If the Bush administration makes more provocations, both NYC & Tokyo will be blazed
truroute
Posts: 251
http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=57652&u_id=4318
Report: North Korea Plans to Test Hydrogen Bomb
-Kim Myong-chol, director of the Center for Korean-American Peace, who is regarded as an unoffical spokesperson for Kim Jong-il has claimed in a radio interview that North Korea has an H-bomb and is ready to test it.
-When asked for evidence the director replied, "that’s why we are going to test the bomb." He went on to say "If the Bush administration makes more provocations, both New York City and Tokyo will be blazed."
-The South Korean Ministry of Unification minimised the importance of the remarks, saying they should be ignored. Kim however claims to be in contact with high ranking North Korean officials and that his comments are representitive of Pyongyang.
Hmmm. Any ideas what should happen? Or is the answer to sit and talk w/ the guys that are threatening to kill us if we say something they dont like.
Report: North Korea Plans to Test Hydrogen Bomb
-Kim Myong-chol, director of the Center for Korean-American Peace, who is regarded as an unoffical spokesperson for Kim Jong-il has claimed in a radio interview that North Korea has an H-bomb and is ready to test it.
-When asked for evidence the director replied, "that’s why we are going to test the bomb." He went on to say "If the Bush administration makes more provocations, both New York City and Tokyo will be blazed."
-The South Korean Ministry of Unification minimised the importance of the remarks, saying they should be ignored. Kim however claims to be in contact with high ranking North Korean officials and that his comments are representitive of Pyongyang.
Hmmm. Any ideas what should happen? Or is the answer to sit and talk w/ the guys that are threatening to kill us if we say something they dont like.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Second, what do you mean what are we supposed to do when we're threatened like this? Did you forget that the USA was the first to make threats against this nation? Did you forget we started a war with them and currently have troops on their border? Not saying they're a wonderful country or the Kim Jong-Il should be ignored, but come on now. We've rattled their cage our share of times.
nowadays hits you when you're young
with what? their long range missile that made it 500 feet in testing? That being said, this guy is frickin' crazy. He's practically baiting us into doing anything, esp, since they said they take any embargo or sanction as an act of war.
Hail, Hail!!!
What theats have we made?
We started a war? Or was there a massive communist push to take the south by force a few years after WW2
Troops are there for a reason. A quick look at the differences of the 2 countries is obvious why.
How have we rattled thier cage? If anything we've done nothing but appease them and all the shit talking, payed them off for threatening us.
While i dont think they have the actual balls to do anything rash, the possiblity is still there. And as for "how"? ...kinda cliche and more difficult than is sounds, but hiding one them bombs in a cargo container from Honk Kong is a possibilty. (let the media fear frenzy flaming begin)
i hope you're right and all this is is a bunch of posturing and empty threats...i really hope they lack the cajones.
North Korea are putzes. They want to be a big player in the world game. Having the nuke chip in your stack gives you bargaining power... at least when it comes to dealing with the U.S.
And we cannot deny that decades of U.S. foriegn policy has lead us to this point. Maybe we should have let Korea have a Civil War a long time ago and let them re-unify... like Viet Nam. We helped to draw the lines and divide those countries... I think we need to own up to our part in this bullshit.
That's all.
Hail, Hail!!!
cross the river to the eastside
Newsflash ... They don't just have one isolated little problem with Bush. Why do you think they threaten Japan all the time?
Newsflash . . . some of us have a sense of humor.
cross the river to the eastside
No need to get defensive.
Do you remember the whole 'Axis of Evil' speech given by Bush? Nobody had even heard or cared about N. Korea for years, outside of political circles. Your typical Bush sheep or soccer mom jumped on the anti-N. Korea bandwagon after Bush's speech and the media picked up on it.
We've been propping up the south for years, and their governments have been nothing short of mafia-style for years. Don't kid yourself thinking they are some rosy, peachy-nice government over the years. Korea has always been 1 country and was looking to go the communist route, until we came in and intervened, and basically have kept the inevitable from happening for years, because of our Communist fear. N. Korea has had some shitty rulers and made some shitty decisions in the past, but South Korea hasn't been friendly to its people, and we shouldn't have been involved there in the first place. We just propped up the south and injected money and military into it. That and us/the world always cornering the north is a main reason why they are always acting like a cornered dog.
nowadays hits you when you're young
why all this bad talk about the south. they are one of the most prosperus countries in the world. you think they are like that because we threw some money their way? sure it took them until the late 80s to become a free nation but since then they have become a economic world powerhouse. the north is hell on earth. imagine how good they could be as one unifed nation without some wack job calling the shots.
You make some good points about South Korea, but still ... South Korea is light years ahead of the North in pretty much every way, especially human rights, progressiveness, and um, feeding their damn people!
Yes, they would have it good if they were unified, but due to the personal interests of a few nations (USSR, US), they were prevented that.
The North had it great for years, until around the 1980's. In fact, they were ahead of the South in many, many areas and were the model of independence from the west for years by other Asian nations. Not until some bad economic decisions and investments and worldwide oil price volatility did they really experience hardship and pay the price for their independence and unreliance on the USSR or the US. Then they began to get desperate, concentrate on the military and have the great fortune of a whack job taking power in '94. They weren't all bad and it wasn't always 'hell on earth'.
