TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- North Korea did Nuclear tests 10.8.06
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid this is a good thing. now we can sit down and talk and really get a peaceful process going on. Like Pakistan and India did.

You have no idea what can happen if an extremist takes the control of the weapon, or that country ... he will not think good before launching these terrible weapons, he will not care for his life.

These extremists are willing to kill themselves in the name of their goals. They are waiting for an opportunity to send the world into a nuclear war, and then they think God or Allah or whatever will help them.

If they blew themselves up, or "hijacked" the planes or whatever, think what they can and will do if they have REAL weapons at their disposal.

Oh, and I dont want to give any good word for the oppressive North Korean regime - why do they need this nuclear force? Their missiles can barely outreach Japan (as shown in recent missile launches). What are they going to aim for - blue whales? Their people are starving, poor, and in massive need of help.

West gives some money to help these poor people. And the regime was warned against testing the nukes with harsh sanctions and cutting off aid. Pyongyang (whatever the name) ignored and proceeded with the testing. WHAT IS IT GOING TO ACHIEVE? How can they protect themselves with nukes when the aid will be cut off?

Ogh, the stupidity ... I feel sorry for their people ...

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r True, your foreign policy is now etched in stone as to what it failed to do; NK's nuclear test now commemorates that. However, I believe it was NK's shear determination more so than anyone's lack of leadership in dealing with them and their aspirations to join the Nuclear Club. The U.S. lack of fortitude in this matter isn't alone in the blame; the U.N. Security counsel and NK's neighbors are also showing their ineptness in dealing with Kim. This fault is exasperated when we think of the state that NK is in overall when they can't even feed their own people AND with sanctions... I guess the next step is to see how kookie Kim gets now that he just grew a couple of feet...

Agreed.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo god do read what you type? this ball got rolling over a decade ago. you act like this shit happens in some American vacuum. i guess it helps your partisaned exclusive world view that cant see past the American Presidential elections of 2000. it must suck soooo bad!

Okay Dittohead, you can go tell your friends that you gave your "told off a librul" speech now. Hope you feelin' better, and glad to be of service. I'll address this more below.

quote:

China doesn't carry any of the blame do they?, i mean, if you want to incite blame. if that helps you sleep, then lets talk about Russia. lets talk about the regional players in this game because thats all Kim Jong Il really cares about. his influence over the region.

China and Russia carry a huge fucking blame for their complacency. Which reminds me, what the fuck has our President done in regards to any of these other players? You want me to live outside of the "American vacuum"? Is that a fucking joke coming from someone who believes the U.S.A is the fucking center of the universe, the place where we spread freedom and our lovely version of "democracy" by invading and toppling hapless regimes while blissfully ignoring other murderous and genocidal dictators and countries?

I was addressing America and Bush for the sole purpose that he can and should have taken the lead on this years ago. Of course all over your airwaves and blogs the same fucking shananigans are taking place - a crisis comes about, therefore it's Clinton's fault. Seriously Q, who the fuck truly lives in a vacuum on these international crisis issues? This is beyond the pot calling the kettle black.

And while you're at it, could you please explain why Bush turned a blind eye to our beloved "ally", Pakistan, while they happily armed N. Korea with nuke material in the first place? And then please tell me why he threw N. Korea in the Axis of Evil limelight while shunning that very light from Pakistan and India for their noncompliant activities?

But then again, Bush wasn't ever truly very well educated with too many international problems in his own right:

quote:

George W. pulled Bandar aside. "Bandar, I guess you're the best asshole who knows about the world. Explain to me one thing." "Governor, what is it?" "Why should I care about North Korea?" Bandar said he didn't really know. It was one of the few countries that he did not work on for King Fahd. "I get these briefings on all parts of the world," Bush said, "and everybody is talking to me about North Korea." "I'll tell you what, Governor," Bandar said. "One reason should make you care about North Korea." "All right, smart alek," Bush said, "tell me." "The 38,000 American troops right on the border." ..."If nothing else counts, this counts. One shot across the border and you lose half these people immediately. You lose 15,000 Americans in a chemical or biological or even regular attack. The United State of America is at war instantly." "Hmmm," Bush said. "I wish those assholes would put things just point-blank to me. I get half a book telling me about the history of North Korea." "Now I tell you another answer to that. You don't want to care about North Korea anymore?" Bandar asked. The Saudis wanted America to focus on the Middle East and not get drawn into a conflict in East Asia. "I didn't say that," Bush replied. "But if you don't, you withdrawl those troops back. Then it becomes a local conflict. Then you have the whole time to decide, 'Should I get involved? Not involved?' Etc." At that moment, Colin Powell approached. "Colin," Bush said, "come here. Bandar and I were shooting the bull, just two fighter pilots shooting the bull." He didn't mention the topic. "Mr. Governor," Bandar said, "General Powell is almost a fighter pilot. He can shoot the bull almost as good as us." Bob Woodward State of Denial 2006

