North Korea 'fires more missiles'

reply to post by Adrifter


I think this regime is desperate. Kim Il-sung has died. His son is dying. The economy is in an awful state. How strong is their grip on their people ? How strong is the interior resistance to the dictatorship ? It is very difficult to apprehend the exact situation, NK has few contacts with the outside, it is a vast jail for north koreans.
I feel very concerned because it is the only regime on earth i think can go insanely berserk if pushed too far, if they feel like they are losing their power on the country. This is a possibility from my point of view.

We have to realise that we cannot do much about NK. It is China business now. We can't do anything apart from pressuring. We must face it. It is not the fifties anymore. No intervention is possible without China's acceptance.
I stated in another thread, I think, that NK as a rogue state is vital to the USA anyways so it is a complicated game. But of course, we can't sit and watch them sharing dangerous technology.

Originally posted by truttseeker
Yes, the US was the only country to use a nuclear warhead in the time of war. HOWEVER, we were also the ones who realized it was bad and helped make sure it never happened again. The US is WAY more responsible in terms of leadership than the North Koreans. Thats like saying, well since that normal guy over there can have a gun, why cant the gangster in LA have a gun, they all have equal rights. Also the US hasn't built or tested any new nuclear weapons lately. In fact the responsible nations that have nuclear weapons have all lessened the numbers in their stockpiles.

exactly my point - NK is run by a volatile dictator and their army and cannot be trusted with nukes either for use or for sale.

I don't think they'd sell them, or use them really. I think they'll threaten but they wont use them. They'll level Seoul with artillery, but if they detonate a nuke, its bad juju for everyone.

Everyone was allowed guns in the playground, except for NicK because he was different.

NicK thought this was unfair because he could not defend himself against the others, and one day decided to bring a gun to the playground anyway. Upon showing his prized possesion, the others started screaming "THAT IS AGAINST THE LAW". But NicK said: "You only made that law AFTER you had YOUR guns". "No matter", screamed the others, "you must drop your gun NOW".

NicK calmly looked at the drawn guns which were pointed at him, firmly placed his gun inside his pocket, turned around and left the playground, never to return.

[edit on 26-5-2009 by Truth4hire]

Originally posted by oaf21
Why doesn't the UN condemn the US and Isreal for having nukes? Oh... right... I forgot... they're all hypocrites!

Man, I'm tired of all this crap... seriously! Wake up! You want these guys to disarm, well 'eff'-ing lead by example and disarm yourselves first! If not, well shut the 'eff' up and let everyone else do EXACTLY what you're doing.

The US is the ONLY country to have EVER fired a nuclear/atomic warhead in a wartime scenario on another nation... so for me, it's impossible to take them seriously when they demand another nation to disarm.

Who made you so righteous?

(sorry, I had no intention on insulting anyone... just those who are 'running the show'... I deeply respect all who have their eyes open to this hypocrisy)

Disarming the US is not a good idea especially since we live in Canada. The US is the only reason we have not lost land and oil sands to the Russians, if you think I am wrong do a little research and you'll see the Russians are already on our doorstep in the North. That notwithstanding Non-Proliferation meant that the countries with Nukes would no longer continue to manufacture them, sell them etc.. The choice to disarm is a choice not mandatory. Let's get Russia or France to get rid of their nukes first and see if they agree?

Only thing is nobody on the playground was shooting their guns, or buying more ammunition, in fact they were working to reduce the number of bullets, but NicK wasn't getting his way so he made sure his gun worked to make sure the others would listen to him....

Originally posted by truttseeker
I don't think they'd sell them, or use them really. I think they'll threaten but they wont use them. They'll level Seoul with artillery, but if they detonate a nuke, its bad juju for everyone.

I would argue that selling any weapons is all they got so yeah they'll sell to anyone I am sure of it. I would not judge KJI to light as he is very
unpredictable and IMHO he wants a good brawl before he passes.

Originally posted by Truth4hire
Everyone was allowed guns in the playground, except for NicK because he was different.

NicK thought this was unfair because he could not defend himself against the others, and one day decided to bring a gun to the playground anyway. Upon showing his prized possesion, the others started screaming "THAT IS AGAINST THE LAW". But NicK said: "You only made that law AFTER you had YOUR guns". "No matter", screamed the others, "you must drop your gun NOW".

NicK calmly looked at the drawn guns which were pointed at him, firmly placed his gun inside his pocket, turned around, and left the playground, never to return.

[edit on 26-5-2009 by Truth4hire]

Nick also had a psychological disorder and had a violent track record

aka NK are run by a volatile dictatorship and are a military state, they have a track record proving them not trust worthy such as the kidnapping of Japanese people in the 70's, shooting a passenger plane full of SK's out of the Sky and bombing South Koreans in Burma.

As trivial as it sounds this may be Kim's way of going out with a bang, he is in command of the 4th largest army in the world and is under pressure from all 4 corners of the world. Maybe before he finally goes he wants to demonstrate the force of his army with an invasion of SK or some sort of conflict.

Obviously you could say well what is the point, NK would be decimated by retaliation by US etc. But you have to remember this is the same guy who leaves his population to starve to death, what are civilian casualties to him? especially to a leader who is close to death or losing power?

Originally posted by jonny2410
Nick also had a psychological disorder and had a violent track record

aka NK are run by a volatile dictatorship and are a military state, they have a track record proving them not trust worthy such as the kidnapping of Japanese people in the 70's, shooting a passenger plane full of SK's out of the Sky and bombing South Koreans in Burma.

