Does Anyone Feel Threat From N. Korea?

**1lonesoldier** · 03 Jul 04,, 23:04

I don't know. I've always had this little nagging voice in the back of my head reminding me of a news story about how North Korea has WOMD. Bush thinks Iraq had WOMD, but they know now that they don't (I'm sure I saw that on the news, too. Correct me if I'm mistaken).

So, that puts us in quite a predicament now, doesn't it? We're still in Iraq, although there aren't that many legitimate reasons to be while there are reasons to at least be worried about N. Korea. 1) They're Communist. Doesn't that say enough? 2) They stated that they have WOMD.

Now, I'm not saying launch another war the way Bush did with Iraq. What should be done is one of two things. 1) We try to make peace with N. Korea. Obviously we don't want to be an enemy of the country, because they have the power to destroy us, and more. If we make peace, we might have more influence on the way they think and work, and we'd have a better chance of peace, as well as ending their Communism. Yes, I know that the USA as a whole pretty much hates Communism, but we need to try and extend our power and influence beyond the boarders of North America. If we use our resources correctly, we may end up with more territory, meaning that we have more influence overseas without invading other, weaker third-world countries (which we seem to be very good at by now). It's kind of like what most other powerful countries do - like France. They've got France, but then they also have islands around Central America and Africa, and they have countries in Africa and South America. They might not be as large and powerful as the USA, but they're thinking.

Now, for the second idea, which isn't exactly the best, but it's our best bet if #1 won't work. We basically redo what Reagan did and convince Korea to end its Communism. I mean, heck, if we could have that devestating of an effect on a country as big and powerful as Russia, we should be able to have a pretty good effect on an area like Korea.

**Asim Aquil** · 04 Jul 04,, 00:24

North Korea won't use its nukes against America or even the south. It's a 'Mutually assured destruction' scenario. So I doubt it ever will. Unless, of course, war in enthrusted upon them. Now, they won't come looking for a fight conventionally either.

Nuke tech is about 50 yrs old. It's better people started accepting new nuclear powers. A nuke would attract another. So people just won't ever use them. Heck nukes might even help bring an end to war. The US is under threat under the current circumstances. Make peace, help them build safegaurds, show them around the club, be nice, they'll be nice.... a happy gay family.

**Confed999** · 04 Jul 04,, 14:33

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

Bush thinks Iraq had WOMD,

Tell me somebody who didn't? France and Russia said he had them, and they were in bed with Saddam. Blame Bush if you want, but the intel didn't come from him, it came from the world for well over a decade.

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

but they know now that they don't

A few, not many, no stockpiles. Equipment they weren't supposed to have was found. Still, without cooperation there was no way to tell this, and Saddam would never have cooperated.

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

We're still in Iraq, although there aren't that many legitimate reasons to be while there are reasons to at least be worried about N. Korea.

You have a problem with us not doing in Iraq what we allready did in Korea? Containment is a stupid policy, it makes things worse and kills more people than war. There is one major reason to be in Iraq, Saddam broke his cease fire agreement and failed to comply with UN sanction. I can give you dozens more reasons as well.

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

1) They're Communist. Doesn't that say enough?

Tyrants are tyrants, doesn't matter what political system they claim to practice.

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

2) They stated that they have WOMD.

Saddam has been talking about his for decades. His defenceive set up gave the impression he was prepared to use chemical weapons.

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

1) We try to make peace with N. Korea.

No deals with bad guys. KJI is commiting extortion. KJI is a tyrant and making deals with him makes us dirty too. Wasn't it a "peace" deal that gave them the tech to build nukes.

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

because they have the power to destroy us,

No way to deliver them. They do have the power to devistate South Korea, but they will likely be destroyed in return.

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

we need to try and extend our power and influence beyond the boarders of North America. If we use our resources correctly, we may end up with more territory, meaning that we have more influence overseas without invading other, weaker third-world countries (which we seem to be very good at by now). It's kind of like what most other powerful countries do - like France. They've got France, but then they also have islands around Central America and Africa, and they have countries in Africa and South America. They might not be as large and powerful as the USA, but they're thinking.

