N Korea is next
- Thread starter Gonz
- Start date
HeXp£Øi±
Well-Known Member
These guys are just worried that we're coming after them when we're done with Iraq. This one might turn out to be more touchy even the the Iraq situation if it's not already. Not that they can reach the US, but they can reach Japan(with missiles). The difference is North Korea actually has some intelligence, unlike Iraq, and they really are like a baby getting ready to throw a tantrum if they don't get what they want. IMO North Korea will blow itself up if it doesn't get what it wants.
tommyj27
Not really Banned
if i were north korea i'd be doing the same thing, it gets them international attention to their situation. they didn't start all this hoopla with the reactor, it was in response to the u.s. halting oil shipments provided by the 1994 agreement. maybe the north is that starved for energy that it really needs the power to make up for loss of oil supplies, i don't know if i buy that but it's a possibility. IMHO the u.s. is going down a dangerous road with it's 'bully everybody' foreign policy, and it's going to find itself alone as more and more nations take a step away from it.
HeXp£Øi±
Well-Known Member
It's not the energy. The latest reactor they're starting up doesn't generate enough power to fuel the Island it's located on! It does however provide a decent setup for making many new explosive devices. The path is narrow and every time we step forward we lean sideways. Just glad i'm not making the decisions.
S
s4
Guest
bad situation
Aunty Em
Well-Known Member
tommyj27 said:
Well I just read in the paper today the opinion that the US is becoming the greatest threat to world peace that we have ever known, and that the american people are being systematically excluded by the powers that be from any control over their own government. This is an opinion that I have also seen expressed by many foreign journalists.
Since our government is the greatest threat to world peace, does that mean we can bring our troops home from Japan, Germany, France, England, Bolivia, Columbia, Peru, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, and all the other places we are & let your governments make sure we live in a better place?
Jeslek
Banned
Gonz said:
Noooo, that can't happen... We must carry the price tag of having a good military, and then rent it out for free to other nations who can't even take care of themselves. This is called being "a good neighbor" and all that shit. As soon as we want to use our own forces, it becomes "the evil US" blah. lol.
Shadowfax
<b>mod cow</b>
funny thing. north korea can't start up a lab again to create weapon grade plutonium...mhhh...and the US has the biggest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world....but still forbids others to create them as well...
now, of course you'll say the US made a deal with north korea not to develop in that area anymore...but then again, the US hasn't been so keen on keeping treaties and deals as well in the past...
of course, the US does a lot of good in the world. true, very true. but like squiggy said, does that mean we'll have to agree on everything the US thinks? agree on everything the US does?
i don't think so.
now, of course you'll say the US made a deal with north korea not to develop in that area anymore...but then again, the US hasn't been so keen on keeping treaties and deals as well in the past...
of course, the US does a lot of good in the world. true, very true. but like squiggy said, does that mean we'll have to agree on everything the US thinks? agree on everything the US does?
i don't think so.
Jeslek
Banned
No, the USA has about 12,700 nuclear weapons. Russia has well over 28,000.Shadowfax said:
Admittedly this data is 2 years old, but it does point you in a direction.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/733162.stm
Yes of course, I don't want people pointing nukes at me. Rephrase... I don't want my enemies to have nuclear weapons. Its called: self-interest and self-preservation, and I do have that sense even if it is at the expense of others. (ring ring, Darwinism)
Shadowfax
<b>mod cow</b>
ok, perhaps i should have said one of the biggest arsenals of nuclear weapons
ah, you don't want people pointing nukes at you? perhaps it could ever occure to you that other people don't like the idea of the US having 12,700 nuclear weapons against they having a big fat zero.
of course, you won't agree, 'cause YOU say the US won't use them without reason. sure, that can be so. but the north koreans may think otherwise. and i highly doubt that the north koreans will nuke the US as soon as they can and have developed nuclear weapons. of course the US thinks differently....see the pattern?
but looking at it from an outside view...why on earth would the north koreans use nuclear weapons against the US? they know the whole country will be nuked if they even try to launch a nuclear weapon against the US. they may not agree with the US in many cases, but i highly doubt they are into the total self destruction of their own country....
ah, you don't want people pointing nukes at you? perhaps it could ever occure to you that other people don't like the idea of the US having 12,700 nuclear weapons against they having a big fat zero.
of course, you won't agree, 'cause YOU say the US won't use them without reason. sure, that can be so. but the north koreans may think otherwise. and i highly doubt that the north koreans will nuke the US as soon as they can and have developed nuclear weapons. of course the US thinks differently....see the pattern?
but looking at it from an outside view...why on earth would the north koreans use nuclear weapons against the US? they know the whole country will be nuked if they even try to launch a nuclear weapon against the US. they may not agree with the US in many cases, but i highly doubt they are into the total self destruction of their own country....
N Korea has a history of violence, even at the scales of war. So do places like Iraq & Iran. They can't let well enough alone & just kick someones ass. They have to take as many people as possible out. Why do you think India & Pakistan wasnted nukes? It certainly wasn't to be friendly. At this point, the only country to use a nuclear device is the US. It stopped a long & bloody war. If we are one of teh only, or the only, country that has them it's deterence. If everybody has them it's anhihilalation. Tit for tat is bad with nukes.
Knee jerk? I don't thnk so. It's been 50+ year since there's been a war of significance on this planet. In those fifty years the US has been disliked, spat upon, jerked around, shot at & bombed. Through all of that, Europe is mainly safe, Japan has no standing army of significance, China wants to join the WTO & the Soviet Unios no longer exists. I doubt very seriously that the fucking socialists in France had much to do with that. If people don't like us bullying the world, have at it folks. Blow youselves to bits. Just don't come looking to ask us for help (WW1, WWII, Balkans)
Knee jerk? I don't thnk so. It's been 50+ year since there's been a war of significance on this planet. In those fifty years the US has been disliked, spat upon, jerked around, shot at & bombed. Through all of that, Europe is mainly safe, Japan has no standing army of significance, China wants to join the WTO & the Soviet Unios no longer exists. I doubt very seriously that the fucking socialists in France had much to do with that. If people don't like us bullying the world, have at it folks. Blow youselves to bits. Just don't come looking to ask us for help (WW1, WWII, Balkans)
Squiggy
ThunderDick
Again a kneejerk. Kuwait was as violent as Iraq and we said nothing till Iraq went in. Where was your voice then? Iran was as violent under the Shaw and we backed the Shaw to the hilt. Where was your voice then? I have trouble understanding our policy from day to day when we selectively enforce or ignore it based on big business and $$$.
I was about 15.
Kuwait-honestly I never heard of them...just another Shell station in the desert. After the crap started in the late 80's I started paying attention.
The world is a safer place because of the US, like it or not. Without us...I'd hate to think what the world would be like. We don't aquire land. We don't attack without provocation-Kuwait was/is an ally. Iraq is & has been violating the surrender treaty damn near since day one. I didn't re-elect Slick Willy.
My point is-the world should shit or get off the pot. If we aren't doing a satisfactory job, find someone else ready willing & able.
Squiggy
ThunderDick
Gonz said:
The problem is, you're jumping from something we might be doing wrong to things we've done right. Then trying to use that to justify what we're doing wrong. I love this countryand would still be willing to drag my wretched, broken body to any battlefeild to defend it. But we still have to think about our actions and question what seems askew...