North Korean Nukes

[Yugoslavia?]

Greeting's



Seriously what is your point ?

The whole point Im trying to make is that countries far less responsible when it comes to international disputes have nukes. The only and I mean only reason you don't want NK to have nukes is cause you disagree with it's poitics, which I do aswell. But you fail to understand that every other nation besides France who has nukes at the moment has done a shitload more bad things to the international community than North Korea ever has or even has wanted to do. And the developement I am seeing in America really frightens me...I think that in 2008 it will all change and America will move towards freedom again but at the moment it's scarry. I mean you can be held indefinetly and tortured without a trial if Bush says so. And he was even spying on the population. North Korea at least admits they are doing it, he was doing it in secrecy which is far worse. So to be honest, I may not trust insurgents in Libya with nukes more than the Americans but I sure as hell trust North Korea more than the US and even China/UK.


Besides, the US gov when interviewed said that they have not excluded the use of tactical nuclear weapons against Iran. (If you guys really doubt me on this one I can try to find it on the news again.) So honestly I'm more scared of America starting a Nuke war than NK. Sorry if you don't agree with me here.

[dalek]

. But you fail to understand that every other nation besides France who has nukes at the moment has done a shitload more bad things to the international community than North Korea ever has or even has wanted to do.

That's a typo right...you can't be serious that France has never been involved in other people's ****?

Who do you think started the Vietnam War, and if you answer the US, your head needs to wrap itself around some history books, it was IndoChina before it was Vietnam , it was a "Colony" of France, they couldn't handle the NVA, so they cried to Kennedy and he sent in "Observers" (spooks/CIA) to assist their tribesmen known as the Monteguard's....pffft read up on some history...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indochina_War

France not being involved, I haven't had a good laugh in awhile until you mentioned that little gem....:-)

[Yugoslavia?]

Exacly my point. Though perhaps you could count in Algeria to that aswell.
I'd still like to add that France after almsot 10 years of war left defeated and never returned nor asked for a new war. Algeria they gave up quite easily even though a large minority of Algeria was in support of French rule.

Also have in mind that the difference is that France aswell as the UK back in the days occupied certian colonies. When war broke out they ofcourse were fighting to keep control and they did have some proportion of the population with them.

The real difference is that you are saying nothing to actully pull down my argument since North Korea has had one single war and so has France. (In the last 50 years)


Compared to the list of military interventions, coups and wars the American state has been in. Listed here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...history_events


And besides, if you want, add france to my list. What have you to counter my argument with really?

[knightlight]

N Korea has threatened to strike any nation that attempts to enforce sanctions. I don't really view that as realistic. However, I have heard that they have enough heavy artillary aimed at soeul to devastate it in no time.
They might do that.

[dalek]

If your argument is trying to convince me that the US is inherently more evil then NK, you can't do it, North Korea is solely responsible for the state it is in now, nobody put a gun to Kim's head (maybe they should have) and said he is to starve his people to death.

For all of it's warts, the US has had to intervene when other's wouldn't like France, or even Russia, during the Oil Embargo against Iraq, France/Germany and Russia all ignored the sanctions that were in place and sold Saddam materials. Kim is also able to prop up his army with the help of Russia/China and Iran through the sale of arms, while his people starve.

The real difference is that you are saying nothing to actully pull down my argument since North Korea has had one single war and so has France. (In the last 50 years)

Whats your point and what's your argument, we should leave NK alone because why? what benefits have NK done on this planet, what tragic events (Tsunami) did NK rush to offer aid to, what countries in Africa benefited from Kim's largesse, how much dope has been smuggled through NK and has ended up in the hands of children, how much knowledge of their enrichment program has been sold to Iran/Libya.

Why are you so eager to defend a despot like Kim? show me where he has done any good, instead of showing me what the US has done that is in your opinion bad.Stop comparing the two and maybe you will understand there is a world of difference between the two countries. Apples and Oranges...

[Yugoslavia?]

I'll give this one more atempt and then I'm giving up.


The United States of America, Russia, China, India, Pakistan and the UK have all been in more conflicts in the world and military interventions than North Korea ever has or ever has planned. Thus North Korea as a sovereign state is an obviously less threatening nation to the world than any of them mentioned above. Any FACTS or even speculations that may state otherwise I am very willing to debate. We are talking about a states rights here not about politics! Try to see the difference.


