting men and money. We have to concentrate on nuclear defense systems. That should be done as a joint project with massive amounts of research and testing, not by simply building billions worth of untested equipment on the coast.
We can and should slow down their spread.

We won't nuke them. If bush has any balls though he'll destroy all their airstrips and their air defenses just to show we can hit them anytime we want.
If and when the US moves against North Korea it will be for the sole purpose of destroying any and all govt. and military infrastucture. We will level that entire pissant country.

Yeah, but they're playing with a pair. We have a few dozen decks. And where are their missiles going to hit? Alaska? I'm sure both eskimos that die will feel very sad.

Do we know that they don't have any ICBM's capable of reaching the West Coast?

If they don't, I think that Beijing and Tokyo would be excellent targets for them. If they strike there the entire Asian market collapses, which means the entire world economy collapses.

Kim Jong Il: "How will this end?"

Vorlon: "In fire."

We can and should slow down their spread.

So you think we should invade Iran? Did you agree with invading Iraq because of the Nuclear Weapons (I mean did you agree back than before it was proven they had no WMDs.

So you think we should invade Iran? Did you agree with invading Iraq because of the Nuclear Weapons (I mean did you agree back than before it was proven they had no WMDs.
No, I think we should bomb their reactor, their missile sites, and anywhere they may have nuclear material and bombs/missiles stored.

I was against the Iraq war because I thought if they did have WMD it was limited to nerve gas and anthrax, and they had no delivery system to hit the USA. Plus Saddam didn't want a war with us. A gangster doesn't go shooting up the police station. That's suicide.

Do we know that they don't have any ICBM's capable of reaching the West Coast?

If they don't, I think that Beijing and Tokyo would be excellent targets for them. If they strike there the entire Asian market collapses, which means the entire world economy collapses.
They wouldn't hit Beijing, NK and China are allies. Tokyo maybe, but if their missiles were of any quality they'd feel the effects in Pyongong.

http://www.comcast.net/News/INTERNATIONAL//XML/1104_AP_Online_Regional___Asia/8addf9ad-2383-4a2a-ae63-f5a78fe9cf78.html

Its about damn time someone stood up to the Bush administration.

Ever wonder why some people's children don't have enough sense to come in out of the rain?

The North can keep their artillery in their own territory and still hit seoul. The problem is they can't establish air supperiority, so US planes will wipe out the artillery before too much damage is done to the south.
They have enough mobile and hardened artillery that only copious nuke usage would take it all out in a short time frame. Meanwhile every peice of artillery they do have would be firing at Seoul giving horrendous civvie casualties.

We can and should slow down their spread.

I do not think that land invasion is a acceptable way of doing that.

With our utter failure in Iraq, it will now be nearly impossible to invade nations on the basis of nuclear weapons.

They have enough mobile and hardened artillery that only copious nuke usage would take it all out in a short time frame. Meanwhile every peice of artillery they do have would be firing at Seoul giving horrendous civvie casualties.
To shoot it they have to take it out of the hardened bunkers they store it in. If it's out in the open we can find and destroy it.

Ever wonder why some people's children don't have enough sense to come in out of the rain?

Ever wonder why a guy with the intelligence lower than the avg. person is the most powerful person in the world?

Maybe we dont come in out of the rain because the indoors brings more consquences.

Like hell it isn't. When a country insinuates that our west coast would be a fine place for them to test a few nukes we kick their ass. The real issue here is what happens to South Korea in the process of this ass kicking? I don't think Seoul is very well prepared for the intensity of the artillery barrage they'd receive. There goes one of the world's largest economies, potentially.

Edit: I just realized that I don't know if they can actually hit the west coast of the United States. Can they? I don't know. But they could nuke our troops in South Korea or Japan. That'd be just as bad.


Of course, the dead south koreans and japanese are just garbage, BUT THE TROOPS! OMG! AMERICANS WILL DIE! :rolleyes:

They wouldn't hit Beijing, NK and China are allies.

Would this be in the same way that the USSR and China were "allies?"

Really, all we need is for either Russia or China to start seeing NK as a threat to them, and the rest of us can sit back and watch the fireworks.

Ever wonder why a guy with the intelligence lower than the avg. person is the most powerful person in the world?

