Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 26

Thread: North Korea launches missile test

  1. #1
    Working rage-aholic
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    a rocky planet with one moon
    Posts
    863

    Talking North Korea launches missile test

    Well, Kim Jong-Il took time out from wearing his high heels and wigs to test a new ICBM.
    Why am I smiling? Because it backfired. The test was a dud, and if anything showed their threat of reaching the US west coast is not a reality. Russia and Japan are furious...and, best of all, North Korea relies on others, mainly China, to feed their people. Now they're likely to feel heat from China, which had been reluctant to take action against them.

    Instead of scaring us, I think they just pissed off their neighbors. Way to go.
    Why are homely people discriminated against...we're the majority

  2. #2
    They are China's best customer and probably used Chinese firecracker, oops, I mean missile, technology to build their latest missiles. If anything China will be embarassed but they will still use their veto to prevent any serious action from being enacted by the UN. Kim may very well be nuts but he's the most dangerous man in the world at the moment. A madman with nukes is not a good thing. His long range tests may have been a dud but he still has the capability to strike Japan and elsewhere. This guy is a war waiting to happen.

  3. #3
    Retired veteran hobbyist
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Eastern Canada
    Posts
    17,824
    Quote Originally Posted by Techman
    Kim may very well be nuts but he's the most dangerous man in the world at the moment. A madman with nukes is not a good thing. His long range tests may have been a dud but he still has the capability to strike Japan and elsewhere. This guy is a war waiting to happen.
    If there ever was a country to invade if there ever was one, North Korea is at the top of the list. Add Iran to the mix. Iraq?? Compared to the two i've mentionned, Iraq with bufoon Sadaam Hussein in charge was a pussycat.

  4. #4
    Working rage-aholic
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    a rocky planet with one moon
    Posts
    863
    You're right, Doc.

    BDC, don't assume we could have crushed the Soviet Union in 1945. Germany made the same assumption in 1941...before him Napoleon made a similar assumption.
    Why are homely people discriminated against...we're the majority

  5. #5
    The problem with invading North Korea is that they are just crazy enough to use their nukes. Kim Jong-Il will never allow any force to attempt to invade and would rather use everything he has than lose power. The Soviet Union, whatever we may have thought of them, had no wish to see their country destroyed even if they were able to destroy the west in turn. Kim is insane and if he feels he will lose he will have no second thoughts about taking as many others with him as possible. The only way to get rid of him is either wait for him to die and hope that his successor will be more reasonable or to assasinate him and his entire inner circle. A very difficult thing to achieve.
    One thing is for sure...shock and awe will not work against them unless someone is willing to use a tactical nuke and take out their nuclear capabilities in one shot.

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    734
    Quote Originally Posted by BDC
    I should have made myself clearer. What I ment was crush their presence out of Eastern Europe. But your historically right, because of the harsh winters. I would have favoured an April invasion if need be.
    Whoah there, tone back down on the testosterone, BDC! Is THAT your answer to every possible worldly conflict, full military retaliation?!? Then what is the point of having diplomats, ambassadors, economic sanctions, the U.N., peacekeepers, in fact every tool available to peacefully defuse any potential political firecracker?
    Now, I admit said tools seldom work, but it is NOT because these tools are useless, but rather because man is a selfish, violent animal and would rather take the bountiful fruits of this planet rather than share them.
    As much as i don't like the Cold War for its decades long proliferation of a useless conflict of ideology, it did prevent the Hawks from torpedoing the entire planet with Hydrogen bombs.
    But here's what is REALLY bugging me about your post: The americans should have used the full force of their military?!? Why, so that MORE innocent civilians in Iraq should be killed in this insane conflict? Weren't enough people killed senselessly in Vietnam?
    "Soviet threat", "Iraq" and "North Korea"...these are easy words to spout when you're playing a life-sized version of the "RISK" board game... like acceptable collateral damage". but these are people's lives you're so casually talking about!! Stop thinking in black and white, life is not as simple as that!!

    And here's a concept for you to ponder: it doesn't take "balls" to get into a fight. it takes them to stop one...
    Last edited by shijak; 10-06-2006 at 08:12 PM.

  7. #7
    There's a reason why going to war decisions aren't left to the military. It's because they tend to think like some of you and confuse capacity with intentions.

