|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Jun 19, 2009 12:08:11 GMT -5
This thread is for the discussion of those crazed fuckers.
They now want to launch a missile at Hawaii around July 4th. Of course it can't hit Hawaii, but it's provoking, and could technically be taken as a declaration of war.
Either way, where the hell is all this going? Does NK have a suicide wish?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2009 12:22:08 GMT -5
they have qualified for the world cup, good times
|
|
|
Post by lampard on Jun 20, 2009 20:52:26 GMT -5
they have qualified for the world cup, good times 10 bucks on north korea and south korea play each other and cause riots to break out in the losing country. you heard it here first.
|
|
|
Post by thechemist on Jun 22, 2009 12:11:27 GMT -5
Let this be a lesson: You don't feed your enemy. You don't supply fuel oil to your enemy. You don't trust your enemy. You don't provide diplomatic legitimacy to your enemy. You CRUSH your enemy when you have the chance.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Jun 22, 2009 14:47:21 GMT -5
Let this be a lesson: You don't feed your enemy. You don't supply fuel oil to your enemy. You don't trust your enemy. You don't provide diplomatic legitimacy to your enemy. You CRUSH your enemy when you have the chance. you should enlist if you truly believe that. war should be the absolute last resort in any situation. especially now. our troops are so worn thin between iraq and afghanistan that yet another war would wear us out so much so that we would be more vulnerable to any type of attack. that's why diplomacy is and should always be the first way to go.
|
|
|
Post by thechemist on Jun 22, 2009 18:05:41 GMT -5
Who said anything about war? We could have crushed this regime simply by not helping them. By not feeding them. By not providing any material or diplomatic support. We extended a diplomatic hand too many times and it continued to be bitten off. Diplomacy WAS the first step. And the second. And the third and fourth. Now they've got power.
Crush them early.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Jun 23, 2009 13:02:16 GMT -5
what do you suggest we do? we're spread too thin as is, and you're forgetting about china. they are a major ally to north korea. they also happen to practically own the u.s.
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Jun 23, 2009 14:09:08 GMT -5
Who said anything about war? We could have crushed this regime simply by not helping them. By not feeding them. By not providing any material or diplomatic support. We extended a diplomatic hand too many times and it continued to be bitten off. Diplomacy WAS the first step. And the second. And the third and fourth. Now they've got power. Crush them early. have ever thought about what you're saying for at least like 5 seconds?
|
|
|
Post by thechemist on Jun 23, 2009 14:37:10 GMT -5
What is so difficult about this? The west has fed North Korea for the pst decade. STOP. The west has provided fuel to North Korea for the past decade. STOP. The west has continued doing business w North Korea for the past decade. STOP.
Are you all really that thick or is it the typical "I can't think of a rational argument so I'll accuse you of being incoherent" discussion strategy?
Stop feeding North Korea and they crash. GET IT NOW???
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Jun 23, 2009 18:49:39 GMT -5
Are you all really that thick or is it the typical "I can't think of a rational argument so I'll accuse you of being incoherent" discussion strategy? You haven't really been a shining star in making a rational argument since you post here. What is so difficult about this? The west has fed North Korea for the pst decade. STOP. The west has provided fuel to North Korea for the past decade. STOP. The west has continued doing business w North Korea for the past decade. STOP. okay, so let's go through your theory a bit. you are saying, that we should stop all the trade with north korea and basically tell the people: you are going to starve unless you start a revolution and get rid of that fucker. okay, so how is that going to happen? north korea has about 1.2 million people in the armed forces. that's 1 soldier for 20 civilians. that means that north korea has as many soldiers as the united states but only slightly more inhabitants than the new york metropolitan area. so the questian is: is the military going to be loyal to the dictator? okay, since the military is essential to stabilize a dictatorship you can expect that they have a lot of power in this state. thus kim jong-il is not very likely to save any money in that section. today north korea spends about 25 % of their GDP for the military. already today, people are starving so they can keep up the military expanditures. i personally think these are good reasons to stay loyal to the dictator. and a rebellion against a military with 1 soldier on 20 civilians? impossible. so yeah, one could stop organisations like the world food programme ship food into the country, but it's not very likely that this would hit the dictator. it would just make the people starve. have a look at chinas great leap forward. 20 to 40 million starved to death and what happened to mao? nothing. next question: trade. major trading partners of north korea are: 1. china 2. south korea 3. thailand 4. russia 5. india so how do you think, we (the us or the eu) could stop north koreas trade? 1) even if we had significant trade with n.k., the chinese would only be too happy to make the deal instead. that's capitalism. 