Not really, I was just trying to make a point. Nutjob is relative and there seems to be no evidence that NK is developing weapons to use them. They are a bargaining chip.
BTW thanks for ignoring my point, I must have hit a nerve.
Originally posted by: alchemize
Sounds like to me you wanted to backdoor this conversation into an anti-bush tirade. Pretty much what I expected.
Originally posted by: Todd33
So how often has NK attacked others in the last 10-20 years? Have they vowed to invade or attack anyone? If Kim is such a "nutjob" why has he not sent his million+ army south to invade? He is nuts right?
Did they put the US on an axis of evil?
Which leader has said that God told him to invade a sovereign country?
Seems to me it's a regional issue and we have no moral high ground to preach from.
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: Todd33
So how often has NK attacked others in the last 10-20 years? Have they vowed to invade or attack anyone? If Kim is such a "nutjob" why has he not sent his million+ army south to invade? He is nuts right?
Did they put the US on an axis of evil?
Which leader has said that God told him to invade a sovereign country?
Seems to me it's a regional issue and we have no moral high ground to preach from.
Does assinations squads in other countries; covert infiltrators/sabatouers into South Korea and Japan count?
What about incursions across the DMZ and tunnels underneath it?
NK is not a innocent misunderstood babe.
Originally posted by: Rainsford
I think our best bet is to not take the lead on this and let NK's neighbors hash it out. This doesn't mean sitting on the sidelines, however, we have allies in that region and we need to make it clear that we can and will defend them and back them up, but let Japan and South Korea take the lead. This will, IMHO, prevent us from once again looking like "Team America: World Police", which has a fairly negative impact on diplomacy, again in my opinion. Letting our allies take the lead here also has the advantage of pushing China without having to overtly threaten them. While North Korea does not seem to grasp diplomatic concerns, I'm positive China does...they're smart enough to realize that a nuclear armed Japan and/or South Korea, backed by American military might, facing off with North Korea in their backyard is NOT in their best interests. That will draw them to the table without having to overtly threaten them, which would almost certainly polarize the discussion the wrong way.
Originally posted by: Todd33
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: Todd33
So how often has NK attacked others in the last 10-20 years? Have they vowed to invade or attack anyone? If Kim is such a "nutjob" why has he not sent his million+ army south to invade? He is nuts right?
Did they put the US on an axis of evil?
Which leader has said that God told him to invade a sovereign country?
Seems to me it's a regional issue and we have no moral high ground to preach from.
Does assinations squads in other countries; covert infiltrators/sabatouers into South Korea and Japan count?
What about incursions across the DMZ and tunnels underneath it?
NK is not a innocent misunderstood babe.
Dozens of countries, including our allies and us do far worse every year. What is your point? I never said NK was innocent, thanks for putting words in my mouth.
Originally posted by: SamurAchzar
But you are claiming there is not moral high ground to take an aggressive stance here, right? You should be able to tell apart good from bad.
The stories about concentration camps and mass murders appeaing not too long ago are enough to put NK in the "bad" side.
Originally posted by: alchemize
Yup, we can sustain short term inflation/economic downswing (from tarriffs on chinese goods resulting in higher prices/lower consumer spending) much easier than they could sustain dramatically reduced demand (as demand shifts to other low-cost producers).
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Originally posted by: alchemize
Yup, we can sustain short term inflation/economic downswing (from tarriffs on chinese goods resulting in higher prices/lower consumer spending) much easier than they could sustain dramatically reduced demand (as demand shifts to other low-cost producers).
Hmm, you do realize that China has been struggling to find a way to slow down their white hot economy? The Chinese GDP growth will be cut in half. The US enters a recession. Lil' Kim keeps on watching Disney movies and wearing women's underwear.
Originally posted by: Todd33
Originally posted by: alchemize
Sounds like to me you wanted to backdoor this conversation into an anti-bush tirade. Pretty much what I expected.
Not really, I was just trying to make a point. Nutjob is relative and there seems to be no evidence that NK is developing weapons to use them. They are a bargaining chip.
BTW thanks for ignoring my point, I must have hit a nerve.
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: Todd33
Originally posted by: alchemize
Sounds like to me you wanted to backdoor this conversation into an anti-bush tirade. Pretty much what I expected.
Not really, I was just trying to make a point. Nutjob is relative and there seems to be no evidence that NK is developing weapons to use them. They are a bargaining chip.
BTW thanks for ignoring my point, I must have hit a nerve.
Yes, Todd you really zinged me. Now this thread is about solutions and their pros and cons.
There are plenty of other NK threads for you to troll in if you don't believe there is even a problem to be solved.
oops is a little late with a Nuke. There are 23,000,000 people in the Seoul South Korea, do we just sit back and wait and hope that lil Kim doesn't get some crazy ass idea about retaking the south?Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
While I don't like lunatics having nuclear weapons, I am just as scared (or moreso) of them being in the hands of neocons. Personally I'd like all nukes destroyed. If not then America needs to quit thinking we're in charge of the planet. Every sovereign nation has the same rights. Period. At least until they do something to lose those rights...like say invading another sovereign nation under false pretenses...oh wait. Well then until they actually use nuclear weapons...ooops.