What? I must not understand. Are you saying that France has more influence in the world than the USA? A Frenchman would laugh at that one. Just the economic influnce, let alone the military and political influence, dwarfs France.

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

Now, for the second idea, which isn't exactly the best, but it's our best bet if #1 won't work. We basically redo what Reagan did and convince Korea to end its Communism. I mean, heck, if we could have that devestating of an effect on a country as big and powerful as Russia, we should be able to have a pretty good effect on an area like Korea.

That's what we're doing now. It's a system that only works if the bad guys aren't completely insane though. I'm not sure Kim is only partialy insane.

BTW, I support regime change in NK, just as I did in Iraq, just as I do through much of the ME and Asia, but it has nothing to do with WMD.

**1lonesoldier** · 04 Jul 04,, 15:51

Originally Posted by Confed999

1) What? I must not understand. Are you saying that France has more influence in the world than the USA? A Frenchman would laugh at that one. Just the economic influnce, let alone the military and political influence, dwarfs France.
2) BTW, I support regime change in NK, just as I did in Iraq, just as I do through much of the ME and Asia, but it has nothing to do with WMD.

1) No, I'm not saying that France has more influence (obviously, since lots of people hate them for not getting involved in the Iraq War). I'm saying that they have some good ideas. If we did have areas outside of N. America, then we'd probably have more influence on other countries. What's the last country we made a big difference in? (Don't say Iraq and don't say Russia - I know about them already, and from what I understand, the effect was not all that positive.) In fact, I'll take this time to show you a quote from another board I'm on to prove a few points.

BIG TERRITORY IS A BIG PROBLEM

Russia has a territory. Too much place where people live and too little of place where food can be produced. Too much places where criminals and corrupted services can hide. Too long distance to many cities and towns and villages. And so we see a lack of provision and a lack of control. Many acts of corruption and bureaucracy and also strict but useless rules make no sense and no good to people and exist only for the greed political system. The big territory is not the only problem of Russia but all problems are caused by
A) big distances
B) Cold climate
C) Tragic history
D) Strange logic and a bad way of living
E) Whims of rulers

Lack of Love to each other
to nature
to strangers
to individuals

Nobody can change the climate but other countries can change all other points. Why don’t they do it?

SOME PEOPLE OF THE EARTH NEED MORE SPACE

The huge population of Asia needs more places for people. Businessmen and builders need more land to build houses and works. Russia has what they need and the Russians don’t use all their wealth properly. Russian Mafia sells natural resources with out any control or risk (all bribes are paid!). And of course the greed and corrupted system of the Kremlin rules all the huge territory of Russia.
If other countries take pieces of Russia they will have some more space for themselves and decrease the area of the Great Crime.

THE GREAT CRIME AGAINST THE PEOPLE

All tyranny and a sum of all inhuman reforms caused by the government towards Russian people should be declared a crime against the mankind. Obviously people of many nationalities became victims of those inhuman acts, not only Russians. That’s why it’s the Great Crime Against the People. This crime is unique and unprecedented and ruthless. This is unforgivable. It’s not a shame for only Russia. It’s a shame for the Earth, the biggest country makes such a mess! Citizens of the World! Look at this and…I hope you’ll guess what to do.

DOWN WITH THE KREMLIN!

The Kremlin must not own Russia. The Kremlin (and all Russian rulers) always uses the land and the people only to get richer and more powerful. It didn’t care for the people’s opinion and needs. And people had no power and possibility to move the rock of tyranny. The Kremlin system is indifferent to human’s needs. It’s not indifferent only when it makes people pay taxes or join the army. Enough! Other political systems and politicians of other countries would be wiser and kinder towards the land and the people.
Is the Kremlin able to rule Russia in any good way after all the disgusting things it has done? I doubt. Anyone sane doubts.

