EPTNorth Korea Launched its rocket - Page 5
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
QuanticHawk
United States32159 Posts
| ||
|
liger13
United States1060 Posts
he was just tired of the lag on ICCUP... | ||
|
jello_biafra
United Kingdom6642 Posts
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7984635.stm It looks like KJI has just made things even worse for North Korea. | ||
|
HeavOnEarth
United States7087 Posts
On April 06 2009 01:02 Juglinjugglo wrote: damn it im due to go to the army this summer! im die!  | ||
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On April 06 2009 06:14 jello_biafra wrote: The UN security council is now having an emergency meeting to discuss this NK rocket launch. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7984635.stm It looks like KJI has just made things even worse for North Korea. Seriously, it's just a regional issue. If the Western nations would just butt out. Stupid arrogant politicians. You'd think that they'd have too much time on their hands - wait they do because the UN is such a stupid waste of money. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
TheFoReveRwaR
United States10657 Posts
On April 05 2009 15:29 Xeris wrote: everyone's going nuts! North Korea launched a rocket! OH NOESSSSSSSS!!! (http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/04/05/north.korea.rocket/index.html for details, I guess) Honestly, do people really think there is a missile attached to it and that North Korea is going to attack anybody? Maybe I'm just skeptical at this stage and I frankly don't think a major conflict will break out in the world for a long time, and if it does it will be initiated by a much larger power such as Russia, China, or the United States. Personally, I think they just want to get a satellite up in space, it's a pretty big thing for a country to have a space program and launch a satellite successfully, and fuck it why can't they? It was the same thing with Iran's satellite (launched about a month ago)... big fuss ultimately for nothing. Just because North Korea is run by a crazy fuck doesn't mean everything the country does is evil and maliciously planned. Let them have their rocket in space! That country isn't rich enough to have a maintained space program. Its definitely for military purposes. Hell even the space programs of russia and the usa during the cold war were just pc fronts for missle/rocket programs. They weren't only for that but it was a big part of the motivation behind it. | ||
|
TheFoReveRwaR
United States10657 Posts
On April 06 2009 06:34 TanGeng wrote: Seriously, it's just a regional issue. If the Western nations would just butt out. Stupid arrogant politicians. You'd think that they'd have too much time on their hands - wait they do because the UN is such a stupid waste of money. So stupid lol. Are you trolling? | ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On April 06 2009 06:41 Jibba wrote: Yeah, those damn Western nations like Japan, S. Korea and Singapore. Why don't they just stay in their own region??? I'm talking about the EU. US only has skins in the game because they have 40k soldiers still stationed in Korea. If it were up to the Japanese, Chinese, and South Korea, they could have solved the issue by now instead of dragging out so long because they can count on foisting the cost of resolution on the US - which by the way always seems to take half measures so the problem never seems to go away. The UN is a useless body. Name one part of their charter they've managed to achieve in recent decades. War and possible genocide in Sudan - nothing Food for Oil in Iraq - corruption War in Iraq - useless bystander Israel - Palestine - no end in sight Rwanda - not effective Anything else meaningful? In a way it's better though, because if the UN had real power, it'd turn out as disastrous as US's adventure Iraq or its own Food-for-oil program. Furthermore, it's not like the debate over any of these issues shed any real light or promoted any kind of real resolution. Instead, there are conflict of interests in the judges so the UN just becomes a mouthpiece for one of the biased parties. | ||
|
Xenixx
United States538 Posts
Ok, so for argument sake its a regional issue, NK doesn't listen to anyone in that region except for China--I guess??(is there someone else capable?). So the responsibility ultimately falls to China to stop them or enforce some type of measure or do anything(slap on the hands included) but China couldn't care less unless it affects them in some way and whats the only way it will effect China? ... ... ... ... ... ... Did you guess Western Influence/Support? Oh shit. You are just one hell of a de-centralization person... no UN. Blasphemer! UN is the embodiment of an idea that has been around for a very long time in Europe. Small nations banded together against larger nations. Nations are reluctant to carry out the organizations' will so you can imagine why the UN itself is not very 'meaningful' as you put it. Humans, as it were, seem to be incapable of seeing the future and past so you blame a good idea carried out poorly. Why don't you sign (enlist) yourself up and give them a hand? According to you they could sure use it. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
![[image loading]](http://www.mrjon.org/airsoft/FEB2009/10x10_JapanIA-Flag_V01.png) Have you ever heard of NEATO? North East Asian Treaty Organization. Probably not, because it was an abject failure. It was supposed to be a joint security force between the US, Japan, ROK and ROC (Taiwan.) It failed for a number of reasons, but one of the leading ones was that the US could not get the other three countries to cooperate together. Do you really think S. Koreans and Japanese will lock hands with N. Koreans on their own? Remember, N. Korea attacked first, against Mao's and Stalin's advice. The fact of the matter is that the S. Korean and Japanese governments want us there, and Japan is the country that petitioned for this emergency Security Council meeting - not the "West." They can live with the occasional strong arming and rape, as long as we're preventing invasion, which we have. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On April 06 2009 08:13 Xenixx wrote: Did you guess Western Influence/Support? Oh shit. You are just one hell of a de-centralization person... no UN. Blasphemer! UN is the embodiment of an idea that has been around for a very long time in Europe. Small nations banded together against larger nations. Nations are reluctant to carry out the organizations' will so you can imagine why the UN itself is not very 'meaningful' as you put it. Humans, as it were, seem to be incapable of seeing the future and past so you blame a good idea carried out poorly. Why don't you sign (enlist) yourself up and give them a hand? According to you they could sure use it. They could use it. The UN does a terrible job and squanders lots of money. Humans see the future and past, but there's still good reason not to trust eachother. A regional centralized body like the EU has enough difficulty with enforcement and reaching consensus, the UN does a much worse job and with less intelligent people. | ||
|
Bob123
Korea (North)259 Posts
The west, myself included, being a swede, are constantly spoon fed with the righteousness of the UN, yet it is only a relic of the cold war with no actual power over anything. None of the world powers (US, RUS, CHI, ...) would never give in to rulings by the UN even if the veto right was removed, they would simply leave in protest. Do you think the US would cancel its war on Iraq because of UN dislike? | ||
|
jello_biafra
United Kingdom6642 Posts
On April 06 2009 08:32 Bob123 wrote: It's more like the UN was formed with the intention to give the NATO (well, western) countries a way to mobilize world support against the soviet union. Look on who has veto right in the security council; USA, GBR, FRA, RUS (previous soviet of course) and CHI. China wasn't even allowed in initially because america did not accept the communist government, instead supporting the exile government on taiwan. So it was USA GBR FRA vs SOV. The soviet boycott (spelling?) due to this US + puppet dommination put the UN firmly in america's reins. The west, myself included, being a swede, are constantly spoon fed with the righteousness of the UN, yet it is only a relic of the cold war with no actual power over anything. None of the world powers (US, RUS, CHI, ...) would never give in to rulings by the UN even if the veto right was removed, they would simply leave in protest. Do you think the US would cancel its war on Iraq because of UN dislike? Those countries were chosen because they were the main victors of World War 2 and I think the UN's original purpose was probably mainly to try and bring these countries closer together. The UN was set up with good intentions of maintaining world peace and such but just never actually became what it was supposed to and now it's basically all talk no action. | ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On April 06 2009 08:13 Xenixx wrote: @TanGeng Ok, so for argument sake its a regional issue, NK doesn't listen to anyone in that region except for China--I guess??(is there someone else capable?). So the responsibility ultimately falls to China to stop them or enforce some type of measure or do anything(slap on the hands included) but China couldn't care less unless it affects them in some way and whats the only way it will effect China? ... ... ... Did you guess Western Influence/Support? Oh shit. You are just one hell of a de-centralization person... no UN. Blasphemer! UN is the embodiment of an idea that has been around for a very long time in Europe. Small nations banded together against larger nations. Nations are reluctant to carry out the organizations' will so you can imagine why the UN itself is not very 'meaningful' as you put it. Humans, as it were, seem to be incapable of seeing the future and past so you blame a good idea carried out poorly. Why don't you sign (enlist) yourself up and give them a hand? According to you they could sure use it. Ineffectiveness of UN aside. Beijing is now the problem and not Pyonggang? North Korea is a small country and usually suffers from famine (fault of its own leadership) so it'd be easy to pressure North Korea, but now you're saying that North Korea is doing this because Beijing told them to do it??? Evidence please. Besides the most effective way to pressure China is not through a body in which China holds veto rights. It's through trade, and Japan and Korea are in excellent position to do it. Japan is #3 in Chinese exports and China also trades extensively with South Korea. In fact, North Korea's disruption of trade with its military exercises will eventually force China's hand. That day will happen earlier if the US decides to back away from the negotiation table. (US is in no position to threaten China on trade, and EU is in a fairly poor position as well - both economies are too reliant on cheap imports.) I don't see good idea carried out poorly. I see an ill-conceived plan that reeks of imperial hubris that should not be carried out at all. UN is also an ill-conceived organization that shouldn't exist. Most UN resolutions are not even slaps on the wrist. "small nations band together against larger nations" - what?? Tell me why 5 large powerful nations have veto rights. I must have miss understood the UN charter. WTF! such nonsense. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
| ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On April 06 2009 08:21 Jibba wrote: The fact of the matter is that the S. Korean and Japanese governments want us there, and Japan is the country that petitioned for this emergency Security Council meeting - not the "West." They can live with the occasional strong arming and rape, as long as we're preventing invasion, which we have. I think it's another way of dragging US and EU into the North Korea problem when US and EU should be running away as fast as possible. US is still in Korea with its 40k troops in SK (dated 2007 - supposedly drawn down to 25k in 2009, but not sure) 50 years after the Korea armistice. US has 50k in Japan (data 2007- another draw down also requested) over 60 after the end of WWII. How ridiculous. Japan and South Korea need to work together and US coddling gets in the way of forcing them to resolve their infighting. Let me put it this way: Should US and EU bailout South Korea, China and Japan in its problems with North Korea? Japan certainly would love a bailout. Do you oblige? | ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Article 1 The Purposes of the United Nations are: 1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace; 2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace; 3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and 4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends. Article 2 The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles. 1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members. 2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter. 3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered. 4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. 5. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action. 6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security. 7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll. Article 1 sounds great, but the UN is just a soapbox (propaganda machine) for certain countries, and the one time it had profound effect, the US led coalition escalated the Korean War! North Korea started the war. Article 2 is just laughable. | ||
|
Pika Chu
Romania2510 Posts
But really, what do you think UN could do here? Afaik they already have a total trade embargo on them (which in my opinion is a very bad move). What do you want them to do? Attack north korea because they wanna have missiles? | ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On April 06 2009 09:17 Pika Chu wrote: I agree that UN is somehow useless as it is. It would need a big reform to make it useful. But really, what do you think UN could do here? Afaik they already have a total trade embargo on them (which in my opinion is a very bad move). What do you want them to do? Attack north korea because they wanna have missiles? UN: repeal its own charter + do nothing. I agree UN trade embargoes are counterproductive. Also pretty sure that UN does have trade sanctions on the DPRK. | ||
| ||
