NationStates Jolt Archive

COMMENTARY: The marginally functional North Koreans are at the sabre-rattling again. They're going to keep on doing this crap until someone finally gets pissed and turns the country into a parking lot.


N. Korea Says it Can Strike First (http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,91736,00.html?ESRC=eb.nl)


Associated Press | March 22, 2006
SEOUL, South Korea - North Korea suggested Tuesday it had the ability to launch a pre-emptive attack on the United States, according to the North's official news agency.

A Foreign Ministry spokesman said the North had built atomic weapons to counter the U.S. nuclear threat.

"As we declared, our strong revolutionary might put in place all measures to counter possible U.S. pre-emptive strike," the spokesman said, according to the Korean Central News Agency. "Pre-emptive strike is not the monopoly of the United States."

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman declined to comment on the reports.

Last week, the communist country warned that it had the right to launch a pre-emptive strike, saying it would strengthen its war footing before joint South Korea-U.S. military exercises scheduled for this weekend.

The spokesman also said it would be a "wise" step for the United States to cooperate on nuclear issues with North Korea in the same way it does with India. [ As IF! ]

Earlier this month, President Bush signed an accord in India that would open some of its atomic reactors to international inspections in exchange for U.S. nuclear know-how and atomic fuel.

The accord was reached even though New Delhi has not signed the international Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. North Korea has withdrawn from the treaty and condemned the United States for giving India "preferential" treatment.

"If the U.S. is truly interested in finding a realistic way of resolving the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue, it would be wise for it to come out on the path of nuclear cooperation with us," he said.

The North's announcement that it has a nuclear arsenal risked escalating tensions in the prolonged standoff over its program and threatened the prospect of resuming six-nation talks on the dispute.

"We have built nuclear weapons for no other purpose than to counter U.S. nuclear threats," the Foreign Ministry spokesman said.

It is rare for North Korea to mention its nuclear capabilities in such an explicit manner. The communist state usually refers to its "nuclear deterrent force."

North Korea first declared last year that it has nuclear weapons, although the claim could not be confirmed independently. Experts believe the North has extracted enough plutonium from its main nuclear reactor for at least a half-dozen weapons.

Six-nation talks have been stalled since November over a dispute surrounding financial restrictions the United States imposed on North Korea for its currency counterfeiting and money laundering. Those talks involve the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia.

Pyongyang says it will not return to the negotiating table unless the restrictions are lifted. But Washington demands that the North come to the talks without preconditions, saying the two issues are separate.

The North's spokesman said his country had shown "maximum flexibility" in trying to resolve the financial dispute, proposing possible solutions during a meeting in New York earlier this month. The meeting produced no breakthrough.

"The Bush administration talks about six-party talks, but it actually is paying no attention to the talks," the spokesman said, according to KCNA.

The spokesman also disputed last week's U.S. national security report that, among other things, said North Korea posed a serious nuclear proliferation challenge.

"In a word, it is a robbery-like declaration of war," the spokesman said. "Through this document, the Bush administration declared to the world that it is a group of war fanatics."

Clearly they have never heard of M.A.D (Mutually Assured Destruction) ever that or they want to go to war.

They properly anounced it to make them selfs look like Serious Communists who would do any thing to defend them selfs.

Even thought they properly have a few nukes at most that could only reach Japan and no further, but the odds are that they would use old MiGs and the Pilots would be on a suicide mission.

Clearly they have never heard of M.A.D (Mutually Assured Destruction) ever that or they want to go to war.

They properly anounced it to make them selfs look like Serious Communists who would do any thing to defend them selfs.

Even thought they properly have a few nukes at most that could only reach Japan and no further, but the odds are that they would use old MiGs and the Pilots would be on a suicide mission.
Still scary.

If it weren't for the people oppressed by this regime of idiots, I would say just slag the entire place and make it a staging area for Japanese auto exports.

The question is, are they just saber-rattling, or are they actually crazy enough to try anything? Hopefully the former!

The question is, are they just saber-rattling, or are they actually crazy enough to try anything? Hopefully the former!
Hopefully indeed! Yet they have been known to do violent things just to prove how wonderful "Great Leader" is. I don't know. On this one, all bets are off. :(

We should use our stealth bombers to drop magazines, televisions and radios on them. Once the people there see what they're missing Kim Jong Il will go the way of Mussolini.

pic deleted so I don't get banned.

What a pity it isn't Iran acting like this.

Why is no one asking themselves what prompted this announcement by NK?

Why is no one asking themselves what prompted this announcement by NK?
Because nobody cares why a scumbag acts like a scumbag. People only want to get rid of the scumbag.

Oh the irony.

What a pity it isn't Iran acting like this.
Why is that?

Why is no one asking themselves what prompted this announcement by NK?
Uh ... extreme zenophobia?

We should use our stealth bombers to drop magazines, televisions and radios on them. Once the people there see what they're missing Kim Jong Il will go the way of Mussolini.

http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/884/38398653deadmusso1508et.jpgHere's what Lil Kim's got to look foreward to.


I dont think that would work very well. I mean, sure they got a television, but knwo they need electricity. Unless they're hand crank or solora power ones, with satelite transmittion built in.

(Can u post that picture?)

This war has been brought to you by:

Pre-emptive war & Co
"Because Offence is the future if Defence and we'll defend whenever we like to"

Also available to any war loving country on the globe.

Oh the irony.
[ sees another "OMG! Teh Bush is teh suxorz!!!111ELEVEN!" bash coming ] :(

send Sam Fisher in, he could take care of them, single handed
im not too sure how well our land defense is, but its possible for the navy to prevent a missile from reaching our country

Meh ... we hold the record for pre-emptive strikes.

I figure what goes around, comes around.

This war has been brought to you by:

Pre-emptive war & Co
"Because Offence is the future if Defence and we'll defend whenever we like to"

Also available to any war loving country on the globe.
Then you'd definitely not want me as President of America. One of my very first acts as President would be to order a preemptive strike on both North Korea's and Iran's nuclear installations and leadership. :mad:

send Sam Fisher in, he could take care of them, single handed

Sam Fisher is far too busy to deal with such petty, mortal matters. He'll send Chuck Norris instead.

<snip>
(Can u post that picture?)
Know what? I don't know. I'm deleting it just in case. Thanks for the heads-up.

[ sees another "OMG! Teh Bush is teh suxorz!!!111ELEVEN!" bash coming ] :(

Those poor North Koreans are just trying to defend themselves from the evil Americans!

Meh ... we hold the record for pre-emptive strikes.

I figure what goes around, comes around.
Yup! That terrible, evil America caused all the world's problems, including WWII, the Korean War, and for all we know, plate tectonics. :rolleyes:

Those poor North Koreans are just trying to defend themselves from the evil Americans!
Oh thank you for not disappointing me! :rolleyes:

Oh thank you for not disappointing me! :rolleyes:

Your sarcasm-detector has failed you. Upgrade to the Mark 2000 model.

Then you'd definitely not want me as President of America. One of my very first acts as President would be to order a preemptive strike on both North Korea's and Iran's nuclear installations and leadership.
If by 'nuclear installations' you mean nuclear power plants, then that would be illegal under NPT - precisely the document the current administration is trying to nail Iran for violating.

Yup! That terrible, evil America caused all the world's problems, including WWII, the Korean War, and for all we know, plate tectonics. :rolleyes:
Damn yankees causing earthquakes

The question is, are they just saber-rattling, or are they actually crazy enough to try anything? Hopefully the former!

Hopefully the former for if it is the latter, they won't be around long enough for a 2nd strike.

Why is that?
Because then we would have a reason to pointlessly throw ourselves into a real war then pretend we arn't.

Yup! That terrible, evil America caused all the world's problems, including WWII, the Korean War, and for all we know, plate tectonics. :rolleyes:

I didn't say that ... I also didn't say anything about being evil.

However, I've known since I was a toddler that if you go around preemptively punching people in the face because they "might do something", eventually someone's going to get to you before you get to them.

Yes, we do bring a lot on ourselves. We are the asshole of the world. I didn't say we didn't earn the right to be, I'm just saying maybe we shouldn't take such advantage of that right.

If Korea strikes, Korea strikes. Life will go on.

So far we have paranoid xenophobia and 'who cares' as the only responses to why NK are announcing this now. Yes they may be paranoid, but they are very good at the publicity game. They would not make this kind of announcement without some compelling reason to do so, and that is why it matters.

If by 'nuclear installations' you mean nuclear power plants, then that would be illegal under NPT - precisely the document the current administration is trying to nail Iran for violating.
Pffft, If you're strong, you dont have to go by the rules. Or if you're backed up by a strong country.

Its sad, but it's the thruth

Damn yankees causing earthquakes

They all gather together and jump up and down. Bastards.

They all gather together and jump up and down. Bastards.
And many of us are overweight so that increases the effect.

Pffft, If you're strong, you dont have to go by the rules. Or if you're backed up by a strong country.

Its sad, but it's the thruth
Fine. I have no problem with that. I have a problem with people acting like that and then objecting to phrases like "illegal war". So long as everyone knows the rules matter shit all, it's no problem.

I didn't say that ... I also didn't say anything about being evil.

However, I've known since I was a toddler that if you go around preemptively punching people in the face because they "might do something", eventually someone's going to get to you before you get to them.

Yes, we do bring a lot on ourselves. We are the asshole of the world. I didn't say we didn't earn the right to be, I'm just saying maybe we shouldn't take such advantage of that right.

If Korea strikes, Korea strikes. Life will go on.

but chicks dig the assholes:D

Heres a question why threaten america, usually they threaten the ROK I mean its almost like they almost want to be kicked back to the stone age!

but chicks dig the assholes:D

Oh you betcha. The bad boy always gets laid. :D

If Korea strikes, Korea strikes. Life will go on.

Unless you live in whatever California city NK nukes. Or NK, after we strike back. Or anyplace downwind from those places.

