What the F#ck is N. Korea Doing? - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- What the F#ck is N. Korea Doing?
Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]

Posted by FuzzyGreen on Jan-23-2003 21:16:

N. Korean knows that they don't stand a chance against the US. They are just trying to get the US to give them more economic aid and the best way they think that they can do that is to threaten us with Nukes. Yes, this is an issue, but Saddam and muslim extremist terrorists are a more immediate threat.

Posted by Yoepus on Jan-23-2003 23:02:

quote:
Originally posted by FuzzyGreen
N. Korean knows that they don't stand a chance against the US. They are just trying to get the US to give them more economic aid and the best way they think that they can do that is to threaten us with Nukes. Yes, this is an issue, but Saddam and muslim extremist terrorists are a more immediate threat.

Lets assume you are right. Then do you believe the US should give NK more economic aid just because they are threatening them nukes?

What kind of precedent do you think this would set?

Posted by FuzzyGreen on Jan-23-2003 23:41:

quote:
Originally posted by Yoepus
Lets assume you are right. Then do you believe the US should give NK more economic aid just because they are threatening them nukes?

What kind of precedent do you think this would set?

Hell NO we should not give them economic aid. I'm just trying to answer the original question as to why NKorea is doing this crap. I think we should attack NKorea as soon as we are done with Iraq/terrorists.

Posted by KoreanDJ on Jan-24-2003 20:34:

I am North Korean, and I am a communist! YOU FOOLS!

Stevek

(*wink wink*)

Posted by mndeg on Jan-31-2003 23:30:

Posted by DJ_Skaya on Feb-03-2003 04:50:

Why does everyone seem to want war? Do they think somehow the US economy will improve after war? I'm sorry to burst you're bubble, but this isn't the great depression, and starting a war will just put us further into the whole, not to mention needlessly kill lots of people.

Posted by DJ_Skaya on Feb-03-2003 04:53:

quote:
Originally posted by FuzzyGreen
Yes, this is an issue, but Saddam and muslim extremist terrorists are a more immediate threat.

We're in most respects the most powerful country in the world. Technically, we're an immediate threat to everyone. Are they starting war on us?

I think you've listened to Bush too much, because obviously you consider Muslims and Iraqi's and Terrorists to be the same thing

Posted by Arbiter on Feb-03-2003 05:55:

quote:
Originally posted by DJ_Skaya
Why does everyone seem to want war? Do they think somehow the US economy will improve after war? I'm sorry to burst you're bubble, but this isn't the great depression, and starting a war will just put us further into the whole, not to mention needlessly kill lots of people.

I want war so that every child born in Iraq will have the opportunity to grow up in a country where they are granted basic human rights, where they won't be killed for voicing their opinions, and where they'll have an opportunity to prosper economically and intellectually. Why does everyone seem to oppose giving them that opportunity?

Posted by Johan (DJ Irish) on Feb-03-2003 07:57:

quote:
Originally posted by Arbiter
I want war so that every child born in Iraq will have the opportunity to grow up in a country where they are granted basic human rights, where they won't be killed for voicing their opinions, and where they'll have an opportunity to prosper economically and intellectually. Why does everyone seem to oppose giving them that opportunity?

Why stop with Iraq though? Saudi Arabia has the same problems why not start a war there? I get the impression that you consider the U.S. (with it's current foreign policies) as a white knight riding around the world rescuing people from evil. How come the U.S. seem to ignore, and sometimes even support, regimes that in no way are any better than Saddam Hussein's?

Posted by Arbiter on Feb-03-2003 09:14:

quote:
Originally posted by Dj_Irish
Why stop with Iraq though? Saudi Arabia has the same problems why not start a war there? I get the impression that you consider the U.S. (with it's current foreign policies) as a white knight riding around the world rescuing people from evil. How come the U.S. seem to ignore, and sometimes even support, regimes that in no way are any better than Saddam Hussein's?

Gotta start somewhere. I don't think Iraq's the best choice, but it's better than doing nothing. I'd like to see the U.S. riding around the world rescuing people from evil. But what I'd really like to see is other countries doing it too, instead of just sitting on their hands acting like its not their problem that people are suffering.

Posted by Johan (DJ Irish) on Feb-03-2003 10:22:

quote:
Originally posted by Arbiter
Gotta start somewhere. I don't think Iraq's the best choice, but it's better than doing nothing. I'd like to see the U.S. riding around the world rescuing people from evil. But what I'd really like to see is other countries doing it too, instead of just sitting on their hands acting like its not their problem that people are suffering.

Well, unfortunatly I don't think there is one country on this planet that has "improving the state of the world" very high up on their agenda. It's all about self interests and it's nothing new about that. However, it doesn't mean every country is sticking their head in the sand and twiddle their thumbs at the same time. There are more ways in trying to make a change than starting war. There's no fool proof way of course but war always causes immens suffering among the people that the war is trying to "help". And democracy and freedom doensn't happen of it's self after the opressor has been removed. Simply put, there are no short term way of "liberating" a country. Monetary aid, education and rebuilding infrastructures, hospitals, schools etc, monitoring elections all have to be included. People who have never experienced democracy won't pick it up first time trying.