TRADITIONS CAN BE BOTH GOOD OR BAD

If a society has traditions it demonstrates the memory about older generations. It shows that this nation or a group of people at least appreciates the experience of their ancestors. Traditions based on Love and sensibility are fair and just and adorable and good for one’s health and soul. Any tradition based on hatred or paradoxical logic or doing something bad for one’s health is DISGUSTING and shouldn’t be held by everyone.
The Russians have a lot of traditions related to drinking vodka. The most of them make people drink too much and even more than a man can normally drink. That’s why I consider those traditions bad.

THE HISTORY OF WARS \ ANY WAR HAS NO WINNERS

Russian history is a history of wars. It’s tragic and horrible. All admit that Russia got a lot of area after wars and by spreading its bad influence to the East. Generally Russia wasn’t an aggressor but was attacked by other countries. After their failure Russia took a part of their territory. All this territory was bought with the price of blood and death. That’s why the Russians don’t want to give even an acre of their land to foreigners. If your father and your son were soldiers and died for Russia you wouldn’t give a piece of your land to any stranger. On the other hand (as pacifists say) any war has no winners. Both sides are losers. And if the war is civil then both losers are in the same country. Actually a lot of reforms and revolutions and mass executions are equal to wars. Some enemies were inside of Russia.
It’s the reason of eternal crises in Russia. After being a winner of all those wars Russia remained a loser. The Russians are proud and even arrogant and one of the things they proud of is their history. And by the way when people have nothing to be proud of they just invent it. Joining Siberia and Far East gave Russia new natural resources but became a hard place to live. Russia spoiled Siberia with vandalism towards the nature and using that land as a place to exile criminals. Therefore Russian government didn’t care for people and wild life of Siberia. Though the most of Siberians with Russian origin consider themselves Russians.
As known many economical and technical achievements of Russia were bought with human price. Price of Human lives and blood and violence. After all those achievements should be considered unfair.

PRAISE ALEXANDER II

Alexander II sold Alaska to the USA. And now some Russians want it back. Why?
America saved Alaska from a bunch of wars and revolutions and the Perestroyka and innumerous crises.

COLLAPSING OF THE USSR

Collapsing of the USSR caused many new troubles for Russia and actually couldn’t help it. The number of criminals and Mafia increased, the most of the people became poor and Russia got new international conflicts. The only good thing about this event was getting independence from the Kremlin for 14 republics. People of many nationalities still live in Russia and government doesn’t care which one pays taxes or works for a small salary or joins the terrible army and live in any kind of disaster.

BIG DIFFERENCES

Russia is a country of big differences and even gaps between
A) Government and citizens
B) Moscow and the rest of Russia
C) The poor and the rich
D) Countrymen and strangers
E) Political parties or points of view
Corruption, bribes and robbery in all levels makes all services and systems work wrong or in vain. Science and mass media are not free from those three vices.

GO!
And so, begin to take Russian territory for your people! Send your people there to settle! Buy or change! Attach and spread your control! Don’t make war! Take new lands with peace and compromise. YOU have a mission to save this land from criminals and tyrants.
YOU:
China
Japan
Korea
Finland
Lithuania
Kazakhstan
Tajikistan
Armenia
Ukraine
Georgia
USA
Turkey
And other countries of Europe, Asia, America and Africa

And you, inner republics of Russia.

GO! GO and win. Win without any wars. As you know now wars have no winners.

My love and admiration,

Yos Nevinovich

Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2004 11:15 pm Post subject: The territory of Russia 'd be shared among other countries! Posted By Yos Nevinovich
$80 Billion Board

Alright, so this proves a couple of things. 1) The Russians aren't entirely happy with their new government. Obviously, they don't miss the tyranny, but the oppression they face from The Kremlin isn't all that much better than what they used to face. A country that we think we saved completely that we might have ended up screwing up even more. 2) The Russians aren't entirely happy with all of the land. Nevinovich even says that he thinks that if other countries (including the USA) would peacefully take and use some of the land, it would be in the best interest of Russia.

Well, say what you like. Obviously, Confed999, you aren't my biggest fan (taking what you said here), but I must make one point: We agree on something!