Don't kid yourself to think the S. Korea isn't where it is today because of its utter reliance on the US for development. The North should actually be commended for trying to be truly independent, at least for the first few decades. Unfortunately, outside interests got in the way from the country unifying, civil war or not.
nowadays hits you when you're young
Im goint to beg to differ on you opinion of how the Koreas would be if they reunified and 'inevitably' became communist. example: Vietnam. Pretty much 3rd world.
Then it's up to THEM if they don't like it, and THEM if they want to change it! If the people ask for help, and we deem it a worthy cause, then maybe help them out, but who are we to intervene on their own self determination????
nowadays hits you when you're young
How much you know about communism? The reality of communism, not the text book version. Doesnt really matter what "THEM" wants. "THEM" stand up for something, then "THEM" get there ass handed to the THEM.
And I'm pretty sure that "THEM" didnt want to become communist back when the US "o' so interfered" in other peoples business when "THEM" were being attacked and over ran.
Seems your taking today's animosity towards the US's boneheaded decisions and applying it to 1950s world events.
By them, I mean the people of Korea. I don't see what you're getting all worked up over.
My point is that Korea has always been one nation and should be one nation, and we should have never interfered. If the communist element of the nation was strongest and the rest would be 'overrun' as you say, by the communists, what business is it of ours? Tell me this. Just because YOU don't like communism? Because you say communism has failed? (despite ignoring the fact that they were more prosperous than the south for decades, and of course a fractured nation will struggle). You set a dangerous precedent when you start thinking you can determine the outcome and direction of every nations' future, especially on the basis of your own wants and desires.
By your logic, Germany should have stepped in on the side of the south in our Civil War, so we didn't 'overrun' them. :rolleyes: Let domestic self-determination remain domestic, even if that means civil war. If the North took over Korea and THEN initiated some form of ethnic cleansing or mass killings, THEN I can see an international body stepping in.
Edit: Do you actually think if the 'THEM' was us, and we stood up to OUR government, it would be any different than them standing up to theirs? You don't think we'd get crushed, imprisoned and sent to Guantanamo to get tortured? How is that any different?? Honestly, you need to take the rose-colored democracy is freedom glasses off.
nowadays hits you when you're young
We wouldn't have shit to worry about if:
1) we stop setting up military bases in Islamic lands and overthrowing their governments
and
2) Bush stopped baiting them, rattling their cages and labelling them 'evil'. You poke and prod unstable nations enough, you should expect to get bit.
nowadays hits you when you're young
What exactly is wrong with working in tandem with a world superpower to improve the plight of your nation? What if post-WWII Europe didn't have an "utter reliance" on American reconstruction monies? What if Japan didn't have an "utter reliance" on American reconstruction efforts? You act as if aligning with the West is negative. I'd argue that most nations who have aligned with the West, not just the US, have actually made great decisions.
The North should be ridiculed for their insistence for independence. The 20th century globe, and certainly the 21st century globe, is not well suited for isolationists.
Because being completely reliant on a world power, especially the US, makes you dependent. When you are dependent, you leave yourself open to be taken advantage of. I didn't say it was necessarily a bad choice for the South, obviously it's paid off in the long run. My point is that it is not always the most wise choice. What Western Europe went through with US aid and the involvement of the US in South Korea's politics and military are 2 quite different circumstances altogether.
In your eyes, North Korea being reliant on the USSR would have been a good thing? I think they should be commended for wanting to go it on their own, especially from USSR/China. And when I say this, I don't mean they were opposed to TRADE with the outside. That's quite different. They did very, very well I stated for DECADES, while the South floundered. The North was by no means a failure, until some bad economic decisions and shunning by other countries led to their steady decline beginning in the 80's.
nowadays hits you when you're young
your wrong. the north was only good because of USSR support. once they lost that, they became what they are today.
and the south became a huge powerhouse once they became a free nation in the late 80s.
Well said. I do see AllNiteThings' point about interference back in the Cold War era ... Arguably the West could have left that situation alone and then MAYBE we'd have a different political situation today. Then again, maybe we'd still have Kim's isolationist and backward regime stirring the pot. South Korea is doing quite well today, and its because they aligned themselves with the West. I am not sure how much of the North's problems stems from being one half of a divided country. I mean, I think a stronger argument can be made for Kim's isolationism, financial mismanagement, and approach to governing being the more important factors keeping North Korea down.
I can't disagree with most of that. With Iran though you are dealing with a leader who specifically stated he wants Isreal wiped off the map. He has the balls to try and do it.
I honestly doubt anyone would outright do anything like that. It would be mutually-assured destruction. You would have to be insane to do anything like that to Israel in this day and age of nuclear proliferation and US backing. They would be signing their own death warrant. Personally, I see it nothing more than grandstanding rhetoric.
That said, I think there are much more effective and long-term strategies we should be adopting to deal with these nations. Threats and labels and thinking we and our allies are only allowed to be nuclear capable will NOT solve any problems. We need to foster real international relations rather than the paternal watchdog with the big stick. Contrary to republican beliefs, dialogue can and does work. We just have to get over our superiority complex and see all sides.
nowadays hits you when you're young
you're willing to bet your life on all that?
www.myspace.com/jensvad