But no, you keep blaming Clinton as always, even though there was absolutely NO evidence that Pyongyang had added any plutonium stockpiles while Clinton was in office, AND had IAEA inspectors on the ground to boot:

http://democrats.senate.gov/pdfs/NS...ds_July2005.pdf

But hey, IAEA isn't exactly one of Bush's favorite gangs anyway, so who cares, right?

quote:

i haven't heard one voice of your party say anything about this. you have no answers either, so shut the hell up.

And who the fuck listens to the minority party anyway? YOU turdbags have been in charge for the past 5 years. YOU GOPers have had all the cards as our elected leaders in charge to take the reigns and lead the way towards peace and diplomacy.

Oh, but I forget, it's the Democrats' faults for not saying anything. Got it, chief. How silly of me to forget how much the Dems. could have actually done a god damn fucking thing about, oh, ANYTHING during Bush's regime.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium LOL, why? Did Japanese bomb San Francisco, Los Angeles? Did Americans use dialogue and political compromise? No, they were chickens and instead of invading the Japanese tightly-populated islands where they were surely going to get hit hard, they decided to nuke the innocent civilians, ATTACKING MEGAPOLISES WITH NUCLEAR WARHEADS, KILLING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANS OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS. Yeah, the circumstances of the use were OK (sarcasm). USA was in dead end and had no choice but to launch not JUST ONE, BUT TWO!!!! NUKES ... WASNT ONE ENOUGH!!!! AND THEY LAUNCHED THE SECOND NUKE WITHIN DAYS ... YEAH, SURE, yeah, its ok to kill another couple hundred thousand innocent civilians just to make a greater effect. I bet if Soviets werent going to receive nuclear technology from communist spies in the Manhattan Project, the Americans would have dropped a nuke or two on Soviet Union and forced them to accept their terms too. Pretty reasonable conclusion from my part ...

So apparently you're forgetting everything the Japanese did to EVERYONE ELSE in and around the region then besides Pearl Harbor.
Convenient argument.
Not buying it.

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 China and Russia carry a huge fucking blame for their complacency. Which reminds me, what the fuck has our President done in regards to any of these other players?

he brought them to the table for 6 way talks and bi-lateral talks under the multi-lateral framework. pyongyang re-nigged. they always re-nig.

quote:

And while you're at it, could you please explain why Bush turned a blind eye to our beloved "ally", Pakistan, while they happily armed N. Korea with nuke material in the first place? And then please tell me why he threw N. Korea in the Axis of Evil limelight while shunning that very light from Pakistan and India for their noncompliant activities?

heres where you fundamentally misunderstand what is going on. Pakistan didn't want anything from anybody. thats why they kept their shit secret. the only way we knew that Pakistan tested a weapon was...after they tested a weapon. they didn't advertise shit. why? because they didn't want anything. NoKo wants something. Kim Jong Il knows what to do to get it.

i mean do you honestly think we [Bush Clinton] could have done anything diplomatically to stop his ballistic missile program or his plutonium enrichment program or his nuclear bomb program or his weaponized nuc/bomb/missile program? no. nothing short of giving him $billions in unmarked 20's and season tickets to Fenway would have stopped him.

as a matter of fact, i believe that his announcement and subsequent test was an indication that the pressure put on by our State dept. is working. why? because he's had nukes for at least 3 yrs.!

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r So apparently you're forgetting everything the Japanese did to EVERYONE ELSE in and around the region then besides Pearl Harbor. Convenient argument. Not buying it.