2) You said that you support regime change in Korea and other ME and Asian countries. So do I. Maybe not for the exact same reasons, but in the long run, we both want to end up at the same goal: NWO, or at least New Eastern Order. Maybe not a Democracy, but who said that Democracy is the best government? Hopefully, though, we'll find common ground with these countries and maybe we can influence them without 'spreading our boundaries'.

Oh, and, BTW, I said it was an idea.

**Confed999** · 04 Jul 04,, 16:43

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

1) No, I'm not saying that France has more influence (obviously, since lots of people hate them for not getting involved in the Iraq War). I'm saying that they have some good ideas. If we did have areas outside of N. America, then we'd probably have more influence on other countries.

What is France actually doing that the US isn't doing as much, or more? We don't take colonies anymore, no matter how much the Bush haters say we do. No profit in colonies anymore, everyone knows it, everyone is trying to get rid of theirs. BTW, you don't need to use bold letters, I can understand you.

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

What's the last country we made a big difference in?

If the US hic-ups it affects the rest of the world. What country haven't we made a difference in? What I want to know is how do we make more of a difference faster?

KOREAN WAR 1950-1953: North Korea invaded the South in March 1950 and the United States led a 16-nation UN force against the North and its Chinese allies. An armistice was declared in March 1953. Among the estimated one million civilian and military dead were about 35,000 Americans.
SUEZ 1956: After the Franco-British occupation of the Suez Canal, the US Sixth Fleet evacuated 2,500 Americans living in the zone and then forced the withdrawal of the French-British-Israeli coalition from the canal zone.
LEBANON, July 15 1958: 3,200 US marines arrive on the Lebanese beaches to "protect American lives and help the Lebanese government" during a Syrian-aided revolt.
CUBA 'Bay of Pigs', April 17, 1961: An invasion organised by the Central Intelligence Agency in a bid to lead a revolt against Cuban leader Fidel Castro is an embarrassing disaster. Almost all the 1,500 US commandos were killed.
VIETNAM 1961-1975: The United States put up to 550,000 troops in Vietnam at any one time during the war against the communist North Vietnamese army. The Americans lost 55,000 troops. The US withdrawal led to the communist victory.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, April-September 1965: About 30,000 marines and parachutists landed in the Caribbean republic to guard against the "communist threat." The United States had occupied the state from 1916 to 1924.
LEBANON, October-December 1983: After an attack on US military headquarters in Beirut which left 239 soldiers dead, the US army bombarded several Syrian positions in Lebanon.
GRENADA 1983: About 1,900 US troops parachuted into Grenada on October 25 after the prime minister was assassinated in a left wing coup. The action was requested by a Caribbean regional grouping.
PANAMA 1989: The US army stages an invasion codenamed "Operation Just Cause", officially to protect Americans in the country, but which ended the rule of Panamanian strongman Manuel Antonio Noriega who is now in a US jail on drug-linked money laundering charges.
GULF WAR 1991: "Operation Desert Storm" was the name of the UN-approved action started on January 17 to force Iraq out of Kuwait, which it had invaded five months earlier. More than 500,000 US troops took part. On February 28, Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein accepted all UN resolutions on Kuwait and disarmament and a ceasefire was ordered. US and British forces have since staged strikes on military targets and patrolled "no-fly" zones in the north and south of Iraq.
SOMALIA 1992-1993: With civil war and famine ravaging the East African country, "Operation Restore Hope" in December 1992 aimed to bring aid to humanitarian groups. But in October 1993 18 Special Forces troops were killed in a battle with factional forces. The US forces withdrew in March 1994. US forces briefly retook Mogadishu in February 1995 to cover the withdrawal of 8,000 UN forces.
HAITI 1994: US troops landed in Haiti on September 19 to secure the return of President Jean Bertrand Aristide, who had been overthrown by the army in 1991 and forced into exile. At the end of July, the United Nations had approved a military operation under US leadership in July.
KOSOVO, March-June 1999. Working under NATO auspices, US forces bombard the former Yugoslavia to force the withdrawal of Serb forces from Kosovo on June 20.
AFGHANISTAN, 2001: Operation Restore Freedom, launched by US and British-led forces on October 7 followed the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington and aimed to hunt al-Qaeda terrorist camps. It led to the downfall of the hardline Islamic Taliban regime which ran Afghanistan in December 2001.
There are still about 10,000 soldiers on Afghan territory.