  8. #8
    shijak, when it comes to people like Kim Jung-Il, military force is the only thing that he understands. He is trying to show that he is a world power. Economic sanctions will not work, he will let civilians die to keep a strong military force. If someone does not stand up to him what's next? If he takes this as a sign of fear and decides to invade South Korea what will we do? All signs say that he has nukes and is ready to use them. He has even threatened as much in recent days. Do you let him move into the south in fear that he will use them? Yes, civilian casualties are a terrible thing but some times good tissue has to die to remove the bad. This may be one of those times. What will it take for the world to wake up to these demagogues? A nuclear attack? It may very well happen in our lifetime if this lunatic isn't dealt with soon.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Techman
    All signs say that he has nukes and is ready to use them.
    See? I rest my case.

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    734
    Techman, I'll admit I'm just not that aware of many facts when it concerns North Korea, so my comments were directed more towards BDC's easy solution of "attack then sort out the innocent from the guilty later" type of approach.
    I'm not blind to the cruelty out there in the world. if the U.S. hadn't stuck its head in the sand in the late 30's, thousands, if not millions of people might have survived world war 2. but was the Vietnam war necessary? Shouldn't the world have gotten involved in Bosnia and most of the african conflicts like in Rwanda, Somalia and Uganda? WTF was The Falkland Islands?

    I'm completely admitting to looking back to those skirmishes after the fact, but I would hope ANY responsible world leader should exhaust every diplomatic solution before unleashing his dogs of war, and not to use them as a first response...
    Last edited by shijak; 07-05-2006 at 11:55 PM.

  11. #11

    Diplomacy

    Unfortunately, diplomacy has a big problem called the UN to overcome first. It was a good idea and was once a valid organization. The problem is that today it has largely been rendered useless due to veto power. The countries that have it tend to use it to support their own interests instead of the best interests of the world as a whole. In the present case China will veto any significant actions against North Korea. For the UN to be of any use, countries that have any political or military ties to the dispute should have their veto power temporarily revoked. Their voice should be heard but they should not be able to stop any action that is voted on. China supplies arms to North Korea and should not have any say in the outcome other than an equal vote. By the same token, as an example, the US being a supporter of Israel with both arms and military support should lose their veto when it comes to discussions regarding Israel's interests. This of course will never happen and the UN will remain a toothless tiger, forever ignored by tyrants such as Kim Jing-Il who have powerful friends.

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    734
    Quote Originally Posted by Techman
    Unfortunately, diplomacy has a big problem called the UN to overcome first. The problem is that today it has largely been rendered useless due to veto power. The countries that have it tend to use it to support their own interests instead of the best interests of the world as a whole
    T-Man
    I agree with you here, and that's one of the things i had in mind when I said:

    Quote Originally Posted by BLEEDING HEART
    Now, I admit said tools [diplomacy, sanctions, etc.]seldom work, but it is NOT because these tools are useless, but rather because man is a selfish, violent animal and would rather take the bountiful fruits of this planet rather than share them.

  13. #13
    The best approach to use with countries like NK is the one used during the Cold War. i.e. containment until an internal collapse.

  14. #14
    Working rage-aholic
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    a rocky planet with one moon
    Posts
    863
    Quote Originally Posted by JustBob
    There's a reason why going to war decisions aren't left to the military. It's because they tend to think like some of you and confuse capacity with intentions.
    I agree with you. We're going to have to wait until the Kim Jong-Il dies. The guy is nuts and has total control on that society...he's comparable to Stalin in that sense. He just has an iron grip on No Korea, and we're not going to assassinate him.

    Isn't the real problem in the region China? They sell arms to anyone who'll buy, then prevent the useless nations from taking action against their clients.

    Then again, the US can't criticize. Besides the fact that we're in bed with China economically, we've propped up Israel, the Saudi's and others for so long it's disgusting. We propped up Afghanistan and Iraq in the 80s. This should be a great lesson to both us and the Chinese. How thankful are these countries we've sold arms to? Israel expects us to kiss their ass, like a spoiled golddigging gf, Saudi Arabia would stab us in the back the first chance they got, and their people hate us, we've been in two wars with Iraq, and the Afghans we supported were the Taliban.
    China (and Russia too, in other cases) has sold out by giving weapons for cash to 3rd world despots. They're going to learn as we have that the weapons you sell will one day be used against you. In the meantime, the world suffers for their greed.

    Here's to humanity. We haven't been on the planet long, but we are the greatest killers ever to inhabit the Earth.
    Why are homely people discriminated against...we're the majority

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Nevada, U.S.A.
    Posts
    28
    The best scenario would be a military coup. Some hot shot general could just put a bullet in that guys head, go on teevee and just level with the people.

    North Korea is actually a weak country. We need to look for the weaknesses and exploit them. Not be afraid of their strengths.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •