When can we finally nuke North Korea off the face of the planet?

[dedalius]

Thanks for the clarification on h-bombs.


Bad idea, definitely... was there actually an agreement where research would not proceed on them though? If not, hell even if there was, it's probably already well underway. I can't see any of today's superpowers completely ignoring the chance of having something that powerful, even as a "defensive weapon".

I'm pretty sure the agreement was made not to research them. It was kind of a "holy shit look at what we think we can research" kind of thing that turned into a "yeah, let's all agree that it's a horrible idea and shouldn't be done"

 

[dedalius]

Saddam captured Kurds and infected with bio warfare weapons which killed them, He then says that his goal is to rid USA of "non-believers" or non Muslims by killing them, he doesn't accept reality he is trying to warp it to suit his needs. Bush has problems, but Saddam isn't far off either.

He is using Islam as a front as well to kill innocent people...

Still think Saddaam isn't that bad?

Some highlights:

Documented chemical attacks by the regime, from 1983 to 1988, resulted in some 30,000 Iraqi and Iranian deaths.

Saddam's 1987-1988 campaign of terror against the Kurds killed at least 50,000 and possibly as many as 100,000 Kurds

Iraq's 13 million Shi'a Muslims, the majority of Iraq's population of approximately 22 million, face severe restrictions on their religious practice, including a ban on communal Friday prayer, and restriction on funeral processions.

Over the past five years, 400,000 Iraqi children under the age of five died of malnutrition and disease

 

[masamura]

Still think Saddaam isn't that bad?

Some highlights:

I'm supposed to believe the Whitehouse? By the way, Palestinians get murdered when they perform their Friday prayers.. thousands, if not, hundred of thousands of children are facing malnutrition, denial of education, and oppression from the Israels.. do you see Whitehouse doing anything about that?

Face it, the reason why America bothered with Iraq is because of US's foreign interest in Iraq which includes oil and the fact that Saddam decided to say "screw USD.. We're using Euro." Any Economist can tell you this. If Saddam was all that bad, your ex-president wouldn't even have helped Saddam in the early 80s.

Now, what can North Korea offer...?

US invading Iraq because of Euros: http://www.energybulletin.net/12125.html

 

[Sapper]

I bet Donald Rumsfeld is licking his chops over North Korea, thats one issue we need to resolve. Kim Jong Il(sp?) is a world class psycho who launched a campaign to his people that eating grass was good because he couldnt feed them.

 

[K. Ishitar]

Still think Saddaam isn't that bad?

Some highlights:

Is that a joke? its really not funny, no I would shoot Saddam on the spot if i could actually, Bush just needs to get out of office.

China really isn't all that scary their people are suppressed often because they want freedom all you need is some propaganda to stir shit up and you can have part of China wiped off the board.

Seems like we can't take the iron curtain down till a war starts >.<

 

[dedalius]

We helped Iraq because it was against Iran. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Remember when Bush Sr. said stop, then Clinton said stop? The Iraq war was over a decade in the making.

Don't trust the White House?
More

From that article, I see Iran. Not Iraq.

 

[masamura]

We helped Iraq because it was against Iran. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Remember when Bush Sr. said stop, then Clinton said stop? The Iraq war was over a decade in the making.

Don't trust the White House?
More

From that article, I see Iran. Not Iraq.

Like I said, playing police doesn't make invasion a justification. If you would like to play police so much, there are much better agenda to look at, such as the Palestinian issue and Cambodian issue. Your "reasons" to start an invasion was not solid and the facts are seriously distorted even up till now.

At first, your justification was that Saddam Hussen had an arsenal of WMD... not found. Then chemical weapons... found, but unusable. And the latest, "to right was is wrong." Fine, you get to liberate the minority Kurds, but now, you are screwing thousands and million of other people's life in Iraq.

Your next target won't be North Korea, I can assure you. There's no benefit from it. Next target: Iran since they have bountiful of oil and you have no reserves.

 

[dedalius]

At first, your justification was that Saddam Hussen had an arsenal of WMD... not found. Then chemical weapons... found, but unusable. And the latest, "to right was is wrong." Fine, you get to liberate the minority Kurds, but now, you are screwing thousands and million of other people's life in Iraq.

Bush did lie in the beginning. Hell, he still may be lieing about something. I don't like him, he's definitely one of our worst presidents. That doesn't change the fact that Saddaam was a lunatic and needed to be taken out.

How are we screwing thousands and millions of other people's lives in Iraq?