And dozens and dozens more through humanitarian and economic assistance.

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

Alright, so this proves a couple of things. 1) The Russians aren't entirely happy with their new government. Obviously, they don't miss the tyranny, but the oppression they face from The Kremlin isn't all that much better than what they used to face. A country that we think we saved completely that we might have ended up screwing up even more. 2) The Russians aren't entirely happy with all of the land. Nevinovich even says that he thinks that if other countries (including the USA) would peacefully take and use some of the land, it would be in the best interest of Russia.

I don't believe the Russian government are on the good guys side. How do you peacefully take something?

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

Obviously, Confed999, you aren't my biggest fan (taking what you said here)[/B]

I don't have a problem with you, I just think the views you've expressed here fail to take alot into consideration.

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

who said that Democracy is the best government?

Only people who don't know what it really is. Thank God we don't have one, American views change with the wind.

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

maybe we can influence them without 'spreading our boundaries'.

Did you say you wanted to "have areas outside of N. America"? We don't do that. Where have we been 'spreading our boundaries' in the last 50 years?

**1lonesoldier** · 05 Jul 04,, 15:05

Okay, okay. I get it. I only have one more problem - me and you are the only two who are really posting here anymore. We should probably continue with this stuff on AIM. Hopefully it'll work next time

**Confed999** · 05 Jul 04,, 15:46

Originally Posted by 1lonesoldier

I only have one more problem - me and you are the only two who are really posting here anymore.

We're the only ones posting on this subject. The "was the war with Iraq justified" has been done to death, and most no longer post on the subject, I don't mind though. There are tons of info on here about it, and even links to video of these same terrorists cutting off the heads of people long before the Iraqi prison scandal. If you wish to know my political and social views, they are all posted here on this board.

**Confed999** · 05 Jul 04,, 15:50

As to the topic of this thread; Yes, North Korea is a threat. Any place/country/person that holds it's own populace as hostages and slaves, is a threat to all mankind.

**Ironduke** · 06 Jul 04,, 00:20

I think North Korea is a threat to its neighbors and US allies, but is not directly a threat to the US.

**ChrisF202** · 06 Jul 04,, 17:23

How can one think North Korea is not a threat:

1) They are ruled by a madman who is worse then Saddam or even Stalin
2) They are agressive
3) They (like China) constantly threaten neighbors

**Asim Aquil** · 06 Jul 04,, 18:00

Originally Posted by ChrisF202

How can one think North Korea is not a threat:

1) They are ruled by a madman who is worse then Saddam or even Stalin
2) They are agressive
3) They (like China) constantly threaten neighbors

Several countries are like that.

**Confed999** · 07 Jul 04,, 01:40

Originally Posted by Asim Aquil

Several countries are like that.

And they are threats too.

**Praxus** · 07 Jul 04,, 01:42

North Korea is a secondary matter, Iran is the problem.

**1lonesoldier** · 07 Jul 04,, 23:17

Can somebody please tell me what's going on in Iran? I haven't been watching the news lately (nasty virus - sinus infection, vomiting, coughing, phlegm, you know, the whole deal), let alone that much at all, since it's mostly about murders in South Philly and whatnot.

Originally Posted by Confed999

As to the topic of this thread; Yes, North Korea is a threat. Any place/country/person that holds it's own populace as hostages and slaves, is a threat to all mankind.

They hold their own citizens as slaves? All the more reason to blow their asses up

**nzkiwi** · 09 Jul 04,, 02:55

Hard to say if the North would ever use them, it would depend on a few things like who controlls them. I thinks a guy like the "Dear Leader" would probably use ( try to at least ) them if he felt he was going down he seems to be one of those leaders would would rather see the hole nation go down in flames if his controll was threatened.