EPTNorth Korea acting a fool(again). - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
KaasZerg
Netherlands927 Posts
| ||
|
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On October 07 2006 14:45 meRz wrote: Nuclear bombs will result in the destruction of earth. Why on fucking earth do they keep testing and, what would they need it for? USA would just bomb the shit out of anything that would try to launch a nuclear missile anywhere. Hmm, a lot of you don't know what's really going on. North Korea does not have intentions of bombing South Korea, that's ridiculous. The US has probably a thousand times more nuclear missiles than North Korea, yet nobody complains about that. Is it because people consider a democracy to be more "civil" and "socially responsible" than a "democracy?" That's preposterous! The reason why North Korea are seen as the "bad guys" and the US as the "good" is because the US is a world leader and powerful. Nobody would dare militarily mess with the United States at this stage in time. Instead of thinking clearly, most people decide to freak out and think of North Korean executives to be insane (which they probably are, I admit), but there should be some underlying reason to it. ( 1 ) North Korea knows that a power struggle would end up in a 100% victory to the United States, so that cannot be a goal for their nuclear missile program. ( 2 ) North Korea without it's nuclear/missile program would be defenseless to foreign policy and with their weak economic system, would have no way of standing up to other nations once it's nuclear program (it's last hope for clinging onto the shred of international voice it has) is stripped. ________________ Reasons for having a nuclear program: Reason 1: There is a considerable threat from the United States following the Korean War. Approximately 30,000 US troops have been stationed in South Korea since then... a presence that both North AND South Koreans feel threatened by. Reason 2: Without nuclear weapons, the North Korean government would be dismissed in international affairs. Any statement made by the DPRK government would carry no political weight whatsoever, since the DPRK does not contribute significantly in any economic, militaristic, or territorial way. On October 07 2006 16:19 Pika Chu wrote: cut the crap.. only political games no one will start a nuclear war (at least not in the next decades) Exactly, they aren't prepared for a nuclear war, nor do they have any real intention for starting one with the US. ________________ Anyways, I'm just playing devil's advocate since everyone here seems to be "pro-US" and spew their ignorant shit like: "Fuck, why is North Korea so crazy? Why the FUCK would they do that? The US will just bomb the shit out of them." Wow, and listen to what the FUCK people like this are saying. They disapprove of the North Koreans testing bombs, yet want the US to "bomb the shit" out of the North Koreans. Like this kid: On October 07 2006 14:45 meRz wrote: Nuclear bombs will result in the destruction of earth. Why on fucking earth do they keep testing and, what would they need it for? USA would just bomb the shit out of anything that would try to launch a nuclear missile anywhere. # 1 No SHIT nukes will result in the destruction of earth. Did you do scientific research to come up with that?? # 2 The USA bombing the shit out of everything will result in the destruction of earth too, you know?  On October 07 2006 14:48 JudgeMathis wrote: Cus N Korea wants to fire shit at people. Why doesn't somebody who's less biased make a post regarding this matter? Haduken is right, all they have to bargain with is force. At least there are some level-headed thinkers in here, like Haduken and a-game. On October 07 2006 15:16 a-game wrote: it's kind of understandable why a nation like N Korea is doing this. do you think the US of A, or any nation for that matter, would of touched Iraq if it had nukes? women get raped because they can't defend themselves, but if women carried bazookas around they wouldn't get raped. But of course, TL.net-ers cannot solve world problems. We can just sit here and read what politically-clueless highschoolers have to say. Oh well, it's still fun.  [Not that it matters, but I believe that a unification of the Koreas would result in a better bargain. North Korea would have no need for a nuclear program to get more economically-strong nations to help their poor system and would have South Korea to do that for them. NK's military + SK's economy and technology = Better Korea. But there are too many problems with unification for now, because South Korea's economy isn't strong enough to bolster NK's weak economy. And the divide in leadership and political views is a huge hurdle as well. Whatever, Unification will happen eventually, since it's what both Koreas want.] | ||
KwarK
United States44448 Posts
On October 07 2006 16:44 WhatisProtoss wrote: Hmm, a lot of you don't know what's really going on. North Korea does not have intentions of bombing South Korea, that's ridiculous. The US has probably a thousand times more nuclear missiles than North Korea, yet nobody complains about that. Is it because people consider a democracy to be more "civil" and "socially responsible" than a "democracy?" That's preposterous! The reason why North Korea are seen as the "bad guys" and the US as the "good" is because the US is a world leader and powerful. Nobody would dare militarily mess with the United States at this stage in time. Strange. I thought comparitive morality was rated by actions and ideals, not quantity of armaments possessed. But hey, I could be wrong there. So the US is in the wrong because as a bigger richer nation they possess more missiles. And the fact that N Korea is an authoritarian dictatorship which creates unimaginable misery to it's people, launched an unprovoked landgrab war against the democratic South Korea, abdicates it's responsibility to the international community by refusing to take a mature diplomatic stance, poses an ongoing threat to regional stability, has absolutely no human rights or freedoms and has enslaved the hearts, minds and bodies of a generation doesn't matter in this debate. Because the US has a LOT more missiles. Or have I over parodied your stance? I'm glad you feel able to speak for N Korea's foreign policy intentions. It's good that someone is doing it since they haven't, not even formalising the temporary armistice thats lasted the past 50 years. Given the total silence of N Korean officials on their ambitions in the region I'm glad that you, as a representive of them, have come forth and told us they will not bomb South Korea. A country they are still at war with. Good that we got that settled. You were indeed right to tell us that we don't know what's going on when compared to your incredible inside knowledge of the Korean government, we indeed don't. Go tell CNN. I'm not sure where you were going with the democracy thing. I consider a democracy to be roughly equal to a "democracy", whatever that means. And I consider a democracy, such as the USA, to be morally superior to an authoritarian dictatorship such as N Korea. But this may be beside the point. You are absolutely right, it would be preposterous to suggest any difference between a democracy and a democracy. Truly a poignant point. Personally I see North Korea as the bad guys because they are hostile to the world, ruled as a dictatorship which enslaves it's people and a threat to global misery. It causes huge suffering to it's own people for weak ideological reasons that were dropped long ago by it's oligarchy of rulers. But hey, your point was valid too. | ||
|
KwarK
United States44448 Posts
So, while you defend the nuclear weapon plan, perhaps you could also lend your weight to the economic and political reform plan as a way forward. Both would get the US of their backs, though one would make them a firm ally of the US. And one of them would be very good for the people of N Korea. Of course, the idea of reform is ridiculous given the authoritarian dictatorship which is perfectly happy letting it's people be miserable but would never loosen a string on power. But instead of defending the right to have nuclear weapons to get the US of their back, which I agree would work, you could accept there are other ways which are better and are not taken because N Korean leaders are shits. | ||
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
as Whatisprotoss has said, they're clinging to nuclear threats b/c they are insignificant in terms of economic and territorial power. Any intro econ class teaches you that the largest contributor to economic power for an entity isnt population, capital, or land. It's the technology level. N.Korea's small territorial space wouldnt prevent it from gaining a strong economy if they would actually invest a large percentage of their GDP back into its economy, rather than put it into military spending... -___-. In the long term that should enable N.korea to become stronger on the international stage. The two major rising coutries right now are India and China. While they have vast land and a large population, they also have a skyrocketing technology level that is propelling themselves upwards. Then again I'm not sure I'd actually want to see an economic powerhouse version of N.Korea so -___- | ||
|
DTDominion
United States2148 Posts
| ||
|
Night[Mare
Mexico4793 Posts
| ||
|
DTDominion
United States2148 Posts
On October 07 2006 17:29 Night[Mare] wrote: If they want to bring good things to their country, i believe NK is doing wrong spending in military research. They'd rather be more successfull by spending in ways of blostering its economy and making it a better place to live, rather than things to kill people North Korean leadership only cares about their own power. The reforms you've suggested would weaken their standing, not help it. | ||
|
a-game
Canada5214 Posts
again, economy is nice and all, but unless you have a bazooka there will be an angry black man out there somewhere who wants to rape you  that's not to say i support weapons, but so long as one guy has them then your only real assurance of safety is to get deterrence factors. until everyone in teh world gives up weapons then we can't blame nations for looking at lebanon, iraq and saying holy fuck i dont wanna get anally violated like that. | ||
|
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On October 07 2006 17:05 Kwark wrote: Personally I see North Korea as the bad guys because they are hostile to the world, ruled as a dictatorship which enslaves it's people and a threat to global misery. It causes huge suffering to it's own people for weak ideological reasons that were dropped long ago by it's oligarchy of rulers. But hey, your point was valid too. Oh WOW! Mister hotshot talking in big terms here!!!! What, did I offend you by grouping you together with the rest of TL.net's high-schoolers??! You see North Korea as the "bad guys" because they're hostile to the world?? You need to see this from ALL points of view. The North Koreans have not invaded a country. They have not committed mass homicide. However, on the other hand... the United States have invaded countries and established their political propaganda forcefully on other nations. The United States has committed mass crimes in murder with the mere invasion of Iraq for non-existant nuclear weapons. And once nukes were NOT found, they switched over to saying that Iraq NEEDED to be freed from Sadaam because he was too dangerous in power. The US went in there to get rid of NUKES! Not take Sadaam out of power. NOT to establish democracy. The US has been around for only a little over 200 years. What makes them so right? The Middle East have been a tribal system for several THOUSAND years. Yet, the young US comes in and decides to say: "We know that you've been around for at least 10 times the period of time we've been around.... but just because we're stronger, we've decided that you're wrong and we're right. Listen to our point of view unless you want to die." Wow, I don't know how NK topic got to be mashed together with Iraq... It's just because Bush is so fucking irrational. Both Bush and Kim Jong ill are idiots... but the only difference is: 1) Bush is an idiot. He commands more power. Thus, he is more dangerous 2) Kim Jong ill is an idiot. He commands almost nothing except for empty threats. Thus, he is much less dangerous to the world than President Bush. By the way, I'm just giving a point of view for the North Koreans, since nobody here seems to be able to do that and only mindlessly bash them. Be more openminded. The difference between the Bush administration and the Clinton administration is the way they handled things. Bush was quick to jump and label the NKoreans as "Axis of Evil." Not a very good way to conduct international matters. However, things under Clinton were much calmer since Clinton diplomatically adhered to the North Korean needs and sent them aid. Once Bush is out of office, things will get better. | ||
|
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On October 07 2006 17:37 a-game wrote: another good example is lebanon. they focused on economy and the long-term stuff, but none of that shit helped them one bit once a country that had weapons decided it was game-on. again, economy is nice and all, but unless you have a bazooka there will be an angry black man out there somewhere who wants to rape you that's not to say i support weapons, but so long as one guy has them then your only real assurance of safety is to get deterrence factors. until everyone in teh world gives up weapons then we can't blame nations for looking at lebanon, iraq and saying holy fuck i dont wanna get anally violated like that. Haha, good thoughts, no matter how crudely you put them.  PI'm sure North Korea doesn't want to get raped like Lebanon did. It's like this: Situation: Asking somebody for food. #1: You show yourself to be a nice person: clean, polite. You politely ask for a sandwich from a tough football player. #2: You bring a shotgun, point it at the tough football player with the sandwich, and demand: "Give me the fucking sandwich!" #2 has a higher probability of succeeding, no matter how stupid and reckless it may seem. You have no real INTENTION of shooting the guy, just want to scare the shit out of him so you get the food. | ||
|
Hippopotamus
1914 Posts
| ||
|
DaN[SES]
United States167 Posts
On October 07 2006 17:50 WhatisProtoss wrote: [removed quote within quote] Oh WOW! Mister hotshot talking in big terms here!!!! What, did I offend you by grouping you together with the rest of TL.net's high-schoolers??! You see North Korea as the "bad guys" because they're hostile to the world?? You need to see this from ALL points of view. The North Koreans have not invaded a country. They have not committed mass homicide. However, on the other hand... the United States have invaded countries and established their political propaganda forcefully on other nations. The United States has committed mass crimes in murder with the mere invasion of Iraq for non-existant nuclear weapons. And once nukes were NOT found, they switched over to saying that Iraq NEEDED to be freed from Sadaam because he was too dangerous in power. The US went in there to get rid of NUKES! Not take Sadaam out of power. NOT to establish democracy. The US has been around for only a little over 200 years. What makes them so right? The Middle East have been a tribal system for several THOUSAND years. Yet, the young US comes in and decides to say: "We know that you've been around for at least 10 times the period of time we've been around.... but just because we're stronger, we've decided that you're wrong and we're right. Listen to our point of view unless you want to die." Wow, I don't know how NK topic got to be mashed together with Iraq... It's just because Bush is so fucking irrational. Both Bush and Kim Jong ill are idiots... but the only difference is: 1) Bush is an idiot. He commands more power. Thus, he is more dangerous 2) Kim Jong ill is an idiot. He commands almost nothing except for empty threats. Thus, he is much less dangerous to the world than President Bush. By the way, I'm just giving a point of view for the North Koreans, since nobody here seems to be able to do that and only mindlessly bash them. Be more openminded. The difference between the Bush administration and the Clinton administration is the way they handled things. Bush was quick to jump and label the NKoreans as "Axis of Evil." Not a very good way to conduct international matters. However, things under Clinton were much calmer since Clinton diplomatically adhered to the North Korean needs and sent them aid. Once Bush is out of office, things will get better. I hope you live in Seoul. | ||
|
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On October 07 2006 17:55 Hippopotamus wrote: What North Korea is doing/did actually works to an extent. Right now it's not working because the President of the U.S. is an asshole. Earlier on, there was a deal between U.S. and North Korea that U.S. would build safe nuclear reactors to provide them power and North Korea would would give up its nuclear program. With Bush it just fell through and they went back to their business. Is that good? In some ways, yes. North Korea is a totalitarian regime, not even a devil's advocate could deny that. They are also exceedingly secretive, and most evidence suggests that North Korea is a big shithole. A regime like this deserves condemnation, in fact it more so than Iraq deserves reform. But from a different point of view, there is also the fact that the way North Korea is being treated by the international community right now is just benefitting Kim Jong Il. Adding North Korea to the axis of evil and then only cutting off aid and imposing sanctions is just... retarded. Separating North Korea just makes secrecy easier, moreover, it delays the inevitable resolution of the situation. The longer Korea is insulated from the rest of the world, the longer its people will be ignorant of their situation. Haha, nicely put. I admitted that North Korea had bad leadership. But Bush is totally taking things the wrong way. The US needs a new president to smooth things over and coax the North Koreans out of their hole and make them give up their nuclear program. On October 07 2006 17:56 DaN[SES] wrote: [removed quote within quote] I hope you live in Seoul. Yes, I'm from Seoul. Why, you think they're gonna blow us up? Don't even try to make a retarded half-assed comment like that. | ||
|
haduken
Australia8267 Posts
Believe it or not. N.K's bid to develope its own nuclear program may pissed off the rest of the world and maybe maybe free itself from China's iron grip. I still think N.K is walking on a thin line here but it does look like everything they do is a matter of gamble because they don't have any chips to bargain. If USA goes to war, then it will create a dilema for Chinese leadership. China is not prepared for war, do they cut their losses? i believe they must. As can be seen by the recent tone of Chinese diplomacy. so the situation is, two gangs, one member of the gang went wild and try to start some shits. the other gang went and ask the leader of the gang what hes going to do? the leader basically says: do watever you want, cuz that kid is whack. | ||
|
lugggy
450 Posts
We have never used our National Guard like this, or forced soldiers/tricked soldiers into serving long past they thought they could even be asked to, and this is just for Iraq, which we thought would be simple. We never have thought such things about NK, but instead, we apparently keep 30,000 troops there for decades but don't dare do anything. NK cannot be the pussies you are making them out to be unless something I said above is wrong. In fact, if everything above is correct, I think we would be in serious shit if NK decided to do anything stupid, if it weren't for the threat of China. I think NK knows that if they try anything too stupid, there is China to kick their ass, in this day and age. But if NK somehow works out a conspiracy with China, or just flat out nukes china while ground-invading the U.S., I think the world is gonna end, fellas. | ||
Klogon
MURICA15980 Posts
Anyway, I guess looking back at my post, I gave off the impression that I was confident that North Korea actually had a war plan to attack because I was just replying to the MAD post, for whatever reason. I firmly believe, as WhatofProtoss is saying, that the North Koreans aren't doing it to attack. It does not make any sense what so ever when you keep in mind their own ambitions and their own self interests. Kwark, that much should be obvious, no? Sure, we cannot know exactly what the hell they are thinking (as you poke fun of WhatofProtoss for claiming to know) but we can make our best guesses, and what WhatofProtoss was saying is, in my opinion, a pretty fair assement given the circumstances and information. But knowing why the North Koreans are doing this isn't the problem. The problem lies in stopping them before they decide to pull a stunt that is irreversable. And, as Kwark mentioned, you would think the most logical step for North Korea would be to change its policy altogether and get in line with the rest of the world instead of living in their own delusional world, but that seems like a pipe dream. I hope I'm wrong, but the Kim regime will not budge in those aspects you mentioned, even if it is THE BEST move for their country. I'm curious how this situation will play out, but also a bit worried to be honest. Worried about the worst, even though my logic tells me the North won't do anything absolutely retarted, because with Mr Kim Jong Il, you never know. | ||
|
lugggy
450 Posts
On October 07 2006 16:24 rhcp12312 wrote: I see why they would want nukes. Its pretty obvious. The reason they shouldn't is because the entire world is telling them not to. And ignoring the rest of the world is a very arrogant thing to do. That's why NK is going to stay a little bitch country, their leaders are dedicated toward superficial ideas instead of bettering their country. Kim isn't the only one I worry about. Anyone else think the above could also apply to Mr. Bush? I can see why they would want to invade Iraq. Its pretty obvious. The reason they shouldn't is because the entire world is telling them not to. And ignoring the rest of the world is a very arrogant thing to do. That's why The United States is going to stay a little bitch country, their leaders are dedicated toward superficial ideas instead of bettering their country. No? No? | ||
|
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On October 07 2006 18:00 haduken wrote: long term for N.K? what long term? a reunionfication is not going to happen in any short period. South Koreans wouldn't want it. Investing capitol back into economy would what? pay off? lets disregard US sanctions for a moment. Do not forget the other big guy. China. Alot of you believe that N.K's existence is because their rulers want to remain in power. The fact is: N.K's existence depends on China's ambition of having a buffer state between its northern mineral rich provinces and the two other great powers of asia (both are under USA influence and control). China wouldn't want a liberlised N.K because it is against its interest. So in reality. China sustains N.K while at the same time keep a fool on N.K's leadership to control it. Believe it or not. N.K's bid to develope its own nuclear program may pissed off the rest of the world and maybe maybe free itself from China's iron grip. I still think N.K is walking on a thin line here but it does look like everything they do is a matter of gamble because they don't have any chips to bargain. If USA goes to war, then it will create a dilema for Chinese leadership. China is not prepared for war, do they cut their losses? i believe they must. As can be seen by the recent tone of Chinese diplomacy. so the situation is, two gangs, one member of the gang went wild and try to start some shits. the other gang went and ask the leader of the gang what hes going to do? the leader basically says: do watever you want, cuz that kid is whack. Actually, MANY MANY South Koreans want unification. | ||
|
Klogon
MURICA15980 Posts
On October 07 2006 18:07 lugggy wrote: If NK was as weak as you are all making them out to be, they would be bombed constantly by the U.S. long before now, and the U.S. would not have 30,000 trops constantly stationed in SK. Therefore, I think we could not fight a ground war against NK any more than we did in the '50's, since we are already exhausting our resources trying to turn Iraq into a Mexico-like state (maybe someday, *crosses fingers*, Spring Break 2050 baby!). We have never used our National Guard like this, or forced soldiers/tricked soldiers into serving long past they thought they could even be asked to, and this is just for Iraq, which we thought would be simple. We never have thought such things about NK, but instead, we apparently keep 30,000 troops there for decades but don't dare do anything. NK cannot be the pussies you are making them out to be unless something I said above is wrong. In fact, if everything above is correct, I think we would be in serious shit if NK decided to do anything stupid, if it weren't for the threat of China. I think NK knows that if they try anything too stupid, there is China to kick their ass, in this day and age. But if NK somehow works out a conspiracy with China, or just flat out nukes china while ground-invading the U.S., I think the world is gonna end, fellas. Uhhh we don't want to get in a land war with North Korea because they have 11,000 artillery cannons pointed at one of the most densely populated cities in the world, not to mention the capital of South Korea - Seoul. That in itself makes any land fight unappealing... as for the North's point of view: a war = 100% loss. So one side doesn't want millions of casualties, and the other side doesn't want to lose what little power it does. So they stay in their status quos... that's why we haven't taken them out. That, and China has been their sugar daddy for the past 50 years. And what haduken said about the buffer state is legit. So China has a stake in their existance too. | ||
| ||