Your next target won't be North Korea, I can assure you. There's no benefit from it. Next target: Iran since they have bountiful of oil and you have no reserves.

No, it'll be Iran because they're trying to build nuclear weapons.

As for oil reserves: we have an entire state.

 

[masamura]

Bush did lie in the beginning. Hell, he still may be lieing about something. I don't like him, he's definitely one of our worst presidents. That doesn't change the fact that Saddaam was a lunatic and needed to be taken out.

How are we screwing thousands and millions of other people's lives in Iraq?

You see, ignorence is not bliss. Middle-easterns have this spiritual thing called "Assabiyah" or in simple English, a very close family bond. If you screw with me, my family will screw with you and so forth. When you forcefully installed this "democratic" government into Iraq, you practically just started a whole new era of problems. For an example, the reason why the minorty Sunni in Iraq is going around bombing everyone because they *KNOW* that no matter what they do, they will NEVER win an election in your so called "democratic" government. To the Sunnis, the Americans have just installed a puppet government... shall I name a few other puppets? *cough*Afghanistan*cough*. You don't callt his screwing up other people's life?

No, it'll be Iran because they're trying to build nuclear weapons.

As for oil reserves: we have an entire state.

Iran's reason to build nuclear weapons are as stated in the UN's meeting and backed by Russia, as a self defence purpose. As a matter of fact, the development of it are actually based on researching towards nuclear power.. but of course, USA won't allow this to happen because USA is the supreme reign of the world, right?

And no, your oil reserve *is* depleting. Why? Well, it's for internal circulation only. And for your information... Iran has the 3rd largest oil reserve in the world. Top rank is Saudi Arabia, second, your neighbor Canada.

 

[dedalius]

I wouldn't call that screwing up other people's lives, I would call that a necessary step to peace. You act like Iraq was some happy place before we went there. When infact it was just as bad, if not worse, as it is now. The only difference: Saddaam the lunatic isn't there.

We have yet to tap Alaska.

End to Iran nuclear shit argument

 

[dedalius]

Quick note to the mods: perhaps this conversation should be moved to the Burning Circle, as it seems to have gotten heated.

 

[K. Ishitar]

For an example, the reason why the minorty Sunni in Iraq is going around bombing everyone because they *KNOW* that no matter what they do, they will NEVER win an election in your so called "democratic" government. To the Sunnis, the Americans have just installed a puppet government... shall I name a few other puppets? *cough*Afghanistan*cough*. You don't callt his screwing up other people's life?

Don't even bring Islam to this discussion, being a muslim is an action not a title that bears the burden of the sins of the one who holds it.

 

[masamura]

I wouldn't call that screwing up other people's lives, I would call that a necessary step to peace. You act like Iraq was some happy place before we went there. When infact it was just as bad, if not worse, as it is now. The only difference: Saddaam the lunatic isn't there.

We have yet to tap Alaska.

End to Iran nuclear shit argument

"Peace" ? *laugh* You mean "Esso needs to be richer"? I didn't say Iraq was a Utopia, but according to my Iraqi university classmates, it's much better than it is now. You can tap all you want... but the real fact is, your reserves are depleting, fast. This is not coming from any distorted media, but from an oil investment company.

Anyway, Russia and China, 2 of the superpowers doesn't find Iran a threat to the global peace, so why should you? Again.. Saudi Arabia, you can't invade. Canada, I don't think you'll ever.. so Iran...? Logical choice. North Korea? What the hell for? Let's just talk.

 

[dedalius]

Russia and China. Two of the members. Should I point out:

The five permanent, veto-wielding U.N. Security Council members -- the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China -- plus Germany have offered Iran a state-of-the-art nuclear reactor with a guaranteed fuel supply, economic benefits and support for the idea of a regional security framework if it halts uranium enrichment.

Second, your one and only source presented is one person's opinion. It his his opinion.

Was reading some more:

More on UN Security Council

The United Nations Security Council on July 5 was united in its condemnation of North Korea's missile launches, but a division emerged over the issue of how to censure Pyongyang. Thirteen of the 15 Security Council members -- including the permanent seat holders Britain, France, and the United States -- favor a resolution that is a strong warning leading to sanctions.

Just like to point out that that ONLY leaves China and Russia.

Furthermore,

Anyway, Russia and China, 2 of the superpowers doesn't find Iran a threat to the global peace, so why should you?