Maybe we dont come in out of the rain because the indoors brings more consquences.
Ever wonder why the truest sign of a person with low IQ is a person who believes everything he reads on the internet?

Of course, the dead south koreans and japanese are just garbage, BUT THE TROOPS! OMG! AMERICANS WILL DIE! :rolleyes:

Ha yeah that was a bad post by him. But he might be saying that they are nuking the Japan becuse Americans are there and that will also kill many other civilians.

Maybe...

Now, an honesty question. (sorry, I really don´t know this answer). But do the US have any anti-missile defense? I mean, I assume that the most powerful military in the world are prepared to destroy a nuke after it was launched... but I really don´t understand about weapons...

Ever wonder why the truest sign of a person with low IQ is a person who believes everything he reads on the internet?

I dont have to use the internet, its common sence.

A man who tries to raise money for the war by giving it to random people has to be pretty dumb.

Ever wonder why a guy with the intelligence lower than the avg. person is the most powerful person in the world?
.

You shouldn't display credence in obviously false urban legends. They only weaken your position.

Now, an honesty question. (sorry, I really don´t know this answer). But do the US have any anti-missile defense? I mean, I assume that the most powerful military in the world are prepared to destroy a nuke after it was launched... but I really don´t understand about weapons...

Yeah, we have a lot of missle defence.

Now, an honesty question. (sorry, I really don´t know this answer). But do the US have any anti-missile defense? I mean, I assume that the most powerful military in the world are prepared to destroy a nuke after it was launched... but I really don´t understand about weapons...
Yes, and we're working on new ones. The Arrow missile, for example. It's a joint US/Israeli project.

You shouldn't display credence in obviously false urban legends. They only weaken your position.

Its really not an urban legend anymore, its a cold hard fact.

They wouldn't hit Beijing, NK and China are allies. Tokyo maybe, but if their missiles were of any quality they'd feel the effects in Pyongong.

First, if China would not come to their aid in the event of a US attack, then I would say the alliance would be out the window.

Second, if NK were to resort to attacking Tokyo I doubt much of Pyongyang would be left to feel the after effects of the Tokyo strike.

I dont have to use the internet, its common sence.

A man who tries to raise money for the war by giving it to random people has to be pretty dumb.
Actually, common sense has nothing to do with IQ. It has to do solely with how your intelligence ranks compared to those in your age group. But hey, the more facts you make up the stronger your posistion, right?

Bush is "The Man"? I always thought it would be someone more impressive.

Now, an honesty question. (sorry, I really don´t know this answer). But do the US have any anti-missile defense? I mean, I assume that the most powerful military in the world are prepared to destroy a nuke after it was launched... but I really don´t understand about weapons...
We're testing things, it was one of Bush's initiatives, but it's by no means 90% yet.

We're testing things, it was one of Bush's initiatives, but it's by no means 90% yet.

Last I heard he was in Venice getting a big glass semi-circle built and is modeling it to put right over the US.

He might stain the glass black over Kerry states though.

Its really not an urban legend anymore, its a cold hard fact.

I'm afraid that unless you can provide actual statistics to back that statement, I shall be forced to declare that your trousers have ignited.

Just wondering, because the fact of US having a really effective defense system would not necessarily stop NK from attacking, instead, they could switch the target to an ally.

Just wondering, because the fact of US having a really effective defense system would not necessarily stop NK from attacking, instead, they could switch the target to an ally.
But the US will be sharing it with its allies. At least with Japan and Israel, at last count.

Ever wonder why a guy with the intelligence lower than the avg. person is the most powerful person in the world?

Maybe we dont come in out of the rain because the indoors brings more consquences.
Ummm...this is an urban legend extraordinaire.

And if you cite the lovenstein institute, well, I can tell you, it doesn't exist.

I'm afraid that unless you can provide actual statistics to back that statement, I shall be forced to declare that your trousers have ignited.

Damn that was good. :D

I'm afraid that unless you can provide actual statistics to back that statement, I shall be forced to declare that your trousers have ignited.

Ok, I have no evidence I have simply an opinion, backed up by 48% of other Americans and at least 75% of Western Europe. But it doesnt matter. Lets stop focusing on this, back to the NK nuke discusion.

Damn that was good. :D

No, it really wasnt.

No, it really wasnt.

Yes it was.

No, it really wasnt.

Hmmmm. Care to prove that?

Ok, I have no evidence I have simply an opinion, backed up by 48% of other Americans and at least 75% of Western Europe. But it doesnt matter. Lets stop focusing on this, back to the NK nuke discusion.
24% of Americans. 50% didn't vote. I think a person with at least average IQ would understand how statistics work.

24% of Americans. 50% didn't vote. I think a person with at least average IQ would understand how statistics work.

:D

lol.

Seriously, as someone said, NK just pulled the MAD card.. If they nuke someone, they get nuked, if they even try to help some terrorist put a nuke some place, they get nuked.. in a sense, I believe that this was the worst thing NK could do: While they were "developing" their nukes, they could at least make threats, ask for concessions.. resources..

Now they have a nuke. Hurray for them.

But like all freak regimes, they want to stay alive, they wont risk a war that in the end, they would always loose. So they will stay there, paranoid as always. While the west as a great opportunity to starve the regime.. I don't think that ANYONE in that region, Chinese included, are confortable with a nuclear-armed NK. It will now be very easy to maintain a full embargo to NK, i mean, not just an economical embargo. I mean controlling everyone that enters or exits that country, everything. They can have their nuke, their lifestyle. Until they rot. One must only be patient, and vigilant. Keep your guns in the holster.

24% of Americans. 50% didn't vote. I think a person with at least average IQ would understand how statistics work.

This topic should be dropped, not only is it a logical fallacy, but it is a stupid argument as well.

This topic should be dropped, not only is it a logical fallacy, but it is a stupid argument as well.
The stupid argument began when someone suggested a man with an Ivy League education had a subaverage IQ.

1) they can hit the west coast!

2) If they launch a missile, it'll be detected by Satellites and a response will occur

3) That response is good morning Pyongyang as a bomb detonates over the city

NK artillery can't get into SK because of the DMZ. Landmines were never mechanized infantries' friends.

hmmm their artillery can hit Soel. They don't have to cross the DMZ to reek destruction.

The stupid argument began when someone suggested a man with an Ivy League education had a subaverage IQ.

Agreed. Drop it.

Kim Jong Il: "How will this end?"

Vorlon: "In fire."

Nice adaption from episode 210 I think it is from Babylon 5 :)

1) they can hit the west coast!

They don't have any missles with that kind of range. The farthest they can go is Japan. With this news out, Japan and South Korea must be sh*tting gold bricks. After all, if NK goes under, from internal problems most likely, they might launch the nukes. Of course it'll be a crap shoot as to wether or not the missles actually hit anything. Its got a better shot of doing damage in SK rather than Japan. Japan's got AEGIS equipped ships and Patriot-tyoe missles for defense so they'll fre everything they've got at any NK missle.

They don't have any missles with that kind of range. The farthest they can go is Japan. With this news out, Japan and South Korea must be sh*tting gold bricks. After all, if NK goes under, from internal problems most likely, they might launch the nukes. Of course it'll be a crap shoot as to wether or not the missles actually hit anything. Its got a better shot of doing damage in SK rather than Japan. Japan's got AEGIS equipped ships and Patriot-tyoe missles for defense so they'll fre everything they've got at any NK missle.

http://www.roundupnews.com/news/2003/02/13/News/North.Korea.May.Have.Icbms.That.Could.Reach.U-368722.shtml

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,78388,00.html

wanna try again?

wanna try again?

My bad, didn't remember seeing those articles. I was kinda busy at that time. I try to use facts, but I screwed up a little.

But if its true, doesn't this validate the push for an anti-balistic defense program.

Also, the accuracy and reliability of the missle should be called into question. If its never been "field tested" then, ouside a lab, anything could happen.

My bad, didn't remember seeing those articles. I was kinda busy at that time. I try to use facts, but I screwed up a little.

Don't worry about it. I think it got obscured anyway

But if its true, doesn't this validate the push for an anti-balistic defense program.

Yes it does. And why we are developing it and why we pulled out of the obsolete ABM treaty

Also, the accuracy and reliability of the missle should be called into question. If its never been "field tested" then, ouside a lab, anything could happen.

It is called into question. Russian missiles aren't great either. US's are very accurate however.

Hmmmm. Care to prove that?

Not really.

Not really.

Good. It would have been a waste of time.