Nuke them. Nuke them all.

Funny thing... Used to be a liberal. Now I just hate everything :rolleyes:

If by 'nuclear installations' you mean nuclear power plants, then that would be illegal under NPT - precisely the document the current administration is trying to nail Iran for violating.
Do you see concern written on this face?

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/6946/agingwarrior1tr.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Nuke them. Nuke them all.

Funny thing... Used to be a liberal. Now I just hate everything :rolleyes:


its ok, you have to grow up and experience the real world some time or another

Do you see concern written on this face?


Meh ... you're the one who said it was "scary stuff" ...

I, for one, am not scared enough of NK to go on bombing raids.

Heres a question why threaten america, usually they threaten the ROK I mean its almost like they almost want to be kicked back to the stone age!

Perhaps its because they are not very smart?

Meh ... you're the one who said it was "scary stuff" ...

I, for one, am not scared enough of NK to go on bombing raids.

Same here. I don't think even the NK leadership is insane enough to nuke the US - considering that their life expectancy would be measured in minutes after it happened. They're just trying to get some publicity since they're being ignored for Iraq and Iran.

They feel lonely...

Used to be a liberal. Now I just hate everything :rolleyes:

Like a good conservative should. :p

Perhaps its because they are not very smart?
Or perhaps they are trying to distract their people from internal problems.

They feel lonely...

I think I'll send Kim a fruit basket.

Unless you live in whatever California city NK nukes. Or NK, after we strike back. Or anyplace downwind from those places.
pff, as if NK puny nukes would get past the US and their defences

I think I'll send Kim a fruit basket.

I'm sending him some Thornton's chocolates; I get the feeling he has a sweet tooth.

pff, as if NK puny nukes would get past the US and their defences

Actually, that just made me think. What ICBM defences does the US have now?

Perhaps its because they are not very smart?

http://www.adjab.com/images/2005/08/kim_jong_il.jpg

look at their leader, oh man, if he does strike, he brings in a whole new era of jokes about him

Do you see concern written on this face?

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/6946/agingwarrior1tr.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

I see over inflated ego and far too much self confidance, that could be deflated with a few taepodongs topped with old fashioned Pu implosion devices (the same goes for Kim jong Il, but it will be tridents topped with Fission Fusion Fission types)

it wouldnt be such a bad thing really. both sides needa good kick in the arse.

I'm sending him some Thornton's chocolates; I get the feeling he has a sweet tooth.
I'll be sending him some kidnapped Japanese actresses. I hear he really likes those.

Does North Korea even have a missile that could strike the Continental US?

I see over inflated ego and far too much self confidance, that could be deflated with a few taepodongs topped with old fashioned Pu implosion devices (the same goes for Kim jong Il, but it will be tridents topped with Fission Fusion Fission types)

it wouldnt be such a bad thing really. both sides needa good kick in the arse.
You're certainly welcome to try. :D

Like a good conservative should. :p
Democrats make me ashamed to be an American. Republicans make me ashamed to be a human being.

I just think theres more important things to everything... more living, less worrying about everything.

Actually, that just made me think. What ICBM defences does the US have now?

We have a giant steel wall on a spring loaded hinge that will pop up out of the Atlantic and stop the missiles. We are aware this will completely flood Japan and probably wipe out most of SE Asia, but we're just itching to use that wall.

Democrats make me ashamed to be an American. Republicans make me ashamed to be a human being.

Aye.

Makes me glad to be independent.

Democrats make me ashamed to be an American. Republicans make me ashamed to be a human being.

I just think theres more important things to everything... more living, less worrying about everything.
Oh, how frakking original. :rolleyes:

We have a giant steel wall on a spring loaded hinge that will pop up out of the Atlantic and stop the missiles. We are aware this will completely flood Japan and probably wipe out most of SE Asia, but we're just itching to use that wall.

Heh...

Gah, I'm bored. Why isn't US Abassadorship in this thread? He could make some inane anti-liberal rant about how North Korea is next on Bush's list, then I'd cheer up by laughing. Maybe add in China attacking Pearl Harbor for bonus points...

Gah, I'm bored. Why isn't US Abassadorship in this thread?

No kiddin' ... this thread needs more Colbert-esque humor.

Heh...

Gah, I'm bored. Why isn't US Abassadorship in this thread? He could make some inane anti-liberal rant about how North Korea is next on Bush's list, then I'd cheer up by laughing. Maybe add in China attacking Pearl Harbor for bonus points...

Too bad Skap/Romulus got DEATed. He'd liven up this thread as well.

Oh, how frakking original. :rolleyes:
Sorry Eut, I'm not really concerned for originality right now, thats just what I'm feeling right now.

Roll your eyes all you want, thats just what I'm saying.

Or perhaps they are trying to distract their people from internal problems.

Ah the old orchestrating foreign crisis to get people to forget their domestic woes. One can only hope that the N. Korea can't be fooled to easily.

Of course I haven't heard any news about discontent in N. Korea to begin with so I don't see what they have to worry about. Pissing of the U.S. isn't very smart especially considering who we have as President. Who knows what he might do.

Too bad Skap/Romulus got DEATed. He'd liven up this thread as well.
A plague on all three of them! Ick! :D

The thing is IF NK were to launch a nuke at the US and it wasn't hit by a SAM launched from the pacific fleet or a PAC-3 battery on US soil, would the USA actually retaliate with thier own nuclear weapons or would the issue of fall out affecting China, South Korea and Japan force US forces not the react in kind?

The thing is IF NK were to launch a nuke at the US and it wasn't hit by a SAM launched from the pacific fleet or a PAC-3 battery on US soil, would the USA actually retaliate with thier own nuclear weapons or would the issue of fall out affecting China, South Korea and Japan force US forces not the react in kind?

No. It would just be a good ole fashioned conventional smack-down.

The thing is IF NK were to launch a nuke at the US and it wasn't hit by a SAM launched from the pacific fleet or a PAC-3 battery on US soil, would the USA actually retaliate with thier own nuclear weapons or would the issue of fall out affecting China, South Korea and Japan force US forces not the react in kind?

If Bush is still President when NK strikes, you can bet he won't give a rats ass about it. He'll have "scientists" standing up and declaring fall out a myth and a liberal lie. Congress will believe him.

The thing is IF NK were to launch a nuke at the US and it wasn't hit by a SAM launched from the pacific fleet or a PAC-3 battery on US soil, would the USA actually retaliate with thier own nuclear weapons or would the issue of fall out affecting China, South Korea and Japan force US forces not the react in kind?
Yes. There would be irresistable pressure to take retaliatory action, up to and including the nuclear option. It might take the form of very selective strikes, but it would happen.

Ah the old orchestrating foreign crisis to get people to forget their domestic woes. One can only hope that the N. Korea can't be fooled to easily.

Of course I haven't heard any news about discontent in N. Korea to begin with so I don't see what they have to worry about.


The reason for not hearing any discontent is that discontenters in NK get very long prison sentences inside wooden boxes called coffins... while their families get free holidays at the Kim jong loony rest home and labour camp for enemies of the state.:eek:

It's interesting though that they would talk about the India deal, because that's exactly the sort of thing I thought might happen.

As for first strikes...meh! They've been living with the same threat for fifty years, only fair I suppose.

And I don't think the North Koreans will simply switch sides like the Italians did in WWII. They're pretty indoctrinated over there.

Maybe they meant that those people they sent over to Russia as slave labourers sweep through Russian rocket-launch sites and have the keys to the button room.

Heh...

Gah, I'm bored. Why isn't US Abassadorship in this thread? He could make some inane anti-liberal rant about how North Korea is next on Bush's list, then I'd cheer up by laughing. Maybe add in China attacking Pearl Harbor for bonus points...


How ironic- This on a thread about a preemptive strike.

The question is, are they just saber-rattling, or are they actually crazy enough to try anything? Hopefully the former!


they shouldnt even have a saber to rattle.

Let's hope they die of old age before they do anything. >.>

North Korea is simply going to run itself into the ground. They have food shortages, their economy has imploded, industrial and power output are dropping rapidly, defectors are escaping (although I'm not sure how many), and they're running a disproportionately huge military. The nuclear weapons will almost certainly never be used, and they represent another strain on an already overstretched economy.

Although this situation is not exactly the same, there are parallels to be drawn to the fall of the USSR. I'd give the DPRK ten years at most before it collapses under its own weight.

They're going to keep on doing this crap until someone finally gets pissed and turns the country into a parking lot.

LOL! That's probably what North Korea thinks about the United States of Torture as well, eh?

I didn't say that ... I also didn't say anything about being evil.

However, I've known since I was a toddler that if you go around preemptively punching people in the face because they "might do something", eventually someone's going to get to you before you get to them.

Yes, we do bring a lot on ourselves. We are the asshole of the world. I didn't say we didn't earn the right to be, I'm just saying maybe we shouldn't take such advantage of that right.

If Korea strikes, Korea strikes. Life will go on.

I concur 100%(for some reason, most everytime you post, i agree...geez)

Ya...they are dying out now....but how long will they last?

Why the North Koreans are saber rattling:

-Bush noted they were apart of the axis of evil
-Bush noted he would not assure them that the US would not attack them nor would he sign a document stating as such BEFORE they kicked UN inspectors out of the country and started developing their nuclear arms program

-the North Koreans are looking to protect themselves from US saber rattling over the past years. Not that I am a fan of North Korea, however just stating facts which if anyone feels I am wrong, they need to do their research (do a search on BBC for starters, if you require links let me know, I have plenty).

-Interestingly enough Bush stated Iran was apart of the axis of evil then the current madman who is now Iran's leader (who is going to lead the world into WW3 - assuming someone else does not beat him to it) got involved in politics. Wish someone could lock him (the Iranian leader) up in a room with all the CIA fascists who are torturing people in Europe and elsewhere and just shoot them all into outer space. Would save the world cause in the end Bush is just a puppet to allow the CIA to get away with whatever they want...