What I'm trying to say here is that from what I know of the U.S. plans regarding the war in Iraq there hasn't been much thoughts about what the hell to do afterwards that would actually benefit the people in the ways needed. After getting their family killed by bombs the affected people will probably only regard the U.S. as the biggest terrorist state of them all and not really accept a leadership in bed with the U.S. government. Plus will the U.S. actually stay long enough to really rebuild the country? If not, this will not help the war against terrorism a single bit.

Posted by Arbiter on Feb-03-2003 15:16:

quote:
Originally posted by Dj_Irish
Well, unfortunatly I don't think there is one country on this planet that has "improving the state of the world" very high up on their agenda. It's all about self interests and it's nothing new about that. However, it doesn't mean every country is sticking their head in the sand and twiddle their thumbs at the same time. There are more ways in trying to make a change than starting war. There's no fool proof way of course but war always causes immens suffering among the people that the war is trying to "help". And democracy and freedom doensn't happen of it's self after the opressor has been removed. Simply put, there are no short term way of "liberating" a country. Monetary aid, education and rebuilding infrastructures, hospitals, schools etc, monitoring elections all have to be included. People who have never experienced democracy won't pick it up first time trying.

What I'm trying to say here is that from what I know of the U.S. plans regarding the war in Iraq there hasn't been much thoughts about what the hell to do afterwards that would actually benefit the people in the ways needed. After getting their family killed by bombs the affected people will probably only regard the U.S. as the biggest terrorist state of them all and not really accept a leadership in bed with the U.S. government. Plus will the U.S. actually stay long enough to really rebuild the country? If not, this will not help the war against terrorism a single bit.

Oh, I agree completely. My support for the war is conditional upon our willingness to spend the time and money afterwards to actually ensure stability in Iraq and to rebuild infrastructure that would be destroyed by a war. I have some doubts about the U.S. government's willingness to do this, but you can't really justify anything under the assumption you're just going to screw it up later.

Posted by intrinsic on Feb-04-2003 14:20:

Posted by vmc on Feb-04-2003 16:44:

quote:
Originally posted by FuzzyGreen
Hell NO we should not give them economic aid. I'm just trying to answer the original question as to why NKorea is doing this crap. I think we should attack NKorea as soon as we are done with Iraq/terrorists.

WTF is going on with you people?

Who gave you rights to tell others what to do and attack who you want? What do you want to do, invade the whole world? Attack anyone who think the other way then you? Bomb every country whose government you don't like? Too bad there's no sort of power such ass USSR in the past that could make you stop threating of attack every country that doesn't do as your interest is.

Osama was a prick for 2 reasons:
1) he killed thousands of innocent people
2) he gave Americans excuse for later military agressions against 'countries that support terrorism', which they rapidly turned into 'countries that don't support American interests'

Do you think you have ruled the world or something? Mind your own business!

Posted by stringfelowhawk on Feb-05-2003 19:56:

Some facts for you all...

North Korea has an army of 1.4 million. Of that, 70% of them are within 24 hours of the DMZ. Also, they have one of the largest field artillery units in the world that is capable of obliterating Seoul withing 24 hours.

This is compared to the 'nuclear tripwire' of 37,000 troops the US has stationed there. Our troops are only a deterant of an attack because we reserve the right to use nukes if NK would come down there. Exactly the same situation we had with the Russians as occrider mentioned before, conventional forces are completely worthless in this sense. What we are saying is basically go ahead and attack South Korea and we'll turn your country into a glow in the dark parking lot.

Posted by FuzzyGreen on Feb-05-2003 23:38:

quote:
Originally posted by DJ_Skaya
We're in most respects the most powerful country in the world. Technically, we're an immediate threat to everyone. Are they starting war on us?

Yes, we are a threat to everyone since we can easily wipe any country off the face of the planet within one day. But we don't and have no intentions or history of doing so. Iraq has proven that they have intentions to do so many times.

quote:

I think you've listened to Bush too much, because obviously you consider Muslims and Iraqi's and Terrorists to be the same thing

Did I say "Muslims"? No I didn't, I said "Muslim extremists". This is VERY different.

Posted by FuzzyGreen on Feb-05-2003 23:53:

quote:
Originally posted by vmc
Who gave you rights to tell others what to do and attack who you want? What do you want to do, invade the whole world? Attack anyone who think the other way then you? Bomb every country whose government you don't like?

Nope, Actually I would rather not have to deal with any other countries problems at all. I don't want the US to go to war with anyone, but I also am tired of living in fear of a terrorist attack or an Iraqi attack (of any sort). If we have to destroy Iraq in order to prevent future problems, then go for it. If people here in the US had attitudes like yours in WW2 you would be under Nazi rule right now.

Posted by Verona^My on Feb-06-2003 09:27:

quote:
Originally posted by Arbiter
I want war so that every child born in Iraq will have the opportunity to grow up in a country where they are granted basic human rights, where they won't be killed for voicing their opinions, and where they'll have an opportunity to prosper economically and intellectually. Why does everyone seem to oppose giving them that opportunity?

And the #1 person on our list to replace Saddam is the general who gased the Kurds in the 80's. I hardly think this is an improvement for Iraq.

The USA's goal is clear, to establish feudal dominion over foreign powers, vassal states, etc.

Posted by stringfelowhawk on Feb-06-2003 12:47:

quote:
Originally posted by Verona^My

The USA's goal is clear, to establish feudal dominion over foreign powers, vassal states, etc.

ya, that's clearly in our best interest

Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]