| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/09/2006 12:42:58 AM · #1 |
If you've been watching the news, you know that North Korea just tested their nuclear weapons earlier today against orders from certain countries. I'm neither necessarilly for, or against a war with North Korea. I see good and bad signs of both sides.
First of all, how can the US invade Iraq because it believes they might have nuclear weapons or (weapons of mass destruction), and ignore the fact that North Korea not only has these weapons, but admits they have them and tests them. We would definately look like hypocrites with an ulterior motive as far as invading Iraq was concerened. We would look like we were afraid to invade, or otherwise engage in war with, another, larger and more-powerful country.
On the other hand, we don't have much business telling people what they are or are not allowed to do in their own countries. A war with NK is definately nothing like a war with Iraq. This is a country more than capable of completely crushing what military we do have. We are already dropping billions of dollars in Iraq while we have things here, at home, that need fixing. We have people without homes because insurance wouldn't cover the natural disasters that took their homes and belongings from them. We have walls that block hurricanes that need fixing.
That being said, I'm not sure exactly what is going to happen, but if the US did decide that they wanted to engage in a war with NK, they had better go in there with a plan other than what has happened and what is happening in Iraq.
Before we go to war with a country, our livelihood and our citizens' lives and futures better be in jeopardy. Before we go to war, we need to be certain that no matter what, without a shadow of a doubt, we need to completely annihilate our enemy or die. When, and only when, that is the case, we need to destroy that said country to a degree that the world has never seen before. That is the only way to win a war and the only reason that a war should be started. All of this sending in ground troops stuff shouldn't even be a consideration. These brave soldiers who are going to fight these battles that our government picks are someone's sons, daughters, mothers, fathers, wives, husbands...and it's just not right to send these young people to die for a cause that is not only unnecessary, but has nothing to do with our livelihood in the first place.
__________________
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 12:46:31 AM · #2 |
|
|
|
10/09/2006 12:50:25 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by ddpNikon:
Before we go to war, we need to be certain that no matter what, without a shadow of a doubt, we need to completely annihilate our enemy or die. When, and only when, that is the case, we need to destroy that said country to a degree that the world has never seen before. That is the only way to win a war and the only reason that a war should be started. __________________ |
Let me see if I understand you correctly... You would advocate a war because a country is undertaking a course of action you are already engaged in... and in the process totally obliterate them...
Your line of reasoning boggles the mind.
Ray |
|
|
|
10/09/2006 12:54:20 AM · #4 |
They are reporting an Earth Quake in the same area. Perhaps Karma is working it's fast magic.
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 12:57:37 AM · #5 |
I don't see why China doesn't just send in a couple of million soldiers and beat up NK's army and then let SK's gov take over the land and make it all one big happy Korea.
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:01:54 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
I don't see why China doesn't just send in a couple of million soldiers and beat up NK's army and then let SK's gov take over the land and make it all one big happy Korea. |
Because China and North Korea are allies, while China and South Korea are not. China doesn't exactly have a history of "taking over" land and then giving it to someone else, either. |
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:18:52 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by ddpNikon:
Before we go to war, we need to be certain that no matter what, without a shadow of a doubt, we need to completely annihilate our enemy or die. When, and only when, that is the case, we need to destroy that said country to a degree that the world has never seen before. That is the only way to win a war and the only reason that a war should be started. __________________ |
Let me see if I understand you correctly... You would advocate a war because a country is undertaking a course of action you are already engaged in... and in the process totally obliterate them...
Your line of reasoning boggles the mind.
Ray |
What I am saying is this: If our country (the US) and our citizens lives are in danger of becoming extinct, we need to go to war. When we do, we need to completely annihilate the threat until the threat no longer exists.
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:22:06 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by ddpNikon:
What I am saying is this: If our country (the US) and our citizens lives are in danger of becoming extinct, we need to go to war. When we do, we need to completely annihilate the threat until the threat no longer exists. |
Yeah. Good point. Why not just go and blow away another country! Totally solves the problem!
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:25:45 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by Makka:
Yeah. Good point. Why not just go and blow away another country! Totally solves the problem! |
lol I sense some sarcasm in your statement. We're all adults here and should be capable of carrying on a decent argument over our values and our opinions without resorting degrading eachother, sarcastic statements, or name-calling. But to each their own.
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:28:06 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by ddpNikon:
What I am saying is this: If our country (the US) and our citizens lives are in danger of becoming extinct, we need to go to war. When we do, we need to completely annihilate the threat until the threat no longer exists. |
We have been "in danger of becoming extinct" ever since Russia got the bomb. I find your line of reasoning to be quite terrifying, actually. 'Nuff said...
R. |
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:30:23 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by ddpNikon:
What I am saying is this: If our country (the US) and our citizens lives are in danger of becoming extinct, we need to go to war. When we do, we need to completely annihilate the threat until the threat no longer exists. |
We have been "in danger of becoming extinct" ever since Russia got the bomb. I find your line of reasoning to be quite terrifying, actually. 'Nuff said...