Man, they're asking for it now

Why is no one asking themselves what prompted this announcement by NK?

Because trying to understand why people do what they do (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_science)...

...is hard: labeling <percieved_enemy> as "evil" dedicated to our collective destruction just for the heck of it is easier on the cerebrum.

...is politically inconvenient: labeling <percieved_enemy> as "evil" dedicated to our collective destruction just for the heck of it is a great way to garner electoral support.

...is characteristic of the yellow-bellied, subversive, and unpatriotic: no true <sociopolitical_group_member> would question the wisdom of <dearest_leader> whose only concern is your welfare (review point (2) above).

...might reveal that <percieved_enemy> has a valid complaint or position: this possibility leads to the destruction of the foundations of items (2) and (3) above, leading to the next point...

...might demonstrate that the assumptions of <dearest_leader> and <dearest_leader's_politics> are wrong: of course, this would mean that <dearest_leader>'s supporters are wrong, and being wrong makes people sad. Ergo, the possibility must be prevented and avoided at all cost.

Because trying to understand why people do what they do (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_science)...

...is hard: labeling <percieved_enemy> as "evil" dedicated to our collective destruction just for the heck of it is easier on the cerebrum.

...is politically inconvenient: labeling <percieved_enemy> as "evil" dedicated to our collective destruction just for the heck of it is a great way to garner electoral support.

...is characteristic of the yellow-bellied, subversive, and unpatriotic: no true <sociopolitical_group_member> would question the wisdom of <dearest_leader> whose only concern is your welfare (review point (2) above).

...might reveal that <percieved_enemy> has a valid complaint or position: this possibility leads to the destruction of the foundations of items (2) and (3) above, leading to the next point...

...might demonstrate that the assumptions of <dearest_leader> and <dearest_leader's_politics> are wrong: of course, this would mean that <dearest_leader>'s supporters are wrong, and being wrong makes people sad. Ergo, the possibility must be prevented and avoided at all cost.



Brilliant post. You rock.

Now if he took that to the social science thread... >.>

NK should be embargoed and quarentined!

they shouldnt even have a saber to rattle.

Yep. Thank you Mr. Carter!

Yep. Thank you Mr. Carter!
And what drug are you on?

And what drug are you on?

None. If it wasn't for Carter's Deal, none of this wouldn't be happenin

Meh, its a shitty little country, if they started anything it would be over real quick. We may not be great with insurgencies, but we can remove a tyrant quicker than poping a pimple. This time we really would be greeted as liberators, things are a lot worse there than they were in Iraq. Anyhow, the Korean War never officially ended, so when we were done we could just hand the land to the south.

None. If it wasn't for Carter's Deal, none of this wouldn't be happenin
How very absurd you are.

How very absurd you are.

Not absurd at all. That deal gave the North Koreans the ability to do what they are doing now. So how is is absurd?

LOL! That's probably what North Korea thinks about the United States of Torture as well, eh?
Your "humor" eludes me. :rolleyes:

I don't know, the US seems to like pre-emptive strikes.

Not absurd at all. That deal gave the North Koreans the ability to do what they are doing now. So how is is absurd?
How do you figure?

Why the North Koreans are saber rattling:

-Bush noted they were apart of the axis of evil
-Bush noted he would not assure them that the US would not attack them nor would he sign a document stating as such BEFORE they kicked UN inspectors out of the country and started developing their nuclear arms program

-the North Koreans are looking to protect themselves from US saber rattling over the past years. Not that I am a fan of North Korea, however just stating facts which if anyone feels I am wrong, they need to do their research (do a search on BBC for starters, if you require links let me know, I have plenty).

-Interestingly enough Bush stated Iran was apart of the axis of evil then the current madman who is now Iran's leader (who is going to lead the world into WW3 - assuming someone else does not beat him to it) got involved in politics. Wish someone could lock him (the Iranian leader) up in a room with all the CIA fascists who are torturing people in Europe and elsewhere and just shoot them all into outer space. Would save the world cause in the end Bush is just a puppet to allow the CIA to get away with whatever they want...
They are part if the "axis of evil" and a rogue state, and the rest is unadulterated bullshit.

Your "humor" eludes me. :rolleyes:
I think it's implied that the US shat and shits on way more taboos of the international community, including the production of torture apparel.

Because trying to understand why people do what they do (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_science)...

...is hard: labeling <percieved_enemy> as "evil" dedicated to our collective destruction just for the heck of it is easier on the cerebrum.

...is politically inconvenient: labeling <percieved_enemy> as "evil" dedicated to our collective destruction just for the heck of it is a great way to garner electoral support.

...is characteristic of the yellow-bellied, subversive, and unpatriotic: no true <sociopolitical_group_member> would question the wisdom of <dearest_leader> whose only concern is your welfare (review point (2) above).

...might reveal that <percieved_enemy> has a valid complaint or position: this possibility leads to the destruction of the foundations of items (2) and (3) above, leading to the next point...

...might demonstrate that the assumptions of <dearest_leader> and <dearest_leader's_politics> are wrong: of course, this would mean that <dearest_leader>'s supporters are wrong, and being wrong makes people sad. Ergo, the possibility must be prevented and avoided at all cost.


This would be a vaidl point if it weren't North Frakking Korea we were talking about.

They are part if the "axis of evil" and a rogue state, and the rest is unadulterated bullshit.
What the hell is the "axis of evil"? Just because Bush opens his mouth and says something, it means it is true?

How do you figure?

The type of reactor that we gave them for one.

What the hell is the "axis of evil"? Just because Bush opens his mouth and says something, it means it is true?
Are you intimating that just because President Bush says something it's automatically a lie?

The type of reactor that we gave them for one.
Perhaps you don't get it that a country may have that and not be able to do much with it. The NKs were bent on getting themselves a nuclear program - I don't see how it has helped them to get two light reactors in place of the ones they already had.

Are you intimating that just because President Bush says something it's automatically a lie?
No, I'm saying that this is one is. Nay, it is not a lie: it is a despicable attempt at manipulation that only some people in America seem to have fallen for.

No, I'm saying that this is one is. Nay, it is not a lie: it is a despicable attempt at manipulation that only some people in America seem to have fallen for.


Yeah but those are our 'special' citizens that fell for it.

MKULTRA says "NK is a US Republicon controlled puppet and is making the threat at their will to get all the Republican scandals off of the front page"

No, I'm saying that this is one is. Nay, it is not a lie: it is a despicable attempt at manipulation that only some people in America seem to have fallen for.

How can you believe that NK is not a threat to the security of the world as a whole? It's not just Bush that says that they are a threat, its the NK government that says that they are a threat. If you want to underestimate them then please take my place in the sights of their nuclear weaons.

No, I'm saying that this is one is. Nay, it is not a lie: it is a despicable attempt at manipulation that only some people in America seem to have fallen for.
Let's see:

Dictatorship ... check

Cult of personality ... check

Militaristic ... check

Oppresses its own people ... check

Xenophobic ... check

Narcotics trafficer ... check

Yep. Sounds like a rouge state to me. :)

How can you believe that NK is not a threat to the security of the world as a whole? It's not just Bush that says that they are a threat, its the NK government that says that they are a threat. If you want to underestimate them then please take my place in the sights of their nuclear weaons.
How is that connected to it being part of the (read my lips) "AXIS OF EVIL"?!
The very concept is out of a Marvel Comics creation. I mean, who the hell believes that all people (s)he considers evil congregate? Who but a paranoid person or an immature one?

Let's see:

Dictatorship ... check

Cult of personality ... check

Militaristic ... check

Oppresses its own people ... check

Xenophobic ... check

Narcotics trafficer ... check

Yep. Sounds like a rouge state to me. :)
To what are you answering? To it being part of an "axis of evil"? Because you really make no sense.

Plus, Ida know about "narcotics" and "xenophobic"... You know, it's not like they sit around and ask themselves "man, what do we do to be considered evil according to Eutrusca? We wanna do all of the things villains are supposed to do...".

Also, how does it affect you that they have a cult of personality? So does Tunisis, so does Turkey, so does Pakistan. Not only are they friends of the US, there is nothing intrinsec to the phenomenon itself - except for bad taste.

How is that connected to it being part of the (read my lips) "AXIS OF EVIL"?!
The very concept is out of a Marvel Comics creation. I mean, who the hell believes that all people (s)he considers evil congregate? Who but a paranoid person or an immature one?


Doesn't have to be one or the other

Because trying to understand why people do what they do (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_science)...

...is hard: labeling <percieved_enemy> as "evil" dedicated to our collective destruction just for the heck of it is easier on the cerebrum.

...is politically inconvenient: labeling <percieved_enemy> as "evil" dedicated to our collective destruction just for the heck of it is a great way to garner electoral support.

...is characteristic of the yellow-bellied, subversive, and unpatriotic: no true <sociopolitical_group_member> would question the wisdom of <dearest_leader> whose only concern is your welfare (review point (2) above).

...might reveal that <percieved_enemy> has a valid complaint or position: this possibility leads to the destruction of the foundations of items (2) and (3) above, leading to the next point...

...might demonstrate that the assumptions of <dearest_leader> and <dearest_leader's_politics> are wrong: of course, this would mean that <dearest_leader>'s supporters are wrong, and being wrong makes people sad. Ergo, the possibility must be prevented and avoided at all cost.



I like this one!

Now I guess if americans will fall again in temptation of voting the mass-media-made-man/men, or a guy that has IDEALS. Or, at least, a guy with enough brain to not to keep to bankrupt (http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=5515) and multiply the external debt of the richest country in the world... nor use terrorism:

http://www.europapress.es/europa2003/noticia.aspx?cod=20060317110431&tabID=1

How is that connected to it being part of the (read my lips) "AXIS OF EVIL"?!
The very concept is out of a Marvel Comics creation. I mean, who the hell believes that all people (s)he considers evil congregate? Who but a paranoid person or an immature one?