That's true, they totaly brutalized the Chinese. But I don't see why large numbers of Japanese civilians should pay for it with their lives (not to mention the after affects still being felt in the areas affected by radiation), or how that's morally justifiable, especially considering that they didn't have a democratic/representative form of Government, atleast that is my understand. Even if they did, I guess it could be argued, but I still don't fully agree with it, especially since there's no distinction between supporters/opponents of a regime/policy when you freakin' nuke someone.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z That's true, they totaly brutalized the Chinese. But I don't see why large numbers of Japanese civilians should pay for it with their lives (not to mention the after affects still being felt in the areas affected by radiation), or how that's morally justifiable, especially considering that they didn't have a democratic/representative form of Government, atleast that is my understand. Even if they did, I guess it could be argued, but I still don't fully agree with it, especially since there's no distinction between supporters/opponents of a regime/policy when you freakin' nuke someone.

Because that's what happens in total war when you have to make decisions that are not black or white. If I had to make the decision between Operation Coronet and dropping the bomb I would not hesitate for a minute. But really this is digressing from what should be discussed in this topic.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo he brought them to the table for 6 way talks and bi-lateral talks under the multi-lateral framework. pyongyang re-nigged. they always re-nig.

And here's where I felt this administration has gone wrong ... what did they do once Pyongyang re-nigged? Nothing. N. Korea has been such a low priority for this administration that I feel that it's no surprise that what happened happened. Has their been a N. Korean plan/strategy? Bush has had the whitehouse and congress for the past 6 years, somebody tell me what the plan was, why it failed, and what the new plan that will succeed is. Don't give me any ... but but but democrats! arguments ... they're not in power.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z That's true, they totaly brutalized the Chinese. But I don't see why large numbers of Japanese civilians should pay for it with their lives (not to mention the after affects still being felt in the areas affected by radiation), or how that's morally justifiable, especially considering that they didn't have a democratic/representative form of Government, atleast that is my understand. Even if they did, I guess it could be argued, but I still don't fully agree with it, especially since there's no distinction between supporters/opponents of a regime/policy when you freakin' nuke someone.

That argument certainly didn't stop the Germans from trying to carpet bomb the UK back to the Stone Age...

quote:

Originally posted by occrider And here's where I felt this administration has gone wrong ... what did they do once Pyongyang re-nigged? Nothing.

ok, who's they? and what are we talking about exactly? is it the ballistic missile testing? plutonium? uranium enrichment? he's taken advantage of every diplomatic engagement on every subject imaginable for the last going on two decades.

i don't give a f**k about Democrats. they're stupid and they clearly aren't the answer. they can't be the answer. thats why i'm not gonna bring them into the dicussion or revise history like most Democrats enjoy doing when it comes to failed policy.

after giving it some thought...and Moet Champagne...fuck it! decapitate the NoKo regime in one fell swoop, and let the chips fall where they may.

no more tyranical despots with nukes. the shit has got to stop for the good of mankind. not Bush. not Hillary. not Shehan. not Hannity. not the French. not the UN.

this will send Tehran a message.

it's time to be a hawk again.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo ok, who's they? and what are we talking about exactly? is it the ballistic missile testing? plutonium? uranium enrichment? he's taken advantage of every diplomatic engagement on every subject imaginable for the last going on two decades.

Ummm they is our government. The Bush administration. The what we're talking about is weapons of mass destruction tested by a terrorist state that has never failed to make its intentions and hostilities clear.

quote:

i don't give a f**k about Democrats. they're stupid and they clearly aren't the answer. they can't be the answer. thats why i'm not gonna bring them into the dicussion or revise history like most Democrats enjoy doing when it comes to failed policy.

Great. Glad we see eye to eye. They aren't the answer because they don't hold the Presidancy or congress like one party we've come to know and love. And for the past 6 years they've had nothing to do with the failed policy that has resulted in recent current events. Glad you're acknowlegding the fact that its been a failure.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby Why? Why can't they have nuclear weapons? I can think of much, much more dangerous countries with much more wicked leaders who, if "disposed of", would make a much more profound positive impact on the planet. If a mushroom cloud ever blows over this country, I would be very suspicious if it hit anywhere but Washington DC... We're not going to do anything about this, and I hope that it doesn't create a scapegoat that will enable the completion of the lockdown of America.

So you'd be ok with the threat against Sth Korea (with or without the US personnel based there)? It is not just the US that needs to be considered.
I agree there are others that need to be sorted, but what do you think would happen if Irans leadership was removed this weekend? How many followers would be in Iraq for Jihad by mid next week. At least the people have some degree of quality of life there, unlike N.K.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider The what we're talking about is weapons of mass destruction tested by a terrorist state...