I would gladly list the offences the "others" committed against humanity for the last 60 years, but listing just the crimes that the United States committed alone would not fit in the 6500 characters that are alotted for this post.

reply to post by habfan1968


So you imagine how difficult are negociations because everybody thinks exactly like you do.
This has no end. The moment we built these weapons, we opened a pandora's box

reply to post by Truth4hire


Who would you trust more with nukes? The US or NK?

Originally posted by truttseeker
Taiwans not gonna go down without a fight

Think 20, 30, 40 years. There is no rush. China is ascending, West is in slow decay.

Western culture was going down before WWII too though. And Truth, everyone breaks out the US is a bunch of war criminals argument. EVERY COUNTRY HAS DONE IT. Lets list the ones the British empire did during their reign, or Ghengis Khan, or the current Chinese government, last I knew the US isn't running their own people with tanks or imprisoning them for speaking out against the government. In fact go listen to US music. We have a whole culture that hates the government in the US. However I do see Kim threatening to go to war with SK, I do see people starving in NK because everything goes to the government, and I don't see the US with a couple carriers off the coast. I dont see a desert shield type buildup on the DMZ, and I dont see us changing in anyway posturing to fight NK more than we have since the 50's.



BTW dont blame AMERICA for any misdeeds toward humanity, blame our leadership.

I say let them have their little nuke. South Korea needs to stop providing aid to the north so they can starve to death. China is reducing the amount of aid they send because of the global economy. Lets see if they can eat those missiles for dinner.

The ROK army is in a state where they can put up a good fight with the north. The DPRK does not have the heavy oil and parts needed to sustain a invasion of the south and they know it.

Park a sub off the coast to hunt for any ships carrying nuclear material from NK to the middle east. If any are found, send them to the bottom.

Problem solved.

So waht is everyone's gut feeling on this?

Will it all blow over and die down and NK will play good cop for a bit?

or

Will we see some sort of escalation either through rhetoric or actions by NK to the UN resolution which will be admittedly pretty lame but still be harsher than previous ones.

I think that with North Korea, there needs to be an alternative way of thinking. We have isolated them, their only neighbor is China, from whom they get support. As long as the US keeps putting pressure on them, they will only turn inward. Sanctions for a poor country does not work. It never has, all it does it strengthen the people in power, and never brings about change. If I were Obama, this is what I would do, first is pull back in South Korea, away from the North/South boundry. Not out of the country, but rather away from the border. Say 2 days travel. Then in a closed door meeting, with no reporters, as this would have to be under the table, bring in the Chineses. I would send aid, to be distributed to the North Koreans, via the Chinese government, giving them the lead and reigns in this case, with the understanding that they would have to take control over the situation. You sit back and watch, chances are China still has pull over North Korea. But ensuring the people, not the Military of North Korea, is getting the food and assistance, it will help spark change that is needed. This serves 2 purposes, one it gives a way for the North Koreans to actually back down and save face, without saying we were wrong, and actually helps their country out.
I saw an report, from North Korea once, and every one in the country pretty much has to say I love the Leader, if not you go to jail. It is a very hard country to live in or exist in, and any who speak ill, tends to be punished very harshly. The last thing you want is to escalate, as North Korea have nothing to loose.

hmmmm....

Americans don't want other countries to launch missiles within their own borders...

yet we have nuclear submarines everywhere in international waters...

submarines that practice war drills every month...not to mention our own nukes.

If we Americans think we're going to intimidate the N. Koreans like we've been doing every country in history, then we're in for a very White Hot mushroom surprise..

Thanks for the response Truthseeker! I really appreciated your comments! =)

Originally posted by truttseeker
Yes, the US was the only country to use a nuclear warhead in the time of war. HOWEVER, we were also the ones who realized it was bad and helped make sure it never happened again.

Don't you realize that other countries want them simply because you have them? People are jealous by nature... especially people in power.

The US is WAY more responsible in terms of leadership than the North Koreans.

How is illegally invading other countries 'responsible'? That's why other countries are arming themselves... can't blame them for wanting to protect themselves in

Thats like saying, well since that normal guy over there can have a gun, why cant the gangster in LA have a gun, they all have equal rights.

IMO, a 'normal guy' would have no desire for a gun to begin with... but I tend to be a bit naive and live in a pipe dream. I suppose I have too much faith that mankind will eventually learn the concept of 'mutual respect'. (To myself... "Get real, you moron!")

Also the US hasn't built or tested any new nuclear weapons lately. In fact the responsible nations that have nuclear weapons have all lessened the numbers in their stockpiles.

I'd love to believe that! Is there any kind of proof of this (that's more credible than the 'proof' that Bush and Co. used to invade Iraq)?

Originally posted by truttseeker
Yes, the US was the only country to use a nuclear warhead in the time of war. HOWEVER, we were also the ones who realized it was bad and helped make sure it never happened again. The US is WAY more responsible in terms of leadership than the North Koreans. Thats like saying, well since that normal guy over there can have a gun, why cant the gangster in LA have a gun, they all have equal rights. Also the US hasn't built or tested any new nuclear weapons lately. In fact the responsible nations that have nuclear weapons have all lessened the numbers in their stockpiles.

I'm against NK having nukes and I'm also against the US having nukes. I could care less what the nation is like, when any nation possesses weapons of mass destruction its irresponible. Really though.. how do you or I know these 'responsible' countries have lessoned their stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction ? I guess if it says so on BBC, NBC, Global, Fox or CNN it must be true..

Preemptive war is a very unwise decision. If NK attacks another nation then international intervention is needed.

There is what.. 30k US troops stationed in SK. If NK attacks SK then intervention will be quik to intervene. Also, if NK does start the agression then China will step in and try to settle things their way. If we invade NK preemptively then its all out war and everything becomes even more unsettled.

I hope common sense will prevail!