2) since china is the most important partner of the regime, could we make them put some pressure on n.k.? difficult. after george bush led the country into an even stronger economical dependancy, it is very hard to ask them to give up one of their major trading partners. imagine someone would ask the united states to stop their trade with saudi arabia, cause it's no democracy and they don't give a fuck about human rights. would the us do this? no. so it is not very likely that we are able to make the chinese stop trade with n.k. to me, this is one of the worst parts of bushs legacy, that he left duty with his country in a weaker position towards china. this was fatal (a thing that the self entitled foreign-policy-analyst on this board doesn't realise aswell). the same with russia. russia simply has too much oil to be bothered. 3) so if we don't have the power to force them, is there an argument to convince them? we could argue that it's unethical or something to do business with this country. but hey, this is capitalism. this is the free market. this is the economical system we prefer! or do you think that e.g. weapon manufacturers give a shit about wether their guns are sold to criminals or to daddy who wants to protect his family? nope. the simple goal of all companies in this system is: make as much money as you can. and the goal for every government is: enable the economy to make as much money as it can. we do it and china does it aswell - hey, we don't give fuck about wether we make deals with dictators or other regimes if it fits our interests (our foreign-policy-analyst calls this a "functioning" regime. this basically means, that we make money with them, they make money with us. let them do what they want with their people). this mechanism alone and a brief overview of game-theory is a simple argument, why i think we won't be able to stop the trade with north korea. so, i'd like to know: how do you think is your strategy going to work?
|
|
|
Post by thechemist on Jun 23, 2009 19:05:46 GMT -5
By starving every one of them into submission.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Jun 24, 2009 9:20:07 GMT -5
By starving every one of them into submission. that is the post of the week, ladies and gentlemen! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Jun 24, 2009 11:46:37 GMT -5
What the fuck do they get out of this? They threaten to fire missiles at the US that can't even reach? They threaten to wipe US off the map with such inadaquate missiles? Thus, this is just for provoking the US, but again, for what fucking reason? What idiots. Can't wait for that regime to fall like the Soviet Union. ---------------- ---------------- NKorea threatens US; world anticipates missile news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090624/ap_on_re_as/as_koreas_nuclear_91By HYUNG-JIN KIM, Associated Press Writer Hyung-jin Kim, Associated Press Writer – Wed Jun 24, 8:51 am ET SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea threatened Wednesday to wipe the United States off the map as Washington and its allies watched for signs the regime will launch a series of missiles in the coming days. Off China's coast, a U.S. destroyer was tailing a North Korean ship suspected of transporting illicit weapons to Myanmar in what could be the first test of U.N. sanctions passed to punish the nation for an underground nuclear test last month. The Kang Nam left the North Korean port of Nampo a week ago with the USS John S. McCain close behind. The ship, accused of transporting banned goods in the past, is believed bound for Myanmar, according to South Korean and U.S. officials. The new U.N. Security Council resolution requires member states to seek permission to inspect suspicious cargo. North Korea has said it would consider interception a declaration of war and on Wednesday accused the U.S. of seeking to provoke another Korean War. "If the U.S. imperialists start another war, the army and people of Korea will ... wipe out the aggressors on the globe once and for all," the official Korean Central News Agency said. The warning came on the eve of the 59th anniversary of the start of the three-year Korean War, which ended in a truce in 1953, not a peace treaty, leaving the peninsula in state of war. The U.S. has 28,500 troops in South Korea to protect against an outbreak of hostilities. Tensions have been high since North Korea launched a long-range rocket in April and then conducted its second underground atomic test on May 25. Reacting to U.N. condemnation of that test, North Korea walked away from nuclear disarmament talks and warned it would fire a long-range missile. North Korea has banned ships from the waters off its east coast starting Thursday through July 10 for military exercises, Japan's Coast Guard said. South Korea's Yonhap news agency reported Wednesday that the North may fire a Scud missile with a range of up to 310 miles (500 kilometers) or a short-range ground-to-ship missile with a range of 100 miles (160 kilometers) during the no-sail period. A senior South Korean government official said the no-sail ban is believed connected to North Korean plans to fire short- or mid-range missiles. He spoke on condition of anonymity, citing department policy. U.S. defense and counterproliferation officials in Washington said they also expected the North to launch short- to medium-range missiles. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence. South Korea will expedite the introduction of high-tech unmanned aerial surveillance systems and "bunker-buster" bombs in response to North Korea's provocations, the Chosun Ilbo newspaper said, citing unidentified ruling party members. Meanwhile, a flurry of diplomatic efforts were under way to try getting North Korea to return to disarmament talks. Russia's top nuclear envoy, Alexei Borodavkin, said after meeting with his South Korean counterpart that Moscow is open to other formats for discussion since Pyongyang has pulled out of formal six-nation negotiations. In Beijing, top U.S. and Chinese defense officials also discussed North Korea. U.S. Defense Undersecretary Michele Flournoy was heading next to Tokyo and Seoul for talks. South Korea has proposed high-level "consultations" to discuss North Korea with the U.S., Russia, China and Japan.
|
|
fastfuse
Oasis Roadie
Today Class We Shall Learn Rock N' Roll History
Posts: 264
|
Post by fastfuse on Jun 24, 2009 12:08:22 GMT -5
wow!!
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Jun 24, 2009 13:00:26 GMT -5
What the fuck do they get out of this? They threaten to fire missiles at the US that can't even reach? They threaten to wipe US off the map with such inadaquate missiles? Thus, this is just for provoking the US, but again, for what fucking reason? What idiots. i think it's pretty obvious what they are trying to do. north korea tries to look as dangerous as possible for the west with their nuclear potential (wich might also be a gigantic bluff, i don't know). this is of course to keep up a deterrend potential against a possible us strike. on the other hand they cannot become too powerful, cause china will not tolerate this. so they play the crazy idiots with the bomb to the west while embracing china at the same time. so kim jong il is heading a very risky course, but that is probably the only way to stay in power. and don't think, that these people are stupid.
|
|
|
Post by MEANSTREAK on Jun 28, 2009 6:23:07 GMT -5
Honestly, I've had it up to here with North Korea and can't take it any more. I mean come on, they are talking about firing missles at us only months after Obama the great peacemaker gets elected? China has to know they aren't doing themselves any favors by propping up the NK regime. I agree with thechemist.
|
|
|
Post by globe on Jun 29, 2009 3:08:19 GMT -5
Honestly, I've had it up to here with North Korea and can't take it any more. I mean come on, they are talking about firing missles at us only months after Obama the great peacemaker gets elected? China has to know they aren't doing themselves any favors by propping up the NK regime. I agree with thechemist. So you want to starve everybody in North Korea to death?
|
|
|
Post by Protector of reality on Jun 29, 2009 13:10:17 GMT -5
This thread is for the discussion of those crazed fuckers. They now want to launch a missile at Hawaii around July 4th. Of course it can't hit Hawaii, but it's provoking, and could technically be taken as a declaration of war. Either way, where the hell is all this going? Does NK have a suicide wish? Pearl harbour number 2? Yes that true, it would be suicide. What if the ohh so successfull American Army parked in Korea? To help establish "law and order". Add to their tally of monumental nation destroying culture crushing fuck ups. Great, when do we start? Why is America looked on as the nation who will fix everything? Sickens me
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Jun 29, 2009 18:47:58 GMT -5
we did... there was the korean war.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Jun 29, 2009 19:31:58 GMT -5
This thread is for the discussion of those crazed fuckers. They now want to launch a missile at Hawaii around July 4th. Of course it can't hit Hawaii, but it's provoking, and could technically be taken as a declaration of war. Either way, where the hell is all this going? Does NK have a suicide wish? Pearl harbour number 2? Yes that true, it would be suicide. What if the ohh so successfull American Army parked in Korea? To help establish "law and order". Add to their tally of monumental nation destroying culture crushing fuck ups. Great, when do we start? Why is America looked on as the nation who will fix everything? Sickens me Cos we're the super power - we're the leader. From my International Security class notes (take it or leave it): --->Guaranteeing Security: The Role of the Hegemon *Hegemon = leader/super power *Guarantor of security and peace issues *Post Cold War: US is the Hegemon – resourceful: -Big population, good education, etc --->Everything in International Politics Depends on an American Response *Logic of a Superpower -What’s the crisis, and how will the U.S respond to the problem? -Examples: US Exchange Rate -America’s power is not static – always discussing issues -Remove the US from being a superpower and civilization would shift more towards state of anarchy, a “state of nature” *America was able to transfer itself -To an industrial country, then to a post-industrial country -From a divided and segregated society to a more open and integrated society *There is no guarantee that can guarantee the guarantee -But in the case of America, it is -America can ensure some function of a relationship --->America’s Logic of a Superpower *America has so many stakes in international politics -Extensive web of contacts *A superpower is like an investor in the stock market -Making decisions of how to administer his worth -Not static, constant employment -Constantly always make decisions – some right, some wrong as you use your wealth and fortune ---->America’s Engagement with the World *Little Historical Experience -New nation -History doesn’t shape US foreign policy too much *Lack of Colonial Legacy -Few colonies – not right to control other nations *Access of Warm Waters -Doesn’t have a barrier like Russia does, for example *A sense of Optimism -Camp David Accords -Jimmy Carter wanted to translate the ethnic division that happened in the US (blacks and whites) and apply it to the tensions abroad between Israel and Egypt --->America’s Power 1.) Oceanic -Can deploy troops in the sea, similar to Great Britain 2.) Continental -America can send troops to many parts of the world -Airlift troops all around the world -Bases in other nations, etc *Britain is really the only other nation with both continental and oceanic powers *America is more powerful than its two neighbors -More powerful than both Mexico and Canada -Example: Belgium in between Germany and France = concern for Belgium
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Jun 29, 2009 20:41:16 GMT -5
Pearl harbour number 2? Yes that true, it would be suicide. What if the ohh so successfull American Army parked in Korea? To help establish "law and order". Add to their tally of monumental nation destroying culture crushing fuck ups. Great, when do we start? Why is America looked on as the nation who will fix everything? Sickens me Cos we're the super power - we're the leader. and you think the us can stay in afghanistan, iraq (like you want it to be) and invade iran and iraq meanwhile? ;D okay, you are the expert... haha!
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Jun 29, 2009 20:52:23 GMT -5
From my International Security class notes (take it or leave it): --->Everything in International Politics Depends on an American Response *Logic of a Superpower -Remove the US from being a superpower and civilization would shift more towards state of anarchy, a “state of nature” ehm, i've learned about that strange new trendy thing lately. it's called pemocracy or democrisis... or something like that. but of course we all know that it takes a good king, don't we? aaah, the thomas hobbes revival. ---->America’s Engagement with the World *Lack of Colonial Legacy -Few colonies – not right to control other nations ;D ha ha...
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Jun 29, 2009 20:59:58 GMT -5
Cos we're the super power - we're the leader. and you think the us can stay in afghanistan, iraq (like you want it to be) and invade iran and iraq meanwhile? ;D okay, you are the expert... haha! NEVER did I say that, nor even imply that. I would like us to succeed in Iraq, yes. I'd like us to do well in Afghanistan. All I have ever said about Iran was that IF NEED BE we should ONLY bomb their nuclear facilities, and not fully invade or topple the regime. We haven't even reached that point yet, imo, but it's def. on the horizon in the next 4 years by the way things are going. And I reckon your slight typo there is meant to be NK? Well, I have no idea what to do with them. ATM, probably nothing as I think all they are doing is for rhetoric purposes, trying to provoke us, so if we make the first move here we play into their hands......
|
|
|
Post by MEANSTREAK on Jun 30, 2009 17:23:36 GMT -5
Honestly, I've had it up to here with North Korea and can't take it any more. I mean come on, they are talking about firing missles at us only months after Obama the great peacemaker gets elected? China has to know they aren't doing themselves any favors by propping up the NK regime. I agree with thechemist. So you want to starve everybody in North Korea to death? They're already starving at the hands of Kim Jong Il, don't act like him and Iran's Guardian Council and blame their problems on the USA/Britain. What choice do we have other than sanctions? North Korea isn't worth the cost of the bombs we would drop on it.
|
|
|
Post by globe on Jul 1, 2009 1:16:23 GMT -5
Ah well thats ok then if they are already starving. Silly me.
|
|