I know they're in Bushes axis of evil, but ther're not really a terrorist state are they? I mean they have no links to al-Quida, they don't do the suicide bombing etc.

They are drug runners tho.
http://www.state.gov/p/inl/rls/rm/21044.htm

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Ummm they is our government. The Bush administration. The what we're talking about is weapons of mass destruction tested by a terrorist state that has never failed to make its intentions and hostilities clear.

see you're under the impression that we [U.S. Government] can do something to diplomatically to stop tyranical despots from using weapons of mass destruction. thats just not the case is it? NoKo is not a terrorist state. this is a regional power play with Cold War overtones.

quote:

Great. Glad we see eye to eye. They aren't the answer because they don't hold the Presidancy or congress like one party we've come to know and love. And for the past 6 years they've had nothing to do with the failed policy that has resulted in recent current events. Glad you're acknowlegding the fact that its been a failure.

it has nothing to do with Democrats holding any office for any length of time. i didn't hear you three years ago when they had nukes, why am i hearing you now?

sure, you can call this a failure. it's a failure 20 years in the making, but what is success?

IMO success is not having the Kim Jong Il regime calling the shots. that requires much more than any one political party in America has the stones for right now Iraq or no Iraq...Neocons are much closer to having those stones than any Pelosicrat.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Because that's what happens in total war when you have to make decisions that are not black or white. If I had to make the decision between Operation Coronet and dropping the bomb I would not hesitate for a minute. But really this is digressing from what should be discussed in this topic.

Just to get off topic for a little bit here. While considering the casualties the other choice would bring the bomb seems like a reasonable alternative, but i wonder if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were really necessary targets. What im trying to say is, if your trying to demonstrate the power of a nuclear bomb you dont really have to level a couple of citys to do so. Sent the japs a message saying "If you want to see something cool take your binoculars and look out to sea at this time and place" then after your demonstration send another message saying "That was cool wasnt it. We have many more and next time we will aim for something more important than some sea water".
A simple threat of such a massive force unleashed on their land would surely convince japs to surrender, especialy if they thought that you could level their entire contry in one bombing run.

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r That argument certainly didn't stop the Germans from trying to carpet bomb the UK back to the Stone Age...

UK was certainly not that badly bombed, there's a reason why they won the air war. They'd be done already if they were that destroyed. In any way, the number of German civilians who were killed by Allied bombing is way more staggering! You remember what the Allies did to Dresden?


Oh, and it doesnt matter what the oppressive Jap leadership did in China, well it certianly matters, but in this case - it doesnt give any justificiation for USA to drop TWO, not ONE, nuclear weapons on innocent civilians. At least Japs military were criminals. Does USA have to go down to their standards too? I thought USA was much more civilized and had some political compromise skills that they bragged about. And all that went up in smoke of a mushroom cloud.

alright before this thread gets hi-jacked by the "Japs" let's consider Occrider's accurate description of "Total War" and what it meant to wage it in 1945.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo alright before this thread gets hi-jacked by the "Japs" let's consider Occrider's accurate description of "Total War" and what it meant to wage it in 1945.

Lets see it. I missed it.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium I bet if Soviets werent going to receive nuclear technology from communist spies in the Manhattan Project, the Americans would have dropped a nuke or two on Soviet Union and forced them to accept their terms too. Pretty reasonable conclusion from my part ...

Are you correct ? I always thought that Americans stole nuclear technology from Germans as well as Soviets did.

I cannot remember any rumors about the spies inside the Manhattan Project.

quote:

Originally posted by star-traveller Are you correct ? I always thought that Americans stole nuclear technology from Germans as well as Soviets did. I cannot remember any rumors about the spies inside the Manhattan Project.

Sigh ... here's a history lesson.

Manhattan project, which was top secret, involved the development of a nuclear weapon, and included several prominent scientists (whose names I forget), some of which were Germans, and one of them passed the secrets to the Soviets, mainly because he was horrified as to what the Americans did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and he wanted to create a deterrent force.

At the same time, starting in 1941, German scientists were also developing nuclear technology, but they ran out of time and the project was damaged by bombing raids. German scientists were geniuses. They had the fastest planes in the war (BY A MARGIN!), Messershmidts, the first missiles, V1 and V2 that gave British a lot of problems, the best tanks, best submarines, amongst other controversial weapons - in fact, most of technology developed by Russians and Americans after WW2 was based on the German blueprints - like new-and-improved aircraft, tanks, development of ballistic missiles, satellites, etc. - based on German blueprints. Nazi's military and technology machine was extremely fascinating and way superior .. I hate Nazis, but their military advancements impressed me. If they didnt attack Soviet Union and finished off the West first, today we'd be living in a Nazi society.