Originally posted by: Todd33
Originally posted by: SamurAchzar
But you are claiming there is not moral high ground to take an aggressive stance here, right? You should be able to tell apart good from bad.
The stories about concentration camps and mass murders appeaing not too long ago are enough to put NK in the "bad" side.
Good and bad? What is this the 2nd grade? We are talking about international relations here - we are all good and bad, depends on who you ask. Are we to tell NK they are "bad" and then what? Pakistan is good harboring terrorist? China has no human rights violations?
I guess we could always fall back on "Do as we say, not as we do.."
While I don't like lunatics having nuclear weapons, I am just as scared (or moreso) of them being in the hands of neocons. Personally I'd like all nukes destroyed. If not then America needs to quit thinking we're in charge of the planet. Every sovereign nation has the same rights. Period. At least until they do something to lose those rights...like say invading another sovereign nation under false pretenses...oh wait. Well then until they actually use nuclear weapons...ooops.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
oops is a little late with a Nuke. There are 23,000,000 people in the Seoul South Korea, do we just sit back and wait and hope that lil Kim doesn't get some crazy ass idea about retaking the south?Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
While I don't like lunatics having nuclear weapons, I am just as scared (or moreso) of them being in the hands of neocons. Personally I'd like all nukes destroyed. If not then America needs to quit thinking we're in charge of the planet. Every sovereign nation has the same rights. Period. At least until they do something to lose those rights...like say invading another sovereign nation under false pretenses...oh wait. Well then until they actually use nuclear weapons...ooops.
NK is like a little child looking for attention. It didn't get the attention it wanted so it broke something (aka launched some missiles) we gave it some attention for a bit and then went back to other things. Now this child decided to break something else to get attention.
We can either pay it some mind for a bit and then when we go back to dealing with other world problems wait for another tantrum or we can stop this once and for all.
I think it is time that we put this child in time out until it agrees to play nice with the other kiddies.
Originally posted by: SamurAchzar
Originally posted by: Todd33
Originally posted by: SamurAchzar
But you are claiming there is not moral high ground to take an aggressive stance here, right? You should be able to tell apart good from bad.
The stories about concentration camps and mass murders appeaing not too long ago are enough to put NK in the "bad" side.
Good and bad? What is this the 2nd grade? We are talking about international relations here - we are all good and bad, depends on who you ask. Are we to tell NK they are "bad" and then what? Pakistan is good harboring terrorist? China has no human rights violations?
I guess we could always fall back on "Do as we say, not as we do.."
YES, there is good and bad. For someone who lives in the free world and enjoys what it has to offer, a Nuke in the hands of NK is bad. There's no other way to twist it around.
Pakistan isn't better, granted, but the fact that you're unable to treat one shouldn't grant immunity to the other.
While I don't like lunatics having nuclear weapons, I am just as scared (or moreso) of them being in the hands of neocons. Personally I'd like all nukes destroyed. If not then America needs to quit thinking we're in charge of the planet. Every sovereign nation has the same rights. Period. At least until they do something to lose those rights...like say invading another sovereign nation under false pretenses...oh wait. Well then until they actually use nuclear weapons...ooops.
The ease with which some people deposit their own and their nations fate in the hands of madmen such as Kim Jong Yil and Achmadinghad keeps amazing me.
Assuming Nazi germany didn't invade any other sovereign country, just kept arming itself and killing minorities, disabled and gay, would it still have the same rights in your opinion?
Or to put it more clearly, what exactly should a country do to have these rights revoked? Are the actions, as mass murders, of Kim Jong Yil enough? How about Saddam and his use of chemical weapons?
I'll never put myself in the same moral level such as the scums from Iran and NK. First of all, because it's my survival or theirs; Second, I was educated to cherish the values of the free world and these countries are the everything but.
When you put yourself on the same moral grounds as loons like Saddam, Achmadinaghed and Kim Jong Yil, you should second guess your judgement.
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
oops is a little late with a Nuke. There are 23,000,000 people in the Seoul South Korea, do we just sit back and wait and hope that lil Kim doesn't get some crazy ass idea about retaking the south?Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
While I don't like lunatics having nuclear weapons, I am just as scared (or moreso) of them being in the hands of neocons. Personally I'd like all nukes destroyed. If not then America needs to quit thinking we're in charge of the planet. Every sovereign nation has the same rights. Period. At least until they do something to lose those rights...like say invading another sovereign nation under false pretenses...oh wait. Well then until they actually use nuclear weapons...ooops.
NK is like a little child looking for attention. It didn't get the attention it wanted so it broke something (aka launched some missiles) we gave it some attention for a bit and then went back to other things. Now this child decided to break something else to get attention.