Now to clear your following statements up, but please have in mind that THIS has nothing to do with NK's right to have weapons:

" If your argument is trying to convince me that the US is inherently more evil then NK, you can't do it, North Korea is solely responsible for the state it is in now, nobody put a gun to Kim's head (maybe they should have) and said he is to starve his people to death. "

- North Korea is not responsible for the state it is in! Their leader is evil and manipulative but he is not a person who starves his people cause of that.
The nation is suffering from unjust sanctions. (Sanctions against Germany have never even existed and they killed 10 million civilians just in camps while NK still has sanctions on it cause of a war that happend 50 + years ago).
The nation has lost one of it's main allies - The USSR, and also has been suffering from devestating droughts in the last 10 years.

" For all of it's warts, the US has had to intervene when other's wouldn't like France, or even Russia, during the Oil Embargo against Iraq, France/Germany and Russia all ignored the sanctions that were in place and sold Saddam materials. Kim is also able to prop up his army with the help of Russia/China and Iran through the sale of arms, while his people starve. "

Yes. Let's go back a bit in time. Kuwait was before the british invasion a part of the Otoman empire. Kuwait was before that part of the Arab Empire. Kuwait has never been an independent state. The two states which in Arabia claimed Kuwait after the downfall of OE was Saudi Arabia and Iraq - It was instead created as an "independent british protectorat" (uhm, puppet state) cause of the nations oilwealth and strategic possition. What was installed was absolute monarchy, a nation with far less democratic rights than in even Saudi Arabia and not to even mention Sadams Iraq. The invasion of Kuwait was thus much more justified than the coup against Salvador in Chilé, the war in Vietnam or Panama yet all of these wars were started by the US despite international protests and even domestic such. A totalitarian state which is more or less rules by a foreign power, a state that only existed cause it's oil wealth and strategic location and a state that actully had drilled for oil in Iraq without asking for it. What Kuwait is now is nothing of what Kuwait was when Sadam invaded it. It's also funny to look at the fact that the US supported Iraq's atack against Iran and supplied weapons to the country while it defended a totalitarian mini-monarchy cause it was in it's own self-narrow interests.

"Whats your point and what's your argument, we should leave NK alone because why? what benefits have NK done on this planet, what tragic events (Tsunami) did NK rush to offer aid to, what countries in Africa benefited from Kim's largesse, how much dope has been smuggled through NK and has ended up in the hands of children, how much knowledge of their enrichment program has been sold to Iran/Libya."

- Heh. Again, Iran has never in it's entire history atacked a single nation. Neither has Libya. What's wrong with these countries having nuclear power?
And again: We are talking about a states rights not politics.

"Why are you so eager to defend a despot like Kim? show me where he has done any good, instead of showing me what the US has done that is in your opinion bad.Stop comparing the two and maybe you will understand there is a world of difference between the two countries. Apples and Oranges..."

- I do not defend him. If you read my threads you see that I oppose him in every single one I make. I hate him for giving leftist ideology such a bad name, I hate him for atacking Korea, I hate him for seeing things in black and white and brainwashing his people with that everything America does is wrong. If in your opinion most of the wars and coups the US has been involved in aren't bad then you are again in my opinion an idiot. Honestly I can't see much the US has done good in foreign politics. They give least aid per BNP/Capita in the whole western world, they have started more wars than the whole western world, they have sanctioned so many countries and killed so many citizens. Your govourment has suppressed and beaten even your own citizens. I saw an documentary on 60 Minutes about the 1968 student revolts and it's just sad how your riot control police is so brainwashed that they are like zombies without any human feelings and thoughts when at their job. I do not like your govourment, I like your culture and alot of my friends and even relatives are american but your politics I spit on. At least the more recent and some of the past.

[dalek]

Thus North Korea as a sovereign state is an obviously less threatening nation to the world than any of them mentioned above. Any FACTS or even speculations that may state otherwise I am very willing to debate. We are talking about a states rights here not about politics! Try to see the difference.

North Korea does not have the right to equip itself with nuclear weapons, whether it is a state or not, if it was genuinely interested in Nuclear Power as an energy source then maybe, but as you can plainly see, he has no intentions of using it for peaceful purposes.
Third pillar: the right to peacefully use nuclear technology

Since very few of the nuclear weapons states and states using nuclear reactions for energy generation are willing to completely abandon possession of nuclear fuel, the third pillar of the NPT provides other states with the possibility to do the same, but under conditions intended to make it difficult to develop nuclear weapons.

For some states, this third pillar of the NPT, which allows uranium enrichment for fuel reasons, seems to be a major loophole. However, the treaty gives every state the inalienable right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, and as the commercially popular light water reactor nuclear power station designs use enriched uranium fuel, it follows that states must be allowed to enrich uranium or purchase it on an international market. Peaceful uranium enrichment can arguably be considered a small step away from developing nuclear warheads, and this can be done by withdrawing from the NPT. No state is known to have successfully constructed a nuclear weapon in secret while subjected to NPT inspection.

Countries that have signed the treaty as Non-Nuclear Weapons States and maintained that status have an unbroken record of not building nuclear weapons. In some regions, the fact that all neighbors are verifiably free of nuclear weapons reduces any pressure individual states might feel to build those weapons themselves, even if neighbors are known to have peaceful nuclear energy programs that might otherwise be suspicious. In this, the treaty works as designed

North Korea was one of the original 188 countries which signed the "Non proliferation act" but later withdrew, as it has become increasingly apparent, North Korea does not deal fairly with those who try to bring it along, Kim is a megalomaniac

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear...eration_Treaty

This debate had nothing to do with the US or for that matter any other country other then North Korea, you with your little weenie decided to insert your hatred for anything US into the debate by trying to justify NK's reasons because the US and others have it also, so if I have a cookie you want one as well...

Heh. Again, Iran has never in it's entire history atacked a single nation. Neither has Libya. What's wrong with these countries having nuclear power?

I'll answer this one because it's easy, they are terrorist countries, what rock do you live under?

Politics and State rights are pretty much the same thing, in a civilized world, maybe where you come from there is no such thing as freedoms?

[Yugoslavia?]

"You and your little weeine"






I rest my case.







Oh I have to answer this though since it's to easy:

"I'll answer this one because it's easy, they are terrorist countries, what rock do you live under?"


So it doesn't matter what the US has done in it's past, nor the other countries. Hell it seems now that it doesn't even matter what North Korea has done as long as they don't have Nukes.



But as soon as it comes to the middle east it matters? That what? Iran has sponsored Hezbollah? WoW now suddently this little organisation that has killed at its most some 2000 people in two wars of self defence and kidnapped two soilders in an act of agression is more evil than any of the armies of the nations I've mentioned and thus it and all of it's sponsors deserve to be enslaved and chained.


You made my day!

[dalek]

"You and your little weeine"

I rest my case.

You made my day!

If in your opinion most of the wars and coups the US has been involved in aren't bad then you are again in my opinion an idiot.

If you can sling it, you should be able to catch it..but then for someone from a place like Sweden I am not surprised, should stay away from the coffee shops...

But as soon as it comes to the middle east it matters? That what? Iran has sponsored Hezbollah? WoW now suddently this little organisation that has killed at its most some 2000 people in two wars of self defence and kidnapped two soilders in an act of agression is more evil than any of the armies of the nations I've mentioned and thus it and all of it's sponsors deserve to be enslaved and chained.

Read my Lips: North Korea does not deserve to have the capability to make a nuclear bomb not today and not tomorrow, maybe your take on this would be different if say Sweden was next door to North Korea, and didn't have NATO to protect it's pacifist ass...

[foxyloxley]

Heh. Again, Iran has never in it's entire history atacked a single nation.

you need to re read your history

iran / persia
Darius / Xerxes
these are the guys who defeated all in there path until Thermopylae
ancient history, but history does have a habit of repeating itself
every race in the middle east has a blood stained past, most have a blood stained present
Korea was the powerhouse for Genghis Khan's attacks through China and Japan, he defeated them and offered tham one alternative, join him or die

NKorea is a blight on the planet
it has NO redeeming qualities
it will not be missed