The Axis Of Evil is but irrelevant rhetoric. It doesn't change the fact they are a major world problem.

The Axis Of Evil is but irrelevant rhetoric. It doesn't change the fact they are a major world problem.
Yes, I was not debating that.

Yes, I was not debating that.

So stop dwelling on it and start focusing on issues that matter.

The U.S just needs to invade them. Kill the North Korean goverment then leave. Then we let the liberated people to Unite and form KOREA. But until then we need to something. Those jurks are makin me really mad, I dont know how China would respond to the Invasion of North Korea.

If I go over their some heads will be rollin
:upyours: North Korea(Goverment)
:upyours: Iran!

North Korea:sniper: :mp5: :gundge:

Nuke the N korean govermetn. I hate N,Korea and Iran

If i go over their some heads will be rollim:mp5: :sniper:

:upyours: you nOrth Korea!!!

Calm down there junior.

So stop dwelling on it and start focusing on issues that matter.
Why don't you take a look at the succession of posts and see how this came about?

As to NK and the threat it poses, all I know for now is that the US holds press conferences presenting how it will strike NK itself if certain conditions arise etc. The issue at hand is how they respond to that. Again, not all enemies of America are cartoon characters: you may notice that they are using words.
As Sting put it: "I hope they love their children too".

Nuke the N korean govermetn. I hate N,Korea and Iran

If i go over their some heads will be rollin:mp5: :sniper:

:upyours: North Korea

You know, this is why I hate the US so much. "Let's kill em!" Pfft. And what has Iran done? Wanted a cheap, reliable, and environmentally friendly energy source?

Nuke the N korean govermetn. I hate N,Korea and Iran

If i go over their some heads will be rollin:mp5: :sniper:

:upyours: North Korea

Wow....it's like a neocon US foreign Policy agenda rolled up into a single post.

*Applauds*


[Attn: This was in fact a satirical post to all Americans who will instantly become enraged by it. Calm down]

To what are you answering? To it being part of an "axis of evil"? Because you really make no sense.
I'm sure it doesn't, to you.

You know, this is why I hate the US so much. "Let's kill em!" Pfft. And what has Iran done? Wanted a cheap, reliable, and environmentally friendly energy source?

The U.S is just fine is that :upyours: up goverment that gets on my nerves. And im american. The people of America are really nice(Exsept for the White Supremisit groups and the NAZI supporters. The goverment is messed up(Bush):sniper:

You know, this is why I hate the US so much. "Let's kill em!" Pfft. And what has Iran done? Wanted a cheap, reliable, and environmentally friendly energy source?
Aaaahahahahahahahaha! Oh, God. I'm cracking up here! ROFLMAO!

That would be hilarious ... if it weren't so sad.

I'm sure it doesn't, to you.
No, because I use logic, not quotes from "Captain America".

I'm sure it doesn't, to you.

Oh come on, old boy. 'Axis Of Evil'? That doesn't strike you as rather childish and somewhat vague? It's just a name for the media and a soundbite to get public support - dumb it down for the public. It's not just an American thing either, most government's have done it over the years.

Why don't you take a look at the succession of posts and see how this came about?

As to NK and the threat it poses, all I know for now is that the US holds press conferences presenting how it will strike NK itself if certain conditions arise etc. The issue at hand is how they respond to that. Again, not all enemies of America are cartoon characters: you may notice that they are using words.
As Sting put it: "I hope they love their children too".
I think I begin to see the sources of your delusion. I'm sure the North Korean people love their children just as much as Americans love theirs. That's not the issue.

Why don't you take a look at the succession of posts and see how this came about?

As to NK and the threat it poses, all I know for now is that the US holds press conferences presenting how it will strike NK itself if certain conditions arise etc. The issue at hand is how they respond to that. Again, not all enemies of America are cartoon characters: you may notice that they are using words.
As Sting put it "I hope they love their children too".

Who said that they are cartoon characters? NK will most likely respond to an attack by shelling seoul and possibly employing their nuclear capabilities against high population density areas. If NK were to attack into the south tomorrow, we would most likely commence with large air strikes and the evacuation of U.S. forces to the southern coast. They would remain there until larger numbers of forces could be rushed to the area. Once we have a number of forces to be effective against the north korean military we would conduct offensive operations. The aftermath of the conflict would be complete devastation. There would be millions of dead civilians on both sides. This is why a military option against north korea is not viable and why north korea is such a problem.

Oh come on, old boy. 'Axis Of Evil'? That doesn't strike you as rather childish and somewhat vague? It's just a name for the media and a soundbite to get public support - dumb it down for the public. It's not just an American thing either, most government's have done it over the years.
I am perfectly aware of that, which is why I prefer the term "rogue state."

The truth is, I really feel, that with the exception of full scale nuclear elimination, we would not be able to overcome the Koreans. If they continue to threaten for war, I suggest we back off from the border a little. We also need to get China to stop participating in these "talks" with Korea.

They're going to keep on doing this crap until someone finally gets pissed and turns the country into a parking lot.
But everything south of the Great Lakes already is a parking lot. A few Korean pop-guns can't do any worse than USians have already managed on their own.

I think I begin to see the sources of your delusion. I'm sure the North Korean people love their children just as much as Americans love theirs. That's not the issue.
What is the issue? That there is a League of Evil on top of Mount Doom, where two Imams and a commie are building a nucular megabot that is gonnay make the world unsafe for democracy?

Who said that they are cartoon characters?

"Cartoon characters" = cliches. As in: "Golly Batman, the evildoers are forming an Axis of Evil!"

NK will most likely respond to an attack by shelling seoul and possibly employing their nuclear capabilities against high population density areas. If NK were to attack into the south tomorrow, we would most likely commence with large air strikes and the evacuation of U.S. forces to the southern coast. They would remain there until larger numbers of forces could be rushed to the area. Once we have a number of forces to be effective against the north korean military we would conduct offensive operations. The aftermath of the conflict would be complete devastation. There would be millions of dead civilians on both sides. This is why a military option against north korea is not viable and why north korea is such a problem.

Did I show any will to approve of or refute what a nuclear attack could do in the event etc.? Bravo, you are a strategic mind. Good for you.

No, because I use logic, not quotes from "Captain America".
I laid it all out for you, oh reality-challenged one. If you choose to ignore actual reason based on fact, that is your choice. As the old saying goes, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."

Did I show any will to approve of or refute what a nuclear attack could do in the event etc.? Bravo, you are a strategic mind. Good for you.

Sorry, wasn't really responding to you at all. More of a general thing to all who are getting a little too eager for war.

What is the issue? That there is a League of Evil on top of Mount Doom, where two Imams and a commie are building a nucular megabot that is gonnay make the world unsafe for democracy?
This is the last reply I will make to this topic:

Anyone who cannot understand that allowing a rogue state like North Korea ( or Iran, for that matter ) to have nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them is an inheretly BAD THING, is living in a dream world.

I laid it all out for you, oh reality-challenged one. If you choose to ignore actual reason based on fact, that is your choice. As the old saying goes, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."
You have a false premise problem. My question was: why would you assume that, because NK fits a dictatorship stereotype, it forms an Axis of evil? You have failed to answer it, and have instead repeated how it is totalitarian (which has been obvious to me since they gave us quotations from Kim Il-Sung to read when I was young, and should by now be obvious to anyone). Can you answer the one question, or are you again going to use: "NK teh evil"?

This is the last reply I will make to this topic:

Anyone who cannot understand that allowing a rogue state like North Korea ( or Iran, for that matter ) to have nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them is an inheretly BAD THING, is living in a dream world.
Again, dude, I'm not arguing against that. You don't seem to be able to read posts that are not signed by you or Corneliu.

This is the last reply I will make to this topic:

Anyone who cannot understand that allowing a rogue state like North Korea ( or Iran, for that matter ) to have nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them is an inheretly BAD THING, is living in a dream world.

Defining Rogue State: That one that never pledges to the desires of the Empire?

The USA having MDW good, NK having MDW bad?

Not seeing the things like you see them, is "living in a dream world"?

Politicians are just trying to shore up support for whatever it is that they want/believe is good for the nation. Stop trying to discuss wether they are right it claiming that north korea is "evil." All that matters is that they are dangerous to the free world and this debate should end there.

Then you'd definitely not want me as President of America. One of my very first acts as President would be to order a preemptive strike on both North Korea's and Iran's nuclear installations and leadership. :mad:
Why?

This is the last reply I will make to this topic:

Anyone who cannot understand that allowing a rogue state like North Korea ( or Iran, for that matter ) to have nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them is an inheretly BAD THING, is living in a dream world.
Oh, I understand completely. I've lived next door to a rogue state like North Korea that has been allowed to have nuclear weapons for my entire life, and let me tell you, it's made it tough sleeping some nights, just knowing that the United States is so armed.

It is a very BAD THING that the United states is allowed nuclear weapons.

Politicians are just trying to shore up support for whatever it is that they want/believe is good for the nation. Stop trying to discuss wether they are right it claiming that north korea is "evil." All that matters is that they are dangerous to the free world and this debate should end there.

And, why not to leave them alone? No crisis, no war.

Politicians are just trying to shore up support for whatever it is that they want/believe is good for the nation. Stop trying to discuss wether they are right it claiming that north korea is "evil." All that matters is that they are dangerous to the free world and this debate should end there.
Look, the point was about wether they are in a tight alliance with someone, a thing which I refuse to believe. America is shouting in everybody's ears something it know is a lie: to me, that proves as risque as anything the NKs are doing. Of course, the US don't have (and shouldn't try to get) the balls to threaten Russia, who has been giving Iran nuclear technology for ten tears now.

Oh, I understand completely. I've lived next door to a rogue state like North Korea that has been allowed to have nuclear weapons for my entire life, and let me tell you, it's made it tough sleeping some nights, just knowing that the United States is so armed.

It is a very BAD THING that the United states is allowed nuclear weapons.

Why? We have never threatened their use before and only used them to end a world war which caused the world great harm. States like North Korea and Iran have stated agendas of hate and power at any cost. The difference between us and them is that they will use their nuclear arms for bad and we will not use ours.

States like North Korea and Iran have stated agendas of hate and power at any cost.
Yeah, sure, So did the Soviets: remember when they nuked Maine back in the 1980s? Good thing the Americans bombed Khabarovsk in return...
Everybody is suicidal but good ole America.

And, why not to leave them alone? No crisis, no war.

If you would read my previous posts, you would see that i would be against any war with north korea unless we are attacked first. The reason i am against any preempt of any kind in this situation is that nuclear weapons are a major factor.

Why? We have never threatened their use before and only used them to end a world war which caused the world great harm. States like North Korea and Iran have stated agendas of hate and power at any cost. The difference between us and them is that they will use their nuclear arms for bad and we will not use ours.

:p Would you be capable of arguing all that you say since "States like..."?

And about the threaten, I remember something called the Cold War... hmm...

If you would read my previous posts, you would see that i would be against any war with north korea unless we are attacked first. The reason i am against any preempt of any kind in this situation is that nuclear weapons are a major factor.

Due to that, Nowth Korea wouldn't either attack first.

The USA government may be planning a major sabotage followed by a chain of bombings, and in the middle of the mess, a massive invasion.

Yeah, sure, So did the Soviets: remember when they nuked Maine back in the 1980s? Good thing the Americans bombed Khabarovsk in return...
Everybody is suicidal but good ole America.

Another point is that in order to carry out war, north korea and iran would require nuclear weapons to be successful. Therefore, they would use them if there was a situation where they went to war. The U.S. on the otherhand does not need to use nuclear warheads to win conflicts so we will not.

The U.S. on the otherhand does not need to use nuclear warheads to win conflicts so we will not.
The U.S. cannot use nuclear warheads to win conflicts, period. Doing so at this or any other juncture would polarize world opinion against any administration that would choose that option.

Another point is that in order to carry out war, north korea and iran would require nuclear weapons to be successful. Therefore, they would use them if there was a situation where they went to war. The U.S. on the otherhand does not need to use nuclear warheads to win conflicts so we will not.

And why should they be in any situation of war that required nuclear weapons? That's why I say to leave them alone.

No, no, they won't attack, because it would mean their auto-destruction. How could people understand this before an affaire similar to the Iraqi one begins?

Perhaps you don't get it that a country may have that and not be able to do much with it. The NKs were bent on getting themselves a nuclear program - I don't see how it has helped them to get two light reactors in place of the ones they already had.

Because the reactors they got is capable of making weapons grade uranium.

Another point is that in order to carry out war, north korea and iran would require nuclear weapons to be successful. Therefore, they would use them if there was a situation where they went to war. The U.S. on the otherhand does not need to use nuclear warheads to win conflicts so we will not.
I keep wondering what posts you're replying to.
Let me ask you again: why is it you assume that Iran or NK aim to carry war? The way I see it, countries get nuclear weapons in order that threats of war against them would not be as effective; plus, if you are NK and use a weapon in war, you are no longer anything after some 20 minutes. The only way a weapon like that is gonna be put to use is if they are invaded. Or I'm wrong and they are suicidal and cartoonesque evil.

The U.S. cannot use nuclear warheads to win conflicts, period. Doing so at this or any other juncture would polarize world opinion against any administration that would choose that option.

Unless of course NK uses nukes first. If they do, then you can kiss North Korea good bye because we'll use our nukes in return and our nukes are a lot more accurate than theirs.

Because the reactors they got is capable of making weapons grade uranium.
Ahhh... so a nuclear program doesn't give you the chance to make weapons? If they already had reactors... How is it Carter's fault? Please, answer using logic.

I keep wondering what posts you're replying to.
Let me ask you again: why is it you assume that Iran or NK aim to carry war? The way I see it, countries get nuclear weapons in order that threats of war against them would not be as effective; plus, if you are NK and use a weapon in war, you are no longer anything after some 20 minutes. The only way a weapon like that is gonna be put to use is if they are invaded. Or I'm wrong and they are suicidal and cartoonesque evil.

Not a real expert on NK but i assume that they want to unite themselves with south korea. Iran's leader has stated along with palestine that he wants israel off the face of the earth. Those are the two hypothetical conflicts. Emphasis on hypothetical.

Not a real expert on NK but i assume that they want to unite themselves with south korea. Iran's leader has stated along with palestine that he wants israel off the face of the earth. Those are the two hypothetical conflicts. Emphasis on hypothetical.
Again, no matter what their supposed goals are: if they use them, they're toast and they know it.
With the Soviets, you didn't have just hypothetical conflicts, you had real ones; the propaganda depicted them as "teh evil" as well (again, the propaganda gets closer to the point when talking about NK - not sure about Iran; definately a crap statement about the USSR anytime after 1953)... And yet, the bomb was never used.

Reality check here people.

1: The current Taepodong series missile can reach the west coast of the US, and has a sufficiently large payload to carry an early model nuke.

2: Taepodong series missiles are ballistic in nature.

3: The US has no defence whatsoever against ballistic missiles.

We are researching ballistic defences, but we don't have any yet. So, if Kim Jong Il and his clique launcha Taepodong with a nuke on it at LA, we lose LA (unless he misses entirely - but ballistic trajectories aren't that hard to calculate). If he launches twenty missiles, we lose the west coast.

Sure, NK becomes a glass crater shortly therafter. But US dominance in the world is gone, along with about a quarter of our population. Not a good exchange.

Unless of course NK uses nukes first. If they do, then you can kiss North Korea good bye because we'll use our nukes in return and our nukes are a lot more accurate than theirs.
Yes, yours are by far the most extravagant, firm, potent and powerful phallus-surrogates on the planet. So I've heard for my entire life.

Face facts: anything North Korea lobs over the Pacific will be shot out of the sky as a matter of course. If the US then "retaliates" by melting Pyongyang (and everything surrounding it for a 200+km radius) into glass, guess what? You'll be as welcome on the international stage as bad breath in a stalled elevator. Got it?

Not heros. Pariahs.

Again, no matter what their supposed goals are: if they use them, they're toast and they know it.
With the Soviets, you didn't have just hypothetical conflicts, you had real ones; the propaganda depicted them as "teh evil" as well (again, the propaganda gets closer to the point when talking about NK - not sure about Iran; definately a crap statement about the USSR anytime after 1953)... And yet, the bomb was never used.

Are you really willing to bet that Kim Jong Il won't want to go out in flames?

3: The US has no defence whatsoever against ballistic missiles.

Bullshit.

No bull, BOP. We have NOTHING that will take out an incoming ICBM. Nothing.

Are you really willing to bet that Kim Jong Il won't want to go out in flames?
Wake up: they have a Chinese experiment with free market and a closed Internet in NK. I definately think he's adapting to survive, like the mobster that he is.
Again, this is not a job for Superman.

Wake up: they have a Chinese experiment with free market and a closed Internet in NK. I definately think he's adapting to survive, like the mobster that he is.
Again, this is not a job for Superman.

Are you kidding? I've seen the intel reports. The people of NK are living in horrible conditions. He still hoards food from his people to be given to the military. I hardly call that trying to appease his people to stay in power.

Are you kidding? I've seen the intel reports. The people of NK are living in horrible conditions. He still hoards food from his people to be given to the military. I hardly call that trying to appease his people to stay in power.
First of all, I'm not saying he's appeasing his people, and I'm not saying that he is turning cuddly. He's a mobster, and does all that he can do to ensure his system is kept - all and nothing more. In fact, I think he needs to be pushed along softly (as disgusting as he may be to the human touch), because the ensuing chaos of a sudden fall will not be mended by anyone ever. As to the other aspects: I come from a country that has had a much milder Stalinist regime, but still one of the toughest in the world - I know a bit about what they tend to do and why.

First of all, I'm not saying he's appeasing his people, and I'm not saying that he is turning cuddly. He's a mobster, and does all that he can do to ensure his system is kept - all and nothing more. In fact, I think he needs to be pushed along softly (as disgusting as he may be to the human touch), because the ensuing chaos of a sudden fall will not be mended by anyone ever. As to the other aspects: I come from a country that has had a much milder Stalinist regime, but still one of the toughest in the world - I know a bit about what they tend to do and why.

what country?

what country?
Romania.

Romania.

I was under the impression that they are a republic. Or are you talking about the past?

I was under the impression that they are a republic. Or are you talking about the past?
The recent past. As to us being a republic, I don't think that's the contrast you want: Romania, the USA, the USSR, and North Korea are all republics. Romania has been a republic since the very last day of 1947: since then, it was Stalinist and generic communist, and now isn't either - being a republic has nothing to do with that.

The recent past. As to us being a republic, I don't think that's the contrast you want: Romania, the USA, the USSR, and North Korea are all republics. Romania has been a republic since the very last day of 1947: since then, it was Stalinist and generic communist, and now isn't either - being a republic has nothing to do with that.

Call it what you want, its not a proper government. Just cause its called a different name doesn't mean it is that. Like America is an Empire.

Call it what you want, its not a proper government. Just cause its called a different name doesn't mean it is that. Like America is an Empire.
Ahh... What?

just typical republican/neocon fearmongering for their flesh eating war machine--Death to the Empire Impeach Bush and Restore our Republic

just typical republican/neocon fearmongering for their flesh eating war machine--Death to the Empire Impeach Bush and Restore our Republic

The Force is strong with this one.

The Force is strong with this one.
HAIL

HAIL

Nothing amuses me more than when people don't get that I'm making fun of them. Tee hee.

Yes, yours are by far the most extravagant, firm, potent and powerful phallus-surrogates on the planet. So I've heard for my entire life.

Face facts: anything North Korea lobs over the Pacific will be shot out of the sky as a matter of course. If the US then "retaliates" by melting Pyongyang (and everything surrounding it for a 200+km radius) into glass, guess what? You'll be as welcome on the international stage as bad breath in a stalled elevator. Got it?

Not heros. Pariahs.

The US is testing ballistic missile defence but that is all. The ground based system isn't the greatest, the airborne laser is still in testing, but the Navy based ones work I believe.

If North Korea did nuke America then I think it is safe to say that most of the World will support the melting of North Korea.

Same here. I don't think even the NK leadership is insane enough to nuke the US - considering that their life expectancy would be measured in minutes after it happened. They're just trying to get some publicity since they're being ignored for Iraq and Iran.

They feel lonely...

you may just be right...you get a cookie.

maybe they are also flexing cause of the upcoming military exercises we have planned with sk

or they are just plain loony...you dont pick a fight with a 10 foot tall linebacker when your 2 foot tall and a 20 pound weakling..unless you crave attention,negative or not...or frakking whacked in the head.

they might nail l.a with a nuke(watch me cry..lol)but they would be smithereens in about 30 minutes flat....just like anyone would be if we went guns blazing mad.:mp5:

If North Korea did nuke America then I think it is safe to say that most of the World will support the melting of North Korea.
That's why they are talking crap to try and coerce the US into going aggro.

Yep! Though with restraint...I hope.

...they're running a disproportionately huge military. The nuclear weapons will almost certainly never be used, and they represent another strain on an already overstretched economy.I remember reading some article saying that -in some ways- the Nukes will actually help their economy

176 posts in this thread and I'm still not afraid of Kim Jong-Il and I still think that if the NK people didn't want him, they'd revolt.

So ... *shrug*

if the NK people didn't want him, they'd revolt.I do not agree176 posts in this thread and I'm still not afraid of Kim Jong-Il
So ... *shrug*I agree.

176 posts in this thread and I'm still not afraid of Kim Jong-Il and I still think that if the NK people didn't want him, they'd revolt.

So ... *shrug*

Maybe you should read up a bit about how North Koreans are treated.

Maybe you should read up a bit about how North Koreans are treated.

Indeed. Few people can revolt against armed soldiers.

Indeed. Few people can revolt against armed soldiers.Yup.. that is why Washington has always had a "lovely" relashinship with most military dictators.

What a pity it isn't Iran acting like this.


Ummm, are you retarded or stupid?

Iran is acting like that. The President of Iran announced that the koran says it's okay to drop a nuke on Israel.

He also announced that if we didn't back off, we would suffer severe consquences.

The President of Iran announced that the koran says it's okay to drop a nuke on Israel.Proof?

Indeed. Few people can revolt against armed soldiers.
That would mean that most revolutions didn't actually happen...

The REAL reasons why you might not see a revolution in Korea are the immense net of security employees - which are probably allowed access to a better quality of life - and the immense period of isolation. And, again, the horrible state the country will be in the moment the regime crumbles - picture that famine is being kept in check as it is.

Reality check here people.

1: The current Taepodong series missile can reach the west coast of the US, and has a sufficiently large payload to carry an early model nuke.

yea but highly inaccurate missiles.

2: Taepodong series missiles are ballistic in nature.[/quote

yea.

[quote]3: The US has no defence whatsoever against ballistic missiles.

This is inaccurate We actually do have a defense against ballistic Missiles.

We are researching ballistic defences, but we don't have any yet.

Then what did they place in Alaska?

So, if Kim Jong Il and his clique launcha Taepodong with a nuke on it at LA, we lose LA (unless he misses entirely - but ballistic trajectories aren't that hard to calculate). If he launches twenty missiles, we lose the west coast.

Possibly but in retrospect, he launches his missiles and we won't have to worry about North Korea for centuries.

Sure, NK becomes a glass crater shortly therafter. But US dominance in the world is gone, along with about a quarter of our population. Not a good exchange.

Again, not entirely accurate. Oh sure we'll take a hit but not as bad as you make it out to believe.

Iran is acting like that.

This is true, Iran is growing its nuclear abilities, but at the same time the Iranian president is making these threats, they are also telling the UN "its for nuclear energy, we dont have any weapons". my opinion, the UN is full of a bunch of retards

Yes, yours are by far the most extravagant, firm, potent and powerful phallus-surrogates on the planet. So I've heard for my entire life.

Face facts: anything North Korea lobs over the Pacific will be shot out of the sky as a matter of course. If the US then "retaliates" by melting Pyongyang (and everything surrounding it for a 200+km radius) into glass, guess what? You'll be as welcome on the international stage as bad breath in a stalled elevator. Got it?

Not heros. Pariahs.

I don't think anyone will do anything if someone does launch a nuclear 1st strike against the US. We would be well justified in responding in kind as we have stated we'll do.

No bull, BOP. We have NOTHING that will take out an incoming ICBM. Nothing.

Due try to keep up with the news. Don't you know that Anti-ballistic missiles have been deployed in Alaska?

This would be a vaidl point if it weren't North Frakking Korea we were talking about.

How so? I'm having a hard time seeing how some small, backward, economically collapsed communist state qualifies as a legitimate threat to the single largest economic and military power unrivaled by any other on the surface of the planet.

All that matters is that they are dangerous to the free world and this debate should end there.

On the contrary, I would argue that it is the "free world"'s reaction to North Korea that is producing the danger.

North Korea is a tiny, relatively powerless and economically devastated state sandwiched between two of the world's nuclear (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html) superpowers (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html). Two nuclear superpowers that have become increasingly friendly in the economic sphere, even while tensions continue to grow over the Taiwan problem.

Thus, North Korea feels threatened on two fronts. As the last communist holdout, it percieves itself as being in danger of being economically overrun by the capitalist West, as well as probably feeling abandoned by the increasingly captialist East. Plus, should the Taiwan issue result in military conflict, North Korea is going to find itself on the front lines when Japan and South Korea possibly (probably) join a conflict.

Considering all this, it only makes sense that North Korea should be seeking and threatening use of nuclear weapons. It needs something which can allow it to assert power in the international sphere in order to ward off percieved threats from the East and West. Like an animal backed into a corner, North Korea is simply looking for a way out, including fighting if necessary.

Now, the United States seems to insist on wanting to push North Korea further and further into that corner without providing a means of escape, and then acts surprised when North Korea seems to want to respond with violence. I've always been taught that an animal will attack when it cannot see a means of escape, and violence is seen as the only option available. In order to prevent being attacked, one should provide such a means of escape. If the United States wants to prevent conflict with North Korea, I would suggest that it should stop taking an aggressive all-or-nothing position (as often justified by political "axis of evil" or "rogue state" rhetorical nonsense), and instead provide North Korea with an escape. More carrots and less big sticks, basically.

Perhaps it could start by withdrawing military forces from South Korea and Japan...

sandwiched between two of the world's nuclear (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html) superpowers (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html).
Make that three (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/rs.html).

But, then North Korea will invade South Korea!!!!!

Oh, wait, they can't. Sure, they might have the 4th largest military in the world, but they're also one of the poorest countries in the world. There is no possible way they can sustain any sort of invasion for the length it would require to conquer South Korea.

*sigh*
Why is it that every thread I post in just spontaneously STOPS. . .

So, if Kim Jong Il and his clique launcha Taepodong with a nuke on it at LA, we lose LA (unless he misses entirely - but ballistic trajectories aren't that hard to calculate). If he launches twenty missiles, we lose the west coast.


Nuclear wepons have been used in combat only twice in history. After that, their use has stopped at the balance of power generated by the principle of mutually assured destruction. Since the Soviet Union collapsed, that balance has disappeared. The efforts of states like North Korea to aquire nuclear weapons simply amount to efforts to reestablish the MAD balance of power in order to gain an increased influence in international relations.

However, I seriously doubt that the acquisition of nuclear weapons by North Korea would result in nuclear exchange. The whole point of acquiring nuclear weapons is to defend the state against percieved threats. But anyone can see that, in the case of North Korea, actually using them would lead to the exact opposite conclusion. We can develop all the horror stories we want about how we would "lose the west coast" but the reality of the matter is that North Korea has way, way more to lose than the United States in any hypothetical nuclear exchange. The fact of the matter is that the United States is the international economic and political order, and it is going to take far more than anything that North Korea can produce to bring that order down. Especially considering that every other Western and Eastern (i.e. China) nuclear power has an interest in the survival of that order, and will come to its defense, even if only out of their own self-interest.

I'm sorry, but I see the supreme position that the United States holds over the international order, and the interest that essentially the rest of the entire globe has in defending that order, and I can only conclude that the "threat" posed by North Korea has been wildly overstated.

How so? I'm having a hard time seeing how some small, backward, economically collapsed communist state qualifies as a legitimate threat to the single largest economic and military power unrivaled by any other on the surface of the planet.
I agree with you. This is just another warmongering thread. We must remember that the US stated that Iraq posed an "imminent threat" to the US and we all know how true that was?

Never going to happen.
Nationalists, pfft.

North Korea does have the capability to launch a medium range missile at Japan and nuke them. It would result in a terrible loss of life if the North Korea felt threatened by Japan, which they don’t anymore. Sure they don’t like them but they know that unless Japan gets militant again (like how the current US administration has encouraged them to be to help out on military missions more), they are a waste of a target. I don’t think that North Korea considers delaying yet again the release date of the PS3 as the ultimate revenge on the Americans. They do have a small supply of ICBM’s that could be used against the US, enough to get the Americans to irradiate the entire Korean peninsula, but not enough to destroy America.

North Korean Missiles
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/missile.htm

North Korean Nuclear Program
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/nuke.htm

Unlike Iraq though, North Korea does have a very large military with actual jets and everything, and not a pile of rusting junk from 10 years of world arms sanctions. The US won’t be invading them or launching air strikes, period. It just wouldn’t go over well in the press or with the electorate to take those kinds of losses. Also unlike Iraq, North Korea has a dictator who isn’t going to cow tow to the Americans and get rid of every tactical advantage he has to appease them, so they can invade them anyways. Any dictator watching what happened in Iraq isn’t going to be handing over any WMD’s if they have them, because it’s the only thing keeping the US from invading them.

The really stupid thing is that right up till Bush went on his Axis of Evil rant, the two Koreas were really making steps towards normalizing relations and easing tensions in the region. Apparently this was just the kind of behavior the Bush regime is trying to nip in the bud with their rhetoric. Still, it is nice to see that after all the blood that’s been spilled by superpower backed political factions that they have recently been marching together in the Olympic opening and closing ceremonies.

Overview of North Korean Military
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/dprk/index.html

North Korean Air Force
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/dprk/airforce.htm

Number of Planes, by type, in North Korean Air Force
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/dprk/air-force-equipment.htm

I feel sorry for South Korea. Talk about bad neighbors...

Unlike Iraq though, North Korea does have a very large military with actual jets and everything, and not a pile of rusting junk from 10 years of world arms sanctions. The US won’t be invading them or launching air strikes, period. It just wouldn’t go over well in the press or with the electorate to take those kinds of losses. Also unlike Iraq, North Korea has a dictator who isn’t going to cow tow to the Americans and get rid of every tactical advantage he has to appease them, so they can invade them anyways. Any dictator watching what happened in Iraq isn’t going to be handing over any WMD’s if they have them, because it’s the only thing keeping the US from invading them.

The really stupid thing is that right up till Bush went on his Axis of Evil rant, the two Koreas were really making steps towards normalizing relations and easing tensions in the region. Apparently this was just the kind of behavior the Bush regime is trying to nip in the bud with their rhetoric. Still, it is nice to see that after all the blood that’s been spilled by superpower backed political factions that they have recently been marching together in the Olympic opening and closing ceremonies.

Overview of North Korean Military
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/dprk/index.html

North Korean Air Force
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/dprk/airforce.htm

Number of Planes, by type, in North Korean Air Force
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/dprk/air-force-equipment.htm


The Olympics don't have any political things draw into them. Its about the people and the sports and pushing your limits, not war or anything like that. Even warring nations are peaceful with their atheletes in the Olympics.

176 posts in this thread and I'm still not afraid of Kim Jong-Il and I still think that if the NK people didn't want him, they'd revolt.

So ... *shrug*

You're kidding, right? I thought you were the sensible one, Keruvalia. The NK people probably don't want to be starved to death, beaten, shot, forced into canabalism and godawful other things, but they can't rebel. The military is all powerful, and most are so brainwashed they don't know what they want half the time.

This makes me think we should go in pre-emptively, we cant allow the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud. This sratagey worked well in the past and I promise it will work again.

The really stupid thing is that right up till Bush went on his Axis of Evil rant, the two Koreas were really making steps towards normalizing relations and easing tensions in the region. Apparently this was just the kind of behavior the Bush regime is trying to nip in the bud with their rhetoric.

Finally. I'm glad I'm no longer the only one saying it.

Kim Dae-Jung's Sunshine Policy was proving effective. Bush's aggressive stance is merely provocative, and Bush & Co. know that the DPRK reacts angrily to provocation. Looks like they're deliberately trying to prevent any tension in the peninsula from being defused.

I read a very interesting analysis once that underlined the importance of the concept of "saving face" in Korea. The North Koreans will never accept to be on the losing end of a bargain. They need to feel they're entering a fair bargain (and, of course, they will try to turn any situation to their advantage, yes). I can't believe Washington doesn't realise this, which means the Bush regime is deliberately trying to prevent the DPRK from agreeing to any reasonable concessions.

Contrary to popular belief, North and South Korea are getting on increasingly well. People should read up on the topic. I can recommend a good book to you about post-1953 Korea if you like.

The efforts of states like North Korea to aquire nuclear weapons simply amount to efforts to reestablish the MAD balance of power in order to gain an increased influence in international relations.

However, I seriously doubt that the acquisition of nuclear weapons by North Korea would result in nuclear exchange. The whole point of acquiring nuclear weapons is to defend the state against percieved threats. But anyone can see that, in the case of North Korea, actually using them would lead to the exact opposite conclusion. [...]

I'm sorry, but I see the supreme position that the United States holds over the international order, and the interest that essentially the rest of the entire globe has in defending that order, and I can only conclude that the "threat" posed by North Korea has been wildly overstated.

Bravo. Finally, someone who actually thinks and says something reasonable on the topic. I'd have thought all that was self-evident, but apparently not for some people...


Never going to happen.
Nationalists, pfft.

A concise and accurate summary of the situation. :D

Regarding North Korea, what many people seem not to realise is that half a century of propaganda has created a sort of massive state religion over there. Most people worship Kim almost like a god. It's frightening and disturbing, but it's something that always needs bearing in mind.

The most striking example came when Kim Il-Sung died in 1994. I've seen footage of massive scenes of grief in the streets. Elsewhere, I read about the authorities having to have ambulances everywhere because people were fainting with grief or even collapsing with heart attacks at the news of Kim's death. It goes deep, and it's extremely disturbing, but you have to recognise the situation if you want to understand North Korea at all. They have no access to outside information. They have no basis on which to develop thoughts of their own. For fifty years the only "truth" has been that of the state, and most (though not all) North Koreans have become simply incapable of conceiving of anything else.

On the contrary, I would argue that it is the "free world"'s reaction to North Korea that is producing the danger.

North Korea is a tiny, relatively powerless and economically devastated state sandwiched between two of the world's nuclear (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html) superpowers (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html). Two nuclear superpowers that have become increasingly friendly in the economic sphere, even while tensions continue to grow over the Taiwan problem.

Thus, North Korea feels threatened on two fronts. As the last communist holdout, it percieves itself as being in danger of being economically overrun by the capitalist West, as well as probably feeling abandoned by the increasingly captialist East. Plus, should the Taiwan issue result in military conflict, North Korea is going to find itself on the front lines when Japan and South Korea possibly (probably) join a conflict.

Considering all this, it only makes sense that North Korea should be seeking and threatening use of nuclear weapons. It needs something which can allow it to assert power in the international sphere in order to ward off percieved threats from the East and West. Like an animal backed into a corner, North Korea is simply looking for a way out, including fighting if necessary.

Now, the United States seems to insist on wanting to push North Korea further and further into that corner without providing a means of escape, and then acts surprised when North Korea seems to want to respond with violence. I've always been taught that an animal will attack when it cannot see a means of escape, and violence is seen as the only option available. In order to prevent being attacked, one should provide such a means of escape. If the United States wants to prevent conflict with North Korea, I would suggest that it should stop taking an aggressive all-or-nothing position (as often justified by political "axis of evil" or "rogue state" rhetorical nonsense), and instead provide North Korea with an escape. More carrots and less big sticks, basically.

Perhaps it could start by withdrawing military forces from South Korea and Japan...


Ok, if you want to underestimate a nuclear power, go ahead. But your taking my place on the front lines of that conflict. These issues are a bit more personal for me because i might die in a conflict over there.

Ok, if you want to underestimate a nuclear power, go ahead. But your taking my place on the front lines of that conflict. These issues are a bit more personal for me because i might die in a conflict over there.
So, is this what you do: post the very same sentences when you believe that people who proved you wrong the first time are no longer around? That's so Eutrusca.

This makes me think we should go in pre-emptively, we cant allow the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud. This sratagey worked well in the past and I promise it will work again.

Do you and your lack of extpertise ever shut up?

So, is this what you do: post the very same sentences when you believe that people who proved you wrong the first time are no longer around? That's so Eutrusca.

When did you prove me wrong?

Do you and your lack of extpertise ever shut up?

No, and it won't until he's banned. Oh well. He's funny to watch.

dp

When did you prove me wrong?

Let's see:

States like North Korea and Iran have stated agendas of hate and power at any cost.

Let me ask you again: why is it you assume that Iran or NK aim to carry war? The way I see it, countries get nuclear weapons in order that threats of war against them would not be as effective; plus, if you are NK and use a weapon in war, you are no longer anything after some 20 minutes. The only way a weapon like that is gonna be put to use is if they are invaded. Or I'm wrong and they are suicidal and cartoonesque evil.

Not a real expert on NK but i assume that they want to unite themselves with south korea. Iran's leader has stated along with palestine that he wants israel off the face of the earth. Those are the two hypothetical conflicts. Emphasis on hypothetical.

[Compare: States like North Korea and Iran have stated agendas of hate and power at any cost with Emphasis on hypothetical.]

Again, no matter what their supposed goals are: if they use them, they're toast and they know it.
With the Soviets, you didn't have just hypothetical conflicts, you had real ones; the propaganda depicted them as "teh evil" as well (again, the propaganda gets closer to the point when talking about NK - not sure about Iran; definately a crap statement about the USSR anytime after 1953)... And yet, the bomb was never used.

Are you really willing to bet that Kim Jong Il won't want to go out in flames?

Wake up: they have a Chinese experiment with free market and a closed Internet in NK. I definately think he's adapting to survive, like the mobster that he is.

Are you kidding? I've seen the intel reports. The people of NK are living in horrible conditions. He still hoards food from his people to be given to the military. I hardly call that trying to appease his people to stay in power.

First of all, I'm not saying he's appeasing his people, and I'm not saying that he is turning cuddly. He's a mobster, and does all that he can do to ensure his system is kept - all and nothing more. In fact, I think he needs to be pushed along softly (as disgusting as he may be to the human touch), because the ensuing chaos of a sudden fall will not be mended by anyone ever. As to the other aspects: I come from a country that has had a much milder Stalinist regime, but still one of the toughest in the world - I know a bit about what they tend to do and why.

what country?

Romania.

I was under the impression that they are a republic. Or are you talking about the past?

The recent past. As to us being a republic, I don't think that's the contrast you want: Romania, the USA, the USSR, and North Korea are all republics. Romania has been a republic since the very last day of 1947: since then, it was Stalinist and generic communist, and now isn't either - being a republic has nothing to do with that.

Where is it, really?

Do you and your lack of extpertise ever shut up?

Ahhh, yoy've met our resident troll/nutter. Just be amused by him. Ask him about China attacking Pearl Harbor - it's good for a laugh.

Ok, if you want to underestimate a nuclear power, go ahead. But your taking my place on the front lines of that conflict. Why?..why should I take your place?
You signed the stupid contract.. Not me.
Your mistake. Not mine.

The really stupid thing is that right up till Bush went on his Axis of Evil rant

In fairness to Bush, it's not like he wrote that speech.

Why?..why should I take your place?
You signed the stupid contract.. Not me.
Your mistake. Not mine.

Just showing you that what you want will affect many other lives in highly negative ways that you would not want to occur to you. These things are not just for fun but people do have to give up much to carry out what you believe would be good.

Where is it, really?

There isn't any proof in any of that. Just your views. What you fail to realize is that the NK leadership would likely survive a nuclear war with the U.S. They have an immense amount of nuclear bunkers that could be used. So i'd give their life expectancy after a nuclear conflict a bit more than 20 min.

There isn't any proof in any of that. Just your views. What you fail to realize is that the NK leadership would likely survive a nuclear war with the U.S. They have an immense amount of nuclear bunkers that could be used. So i'd give their life expectancy after a nuclear conflict a bit more than 20 min.
Logic is proof to. Which is why you're opening a new topic each time you're contradicted. Fine, I'll play along: see my point about the Soviets, and wonder if they didn't have even better ways of protecting (even more of, even more than) their leadership. Yet, no nuclear war.
You are back on that vision of Kim Jong Il as one of those nihilistic characters in comic strips. Sure, hypotetically he may be that (just as he may be a horse, or a fireman), but he'd be the first real person to wish for the destruction of America more than for the survival of the thing he holds as the antithesis of America. See my point?

Logic is proof to. Which is why you're opening a new topic each time you're contradicted. Fine, I'll play along: see my point about the Soviets, and wonder if they didn't have even better ways of protecting (even more of, even more than) their leadership. Yet, no nuclear war.
You are back on that vision of Kim Jong Il as one of those nihilistic characters in comic strips. Sure, hypotetically he may be that (just as he may be a horse, or a fireman), but he'd be the first real person to wish for the destruction of America more than for the survival of the thing he holds as the antithesis of America. See my point?

I understand that there is a real possibility that war will never occur. But that doesn't mean that we don't prepare for one in the event that it occurs. Even if you think that he is a rational human who would never attempt war with the world, we still need to be able to defend against him. Just b/c Bush portrayed him as a cartoon character doesn't mean that he doesn't have the potential to start nuclear war.

IMO, it comes down to one question. Is Kim Jong Il sane? If he is, then he's just saber-rattling and won't actually launch nukes. But the fact the NK people worship him as a god is disturbing. If he starts believing his own press, then he might actually think he can get away with firing missles. Or, he might decide that he has nothing to lose and doesn't care if the country goes down with him.

Due try to keep up with the news. Don't you know that Anti-ballistic missiles have been deployed in Alaska?

Actually, they haven't. What's been placed in Alaska is the command and control system for a nuclear defence network that, as yet, does not exist. To make things sound better, they placed some Patriot batteries around the facility (which, IIRC, won't even be finished until early '07) so they could say they'd put in an anti-missile defence network (never mind that Patriot is USELESS against true ICBMs - they come in too fast for the system to engage).

Even if they HAD put a bunch of our current generation interception devices up there, they only have an interception rate of 10% - with missiles they KNOW are comng and who's trajectories are also known. Against an incoming enemy missile, I'd guess that would drop to about 1%. If they were there, which they aren't.

In about ten years, at the current rate, we'll have a defence network capable of fending off minor nuclear powers. Until then, we're wide open.

We have nothing to worry about. It's not like Bush would take a strong stance against a country that actually has WMD. They'd only do something desperate if we put them in a desperate situation.

We have nothing to worry about. It's not like Bush would take a strong stance against a country that actually has WMD. They'd only do something desperate if we put them in a desperate situation.

They are in a desperate situation. Starving is one.

They are in a desperate situation. Starving is one.
But they are under no threat of attack from the US.

DPRK aint commie...It's a cardboard cultist totalitarian police state

Do you and your lack of extpertise ever shut up?
your flaming is not appericated

This is hilarious...

If a month or so goes by without news about North Korea, they have to pound their chests and shoot off their mouths. I think they have the "ignored little tough guy" mentality.

"Hey, look at me!"

We have nothing to worry about. It's not like Bush would take a strong stance against a country that actually has WMD. They'd only do something desperate if we put them in a desperate situation.
Except for Iraq...

Except for Iraq...
*points, laughs*

But everything south of the Great Lakes already is a parking lot. A few Korean pop-guns can't do any worse than USians have already managed on their own.


Maybe I'm missing something. Or-this IS just a frustrated and retarded statement.

your flaming is not appericated

Your undoing all the good we do in the middle east by spreading your ignorant comments is also not appreciated.

Your undoing all the good we do in the middle east by spreading your ignorant comments is also not appreciated.
Im undoing the good by being one of the biggest supporters of the commander in cheif and of US foreign policy? btw I dont find my comments any more ignorant than anyone elses.

*points, laughs*
why is that funny?

why is that funny?
Read: http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,808970,00.html

IF Iraq did have WMD, we did the exact thing necessary for him to have an excuse to blow us all to kingdom come. Luckily, WMD was just a selling point to have a war, not a reality.

Im undoing the good by being one of the biggest supporters of the commander in cheif and of US foreign policy? btw I dont find my comments any more ignorant than anyone elses.

No, you are being a blind supporter of US foreign policy. If you put more thought and had more backing to your comments then you could be taken seriously and be beneficial to the US.

Read: http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,808970,00.html

IF Iraq did have WMD, we did the exact thing necessary for him to have an excuse to blow us all to kingdom come. Luckily, WMD was just a selling point to have a war, not a reality.
This is just a matter of opinion, you believe they didnt have them, I believe they did and probably still do.

This is just a matter of opinion, you believe they didnt have them, I believe they did and probably still do.
Why didn't they use them? Whats the point of having something for a war and not using it in a war?

No, you are being a blind supporter of US foreign policy. If you put more thought and had more backing to your comments then you could be taken seriously and be beneficial to the US.
Why shouldnt I support our policies? We cant think in a pre-9/11 mindset. Its important to spread freedom and to stay the course. Saddam means the world is a better place with him in a cell. And we cant back down to N. Korea and we cant allow them to strike 1st. America will not run and we will not back down!

Why didn't they use them? Whats the point of having something for a war and not using it in a war?
He didnt want to prove us right, he did it to spite Bush. Dont forgot he tried to kill his dad.

Bring it on you commy bastards! :mp5: :mp5:

He didnt want to prove us right, he did it to spite Bush. Dont forgot he tried to kill his dad.
You're saying that he threw out the only card in his hands because he wanted to prove a point?

He didnt want to prove us right, he did it to spite Bush. Dont forgot he tried to kill his dad.

He was a dictator about to be displaced - of course he would have used them if he had them available. He had no compunctions about using poison gas before, so why not WMDs when the allies invaded?

Husein tried to kill Bush's dad? Evidence, please? If it's the other way around I still want evidence.

He didnt want to prove us right, he did it to spite Bush. Dont forgot he tried to kill his dad.

So, he let himself get kicked out of his cushy palace, into that hole that we found him in, to spite Bush?

Why shouldnt I support our policies? We cant think in a pre-9/11 mindset. Its important to spread freedom and to stay the course. Saddam means the world is a better place with him in a cell. And we cant back down to N. Korea and we cant allow them to strike 1st. America will not run and we will not back down!

Have you ever questioned Bush or the US foreign policy ever? Or are you a good government drone that responded blindly to post-9/11 propaganda?

He was a dictator about to be displaced - of course he would have used them if he had them available. He had no compunctions about using poison gas before, so why not WMDs when the allies invaded?

Husein tried to kill Bush's dad? Evidence, please? If it's the other way around I still want evidence.
No, it's true. Hussein did go after Bushdad.

Why shouldnt I support our policies? We cant think in a pre-9/11 mindset. Its important to spread freedom and to stay the course. Saddam means the world is a better place with him in a cell. And we cant back down to N. Korea and we cant allow them to strike 1st. America will not run and we will not back down!

I'm a marine, it's my job to aide in carrying out the U.S. foreign policy. I'm all for closing with and destroying the enemy, but you have to do it with care. Spreading rhetoric that everyone is aware of and will change no ones opinion is not helpful.

You're saying that he threw out the only card in his hands because he wanted to prove a point?
exactly, he wanted to make us look bad, that bastard

No, it's true. Hussein did go after Bushdad.

Wait...US Abassador was right? How did he go after him?

I'm a marine, it's my job to aide in carrying out the U.S. foreign policy. I'm all for closing with and destroying the enemy, but you have to do it with care. Spreading rhetoric that everyone is aware of and will change no ones opinion is not helpful.
yeah, Im not a big fan of the whole "win the hearts and minds" nonsense. Im more for getting in there and taking care of business regardless of what people way think. And I aint rhetoric, Im spreading the message of hope and freedom.

Have you ever questioned Bush or the US foreign policy ever? Or are you a good government drone that responded blindly to post-9/11 propaganda?
yeah, I questioned him. Im wondering why he's taking so long to get into Iran. But I guess he has a good reason.

exactly, he wanted to make us look bad, that bastard
He could have just killed us. We would have looked worse after that.
http://www.justthefunny.com/images/Mutant%20Belkys.jpg