We can either pay it some mind for a bit and then when we go back to dealing with other world problems wait for another tantrum or we can stop this once and for all.
I think it is time that we put this child in time out until it agrees to play nice with the other kiddies.
Why? Who are we? Why don't other nations have a right to do something to us in case Bushco gets a crazy ass idea about whatever?
No, equality is the answer. Every nation has the same rights, until they lose their rights because of some unlawful action. Not threat of action, actual action. Pre-emption is vile in every respect.
One of the reasons there are so many anti-western nutz out there is because of the west trying to control everyone else. It's not the only reason, but it's one of the biggies. If someone actually does something (ie Japan, Germany) then ssure, turn em into a parking lot. Otherwise quit thinking our feces doesn't stink and run our own damn country.
BAHAHAHAHA. The atrocities of western 'civilization' are well documented and every bit as vile and contemptable as any other...the only difference is that we did ours a while ago and some lesser developed nations are just now catching up.
We don't have a right to go into any other nation, unless it's to stop aggression beyond their borders. If people within a country are being abused then they need to step up and put a stop to it themselves. We did, and it's why we cherish our freedom today. No citizen will respect a government that they didn't fight for. If the country commits civil rights violations, fine, sanction them. Withhold anything but humanitarian aid. But don't try to overthrow them, don't meddle in their affairs, and sure as hell don't invade them. Our rights end at our borders. Period.
Originally posted by: SamurAchzar
The line between internal affaris and foreign affairs is thin to the point of invisibility when you speak of WMDs. By your logic, NK could arm itself with nuclear ICBM and you won't be able to do sh!t about it - just step aside and see how they get the power the end your civilization at will. That doesn't hold water, no matter how you put it.
US has practiced the attitude of keeping its nose in its own affairs up until WWII, where it failed miserably. US is not the bubble you want to think it is. It's still on earth.
Of course the US is an elected government with a high level of freedom. NK is a dictator ship where you would be thrown away for life talked about IT they way you talk about the US.Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: SamurAchzar
The line between internal affaris and foreign affairs is thin to the point of invisibility when you speak of WMDs. By your logic, NK could arm itself with nuclear ICBM and you won't be able to do sh!t about it - just step aside and see how they get the power the end your civilization at will. That doesn't hold water, no matter how you put it.
US has practiced the attitude of keeping its nose in its own affairs up until WWII, where it failed miserably. US is not the bubble you want to think it is. It's still on earth.
If America can be allowed nukes, other nations can be allowed the same nukes. That's my core point this entire time. We aren't special. We are the only nation to use nukes, we are the most recent nation to invade another (as far as I know). If ANYONE should be kept from keeping a powerful military based on current and past actions it's the United States. No, the US has NOT minded it's own affairs before WWII. Let's start with the eradication of the Indians (either a sovereign nation or group of sovereigns), then move on to Mexico, South and Central America, etc. America has, since day one, tried to be the world's bully (and largely succeeded).
All I want is equal treatment. Innocent until proven guilty, and held to the same standards. The US has no right to claim superiority in anything, except perhaps in claiming superiority.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Of course the US is an elected government with a high level of freedom. NK is a dictator ship where you would be thrown away for life talked about IT they way you talk about the US.Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: SamurAchzar
The line between internal affaris and foreign affairs is thin to the point of invisibility when you speak of WMDs. By your logic, NK could arm itself with nuclear ICBM and you won't be able to do sh!t about it - just step aside and see how they get the power the end your civilization at will. That doesn't hold water, no matter how you put it.
US has practiced the attitude of keeping its nose in its own affairs up until WWII, where it failed miserably. US is not the bubble you want to think it is. It's still on earth.
If America can be allowed nukes, other nations can be allowed the same nukes. That's my core point this entire time. We aren't special. We are the only nation to use nukes, we are the most recent nation to invade another (as far as I know). If ANYONE should be kept from keeping a powerful military based on current and past actions it's the United States. No, the US has NOT minded it's own affairs before WWII. Let's start with the eradication of the Indians (either a sovereign nation or group of sovereigns), then move on to Mexico, South and Central America, etc. America has, since day one, tried to be the world's bully (and largely succeeded).
All I want is equal treatment. Innocent until proven guilty, and held to the same standards. The US has no right to claim superiority in anything, except perhaps in claiming superiority.
Also NK has a history of giving weapons help to other countries, aka Iraq and Iran. We can't afford for them to help someone like Iran test their own nuke.
Your the US isn't any better than any other country doesn't fly in the real world. Most of the world looks up to the US, especially our ideas and freedoms, at the same time they are angry for our actions in the world, but if we didn't stand up for freedom with the later we would never have the former.
Originally posted by: kingtas
The point is we are not going to sell nukes to some mad men who will use them.
Originally posted by: kingtas
The point is we are not going to sell nukes to some mad men who will use them.