R. |
What is it that you find terrifying? If our country's existance is in jeopardy, you don't agree that we should completely eliminate the threat?
From this point forward, if anyone wants a response from me to a certain statement, they should actually make a statement themselves. Don't just tell me that you think I'm wrong or my way of thinking is scary, tell me why. Tell me how you feel about it. Tell me what it is that is wrong with my ideas. Otherwise, I'm just going to assume that you are posting for no reason other than to add in your little two cents and really don't care about the issue at hand.
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:32:47 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by ddpNikon:
Originally posted by Makka:
Yeah. Good point. Why not just go and blow away another country! Totally solves the problem! |
lol I sense some sarcasm in your statement. We're all adults here and should be capable of carrying on a decent argument over our values and our opinions without resorting degrading eachother, sarcastic statements, or name-calling. But to each their own. |
No name calling. I just don't agree that wanting to wipe out a country is a way to solve a crisis. Maybe we have different media coverage to you over here but I haven't seen it mentioned where NK has threatened to throw a nuke at the US or anywhere else to throw it's weight around. They claim they are doing it as a deterrent which I can understand, considering the US seems to be jumping up and down about them. I guess attacking Iraq made a few 'rogue' countries jumpy and this is their natural response and they feel that it is justified. I believe that 'only' if that country threatens to attack then a war is a natural progression. Just because another country says 'boo' to you doesn't mean you should kill them all! Just my opinion! Peace!
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:35:41 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by Makka:
No name calling. I just don't agree that wanting to wipe out a country is a way to solve a crisis. Maybe we have different media coverage to you over here but I haven't seen it mentioned where NK has threatened to throw a nuke at the US or anywhere else to throw it's weight around. They claim they are doing it as a deterrent which I can understand, considering the US seems to be jumping up and down about them. I guess attacking Iraq made a few 'rogue' countries jumpy and this is their natural response and they feel that it is justified. I believe that 'only' if that country threatens to attack then a war is a natural progression. Just because another country says 'boo' to you doesn't mean you should kill them all! Just my opinion! Peace! |
I didn't accuse you of name-calling, just that we shouldn't resort to name calling, sarcasm, or derogatory statements, nor did I say that we should go blow up North Korea. I stated, and if you re-read my posts, you will see, that if my country's existance is in jeopardy, that is the time to go to war.
Never did I state that NK testing a nuke put my country or our citizens' lives in danger of becoming extinct. Never did I say that we should go blow up NK to a state of annihilation.
Please don't jump to conclusions or put words in my mouth. If you're going to make a statement based on something that I said, next time make sure it's something that I said. Peace.
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:40:55 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by ddpNikon:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by ddpNikon:
What I am saying is this: If our country (the US) and our citizens lives are in danger of becoming extinct, we need to go to war. When we do, we need to completely annihilate the threat until the threat no longer exists. |
We have been "in danger of becoming extinct" ever since Russia got the bomb. I find your line of reasoning to be quite terrifying, actually. 'Nuff said...
R. |
What is it that you find terrifying? If our country's existance is in jeopardy, you don't agree that we should completely eliminate the threat?
From this point forward, if anyone wants a response from me to a certain statement, they should actually make a statement themselves. Don't just tell me that you think I'm wrong or my way of thinking is scary, tell me why. Tell me how you feel about it. Tell me what it is that is wrong with my ideas. Otherwise, I'm just going to assume that you are posting for no reason other than to add in your little two cents and really don't care about the issue at hand. |
Well, I thought I did just that. Based on your approach to the problem, we should have nuked the Soviet Union decades ago, right? But we didn't, even though they WERE a threat, and we are still here, and in a hell of a lot better shape than they (or the separate pieces that were "they") are, for the matter of that.
Your approach basically boils down to "if we perceive a threat, we are justified in eliminating the source of the threat." This, of course, can only be accomplished if we actually have the power to do it, which as a matter of fact we probably do. So in a broader sense, your approach is "Those who have power are justified in doing whatever they can get away with to perpetuate that power." This is what I find terrifying.
There are any number of countries in the world that have a nuclear capability now, and quite a few of them are not our friends. In fact, we seem to be losing friends right and left lately, or at least trying the patience of our allies, based on our very belligerent, even war-like foreign policy, the nadir of which was our ill-advised invasion of Iraq.
I don't think there's anything we could do right now that would make us LESS safe than to attack North Korea because they pose a nuclear threat. We just don't have that right, not legally in the international community or morally.
Robt.
Edit to add: I see by your response to Makka that you didn't intend to say that we should be attacking NK right NOW, but rather that if they DID actively threaten us we should respond by annihilating them. I still don't agree with that, but it's a marginally more tenable position :-)
Message edited by author 2006-10-09 01:44:47. |
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:46:39 AM · #15 |
I understand your point Robert, but I think you're taking what I'm saying out of context.
Take this hypothetical situation for example.