But thats a different topic. USA secretly smuggled Nazi scientists, some of whom could have been easily convicted of war crimes, in USA. And other things. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_paperclip

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium UK was certainly not that badly bombed, there's a reason why they won the air war. They'd be done already if they were that destroyed. In any way, the number of German civilians who were killed by Allied bombing is way more staggering! You remember what the Allies did to Dresden? Oh, and it doesnt matter what the oppressive Jap leadership did in China, well it certianly matters, but in this case - it doesnt give any justificiation for USA to drop TWO, not ONE, nuclear weapons on innocent civilians. At least Japs military were criminals. Does USA have to go down to their standards too? I thought USA was much more civilized and had some political compromise skills that they bragged about. And all that went up in smoke of a mushroom cloud.

Um.
Hello?
They were at WAR.
It's obvious you have no concept of what it takes to win one.
It's a no holds barred of one country against another AT ALL COSTS.
You want to minimize your own casualties while ending the war, FAST.
That's exactly WHY they did it.
Don't think for a second they that didn't think of the consequences of their actions.
Was it horrible? Yes.
Did it stop the war? Yes.
Was it worth it? Absolutely, and in the end, saved millions more lives than those two bombs ever took.

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r Um. Hello? They were at WAR. It's obvious you have no concept of what it takes to win one. It's a no holds barred of one country against another AT ALL COSTS. You want to minimize your own casualties while ending the war, FAST. That's exactly WHY they did it. Don't think for a second they that didn't think of the consequences of their actions. Was it horrible? Yes. Did it stop the war? Yes. Was it worth it? Absolutely, and in the end, saved millions more lives than those two bombs ever took.

I would still disagree.

Basically you said it was OK that USA lowered itself to the Japanese military criminals levels and used a terrible weapon without using the language of dimplomacy first. No excuse for dropping a nuclear weapon. And no excuse for Japanese war atrocities either.

In any case, even if Americans wanted an quicker end to the war - but I will never ever accept that it was the right decision to drop the second nuclear bomb, only days after the first one. American military instead of settling for peace decided to use this terrible weapon to force Japs to surrender.

Oh, and by the way, it was the Americans who armed the Japanese and with American weapons did the Japs commit all the crimes.

Just like the Americans sold military equipment to Nazis before they joined the war. Thats why they were reluctant to enter the war in first place.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium I would still disagree. Basically you said it was OK that USA lowered itself to the Japanese military criminals levels and used a terrible weapon without using the language of dimplomacy first. No excuse for dropping a nuclear weapon. And no excuse for Japanese war atrocities either. In any case, even if Americans wanted an quicker end to the war - but I will never ever accept that it was the right decision to drop the second nuclear bomb, only days after the first one. American military instead of settling for peace decided to use this terrible weapon to force Japs to surrender. Oh, and by the way, it was the Americans who armed the Japanese and with American weapons did the Japs commit all the crimes. Just like the Americans sold military equipment to Nazis before they joined the war. Thats why they were reluctant to enter the war in first place.

What diplomacy????
They were at WAR.
The Japanese were NEVER going to open up talks in any hint or suggestion of anything BUT victory, their honor-valued system would never allow for it.
Tell me, how does one negotiation with an ideology that won't accept surrender?
Were they supposed to have some sort of epiphany in the middle of it all and get together for tea?
I'd love to live in this post-fairy-tale land in which you live.

You don't have to like what the Allies (let's not single out the U.S. shall we? It was hardly just them involved in this) did but it was effect enough to save lives AND convince the Japanese that they indeed, had no choice.
Why did they do it twice? Because they HAD to.

Other than winning the war, the other great thing that came from it was the total global unwillingness to use such a horrible weapon again.
It was only ever legitimate because it was never used before and there was no opinion on something that never existed before.
You might question of course, well does that make it right?
At the time, yes.
It's easy to look back and suggest they should have never used it, however, taking into consideration the circumstances for what they were at the time, it cores out any argument you want to wrap around the use of the bombs.

Alright, I wont bother arguing ... but are you against the use of nuclear weapons then? Or do you think some countries might be entitled to use them when their own existence is threatened ...

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.