The two remaining permanent members, China and Russia, are leaning toward issuing a "presidential statement," a less serious, nonbinding warning that must be approved unanimously.

And, I'm not sure if this is allowed, but what class were your Iraqi friends? Were they higher class or lower class? If they're going to University, I would be willing to guess they are atleast middle class (if there is one in Iraq?). I highly doubt they know how bad it is for the lower class majority.

 

[masamura]

Russia and China. Two of the members. Should I point out:



Second, your one and only source presented is one person's opinion. It his his opinion.

Was reading some more:

More on UN Security Council



Just like to point out that that ONLY leaves China and Russia.

Furthermore,




And, I'm not sure if this is allowed, but what class were your Iraqi friends? Were they higher class or lower class? If they're going to University, I would be willing to guess they are atleast middle class (if there is one in Iraq?). I highly doubt they know how bad it is for the lower class majority.

Need I remind you that Britian and America are allies to the death? France is just there because it owed America a favor. As for the council members, as far as talking and understand from the ambassador of my country to UN, I understand that if you vote against the super power, chances are, you're screwed economically. So to play it safe, vote for the super power.

As for "sources", I don't pick stuffs up from Google. Googling is too easy. Put in a few keywords, and fire your salvo, read a few lines, you can say "that's my proof."

Real articles come from scholars, lecturers and books. Anyway, here's one of my favorite article I got from my a lecturer in the economic department.

http://ist-socrates.berkeley.edu/~pdscott/iraq.html

 

[dedalius]

THIRTEEN countries. Thats more than 6 times as many as the people that are "ok" with it. Even though they aren't "ok" with it. Thats 86.67% of the UN Security Council that thinks that something strong needs to happen. The other 13.33% thinks that something needs to happen, just not as strong.

 

[masamura]

THIRTEEN countries. Thats more than 6 times as many as the people that are "ok" with it. Even though they aren't "ok" with it. Thats 86.67% of the UN Security Council that thinks that something strong needs to happen. The other 13.33% thinks that something needs to happen, just not as strong.

Look, the UN Security Council for the term consists of: Argentina, Congo, Denmark, Ghana, Greece, Peru, Japan, Slovakia, Qatar, and Tanzania.

All these countries, are either 3rd world country or countries who's economic ties are closely related to the United States. Now, I have no solid evidence, but taken literally from the mouth of my country's ambassador to United Nations (oh yes, I know my ambassador personally), it's either "you're with us, or you're not" type of situation in the council. Unless you're a self sustaining super power (China is great example), there's no way you'll vote a "nay" against this matter especially if it involves US's next great financial breakthrough.

FYI, Iran has also converted to Euro when trading oil in 2002. Do you see why the demand of US Dollar is going down these days? Have you noticed your currency exchange and that in every week, USD seems to fail more and more? China is also moving towards Euro backing and so is Japan.

Oh.. your debt is also now half a trillion by the way. Do you know how many zeros are there in a trillion? Take that, divide with the current population of America and viola, that's your current debt. Even your babies are owing people money at the moment.

 

[Kyle]

Masa you french?

 

[CmdrFly]

[cheerleader]

Sweet debate, keep it up. And civilized! I never thought I'd see such a thing on a forum visited by Kire and WSM.

[/cheerleader]

 

[Reishu]

The US' interest in South Korea is largely diplomatic. The US have actually been the peacekeepers between North and South Korea. If you don't believe me, look at all the good press the US has in South Korea. They wouldn't be getting all that press if they didn't do something right... and that's only what could be declassified. I personally believe the US has some very good peaceful-minded liasons in South Korea.

When it comes right down to it though, Seoul is only a stone's throw away from the DMZ between N and S Korea. It -is- a "powder keg" (to use WW1 terms) just waiting to blow up. And who will South Korea turn to for help? the US. We've been there basically since WW2, keeping the peace there. S Korea depends on us, and if we pull out when S. Korea needs us most, we basically tell them "we can't do anything if they conquer you, even though we had a very large hand in the creation of your nation."

I personally hope that bad things don't happen... but I see something that can happen. WW3 is just waiting to happen right there. All North Korea or China needs is a good reason to conquer South Korea and/or Japan. They have the force, we don't. They'll be fighting without logistical problems of the magnitude we face. And they'll be fighting our allies (South Korea and Japan), who are both important economical partners.

Our interests are already there. And we'll be screwed royally if things go badly, which it could very easily.

Our bad public press worldwide concerning Iraq doesn't help our situation either.