Let's say you're walking down a dark street at night with a handgun in a holster on your waist to your car which is 100 yards away and are approached by a man who says "I have a knife and I'm probably going to stab you."
In this situation, you need to try to get away from the situation. If you pulled out your gun and shot this man (eliminated the threat), you *may* be justified, but may not be justified, you just don't know.
Now let's say this man then pulls out a knife and says "I'm going to kill you" and starts lunging at you with the knife.
At this point, whether you are legally carrying this firearm or not, regardless of legal ramifications, your life is in immediate danger. If you do not pull out your firearm immediately and eliminate the threat, you're going to die. It doesn't matter if you're legally carrying this firearm, nothing else matters except that you are definately without a shadow of a doubt going to die if you do not eliminate this threat right here and now.
--
That is what I'm talking about. Not a man who says he may have a knife and may go practice using this knife on occasion.
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:48:39 AM · #16 |
We all need to calm down about North Korea.
If we aren't worried about Pakistan or India or any number of former Soviet Republics having the bomb we shouldn't worry about North Korea. Having a bomb and thinking you can build it, launch it and survive the reprecussions are entirely different matters.
However, the longterm of this is that Japan will more than likely arm themselves which will raise the level of concern all along the pacific rim. That is the same concern we have with Iran getting nukes. Not that Iran will attack the Unite States..but that further destabilization will occur and the ability of any of these countries to secure nuclear bombs from theft.
Remember, North Korea got their nuclear tech from a variety of sources including stolen material from Pakistan.
It's not like we have the intelligence in government right now to make anything from any of this information. I mean, we can't keep thousands of Mexicans from entering our country each day I don't think we can do much about North Korea >:-/
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:52:13 AM · #17 |
There is absolutely no way the US is going anywhere near North Korea.
Why?
1.3 Billion Chinese...
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 01:59:52 AM · #18 |
deapee:
your hypothetical situation: imagine you're a guy walking home after you've received a phonecall from your wife that told you that a man broke in your apartment, raped your 12 year old daughter and shot your 5 yearold son dead. You are walking towards your apartment in the middle of the night, carrying only a knife, and you see a man walking out of your building and walking towards his parked car...
You see, it is all in the perspective. Can't view the world b/w, sorry.
-Serge |
|
|
|
10/09/2006 02:23:36 AM · #19 |
| if everyone takes out their nukes and starts firing away, we might as well say goodbye now. |
|
|
|
10/09/2006 02:24:24 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by ddpNikon:
we don't have much business telling people what they are or are not allowed to do in their own countries. |
yup, well since you're asking that's what I think too.
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 03:10:37 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by ddpNikon:
Let's say you're walking down a dark street at night with a handgun in a holster on your waist to your car which is 100 yards away and are approached by a man who says "I have a knife and I'm probably going to stab you." |
That is totally what i feel. Only that, the person holding the knife is america. And, we don't have a gun. |
|
|
|
10/09/2006 08:30:30 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by ddpNikon:
... Don't just tell me that you think I'm wrong or my way of thinking is scary, tell me why. |
Your line of thinking (Or lack thereof) is scary simply because it is a knee jerk reaction to an activity, which you have no control over and can do nothing about without the cooperation of the international community.
If indeed this illogical approach were to prevail amongst the leaders of the world, then I fear that we might as well bid adieu to each other now, before we all become little more than atomized(sic)particles passing each other in the night.
I do hope this small snippet satisfies your craving for input.
Ray |
|
|
|
10/09/2006 09:50:14 AM · #23 |
Here is what I find amusing or ..perhaps perplexing.
How anybody on this planet that has managed to walk upright for more than a few generations without scraping their knuckles in the dirt can think nuclear war is an option.
I am speaking to anyone. North Korea, Iran, United States and the citizens in those countries.
This is not the 1940's. Atomic weapons are a bit more powerful than the one the United States dropped on Japan. We (meaning many people other than the United States) can deliver them via supersonic intercontinental ballistic missles.
You have to really suspend your freaking common sense and use your belief the Earth is a lot bigger than it really is.
The only reason we speak different languages and carry on these arcane, sectarian tribal religous and cultural beliefs is that our ancesters (as in cave people up to the first 1,000 years AD) couldn't cross large expanses of the earth and seas quickly.
Today we have no excuse for not understanding our brothers and sisters around the globe other than pure, unadulterated ego and dogmatic culture.
Sorry to go on but...man...sometimes I just can't take the ignorance anymore and flip out. >:-/
Message edited by author 2006-10-09 09:56:52. |
|
|
|
10/09/2006 10:06:41 AM · #24 |
air fare is kinda expensive though... plus, there's that language barrier. I can't understand what those non-english speakers are talking about in their websites.
But! that's not a reason to nuke your neighbour. Pictures paint a thousand words, and those words, transcends the language barrier!
Let us make pictures! in peace and war! Because to my knowledge, radiation won't ruin digital photography unlike the old film strip. |
|
|
|
10/09/2006 11:18:56 AM · #25 |
Well Informed |
|
