[Toasty]

So, I hurd u liek ICBM's

North Korea is trying to test what amounts to yet another item that could become a weapon in their arsenal.

They've got nuclear technology now (I believe), and now they're testing Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles. It is believed that their current prototype could possibly reach Alaska (I wonder if Palin can see North Korea from her house....) or Hawaii.

So. What's up with those silly Asians?

[Golden Legacy]

The people of North Korea are suffering from acute malnutrition and poverty while Dear Leader decides to spend billions on a military launch. Exceptionally inefficient, there are already reports that the rocket launched - which NK claims to be a space communications satellite - landed in the Pacific.

[Toasty]

Instead of trying to launch things into space, they should spend more on their civilians.

[Golden Legacy]

I am in full agreement.

[Drizzy Drake]

Golden Legacy, on Apr 6 2009, 12:03 AM, said:

The people of North Korea are suffering from acute malnutrition and poverty while Dear Leader decides to spend billions on a military launch. Exceptionally inefficient, there are already reports that the rocket launched - which NK claims to be a space communications satellite - landed in the Pacific.

Damn, beat me to it. Was talking about this at work; funny how it works out like that.

Well, now they can bomb Jap-- oops, 60 years too late.

[Toasty]

Anyway, regardless, they can still potentially use this technology to make ICBM's. And seeing as how North Korea hates us....

[Saturos S.]

Toasty, on Apr 6 2009, 06:28 AM, said:

Instead of trying to launch things into space, they should spend more on their civilians.

You could say about the US of A. But then again, I find space more interesting than poor people to put it bluntly. Morally though, it's stupid what the USA is doing.

[Golden Legacy]

Toasty, on Apr 6 2009, 01:54 AM, said:

Anyway, regardless, they can still potentially use this technology to make ICBM's. And seeing as how North Korea hates us....

You're automatically assuming North Korea would attack if given the capabilities too. South Korea and Japan are both within its range and it has not struck. In fact, North Korea and South Korea are still at war technically.

It is also worth looking at the goals of this missile launch (space rocket launch?) politically, to give NK more leverage on the world stage. It might be using this test as a way to remove the sanctions that have been imposed on it, for example.

[Toasty]

Possibly. But it doesn't explain why even though they said they put a satellite into space, NORAD still has seen no sign of one.Basically, NK lied about putting something into space, for some reason. *coughicbmcough*And SS, the majority of Americans are not without food. However, the majority of NK's are.Possibly. But it doesn't explain why even though they said they put a satellite into space, NORAD still has seen no sign of one.Basically, NK lied about putting something into space, for some reason. *coughicbmcough*And SS, the majority of Americans are not without food. However, the majority of NK's are.

[Golden Legacy]

All right, let's say North Korea did have Intercontinental Ballistic Missile technology. Let's further assume that this recent test was indeed an attempt at such a weapon.

What do you propose be done?

[Toasty]

NUKES! EFF YEA!

Not really sure to be honest. Sending some UN weapons inspectors over there would be a start though.

[Ironsight]

^ As long as they get to look where they want, instead of where they are directed by Mr. Kong.

[My Best Wishes]

Anyone else think of the Treaty of Versailles?

Golden Legacy, on Apr 7 2009, 02:16 PM, said:

All right, let's say North Korea did have Intercontinental Ballistic Missile technology. Let's further assume that this recent test was indeed an attempt at such a weapon.

What do you propose be done?

Dubya says- Invade! And then back it up with the excuse they had WOMD.

[Ironsight]

"Dubya" isn't in office anymore, and is irrelevant to this topic.

[Golden Legacy]

Unless the US decides to carry out a Dubya like attitude towards North Korea, in which case it is highly relevant.

[Ironsight]

Would you feel any different about an invasion if it were performed by any other country then?

[Golden Legacy]

What difference does it make if another country commits the invasion? Had Russia invaded Iraq under the same pretense as the USA, you'd better believe I would feel the same vitriol hatred towards Putin that I have for Bush and Cheney.

[Ironsight]

Ok, since invasion is bad, what would you do about North Korea?

[Golden Legacy]

I love your loaded question that implies an invasion of North Korea is good, and all other options are inferior.

[Ironsight]

I'd still like to know what you would do instead.

[Golden Legacy]

Russia and China to be the middlemen; allow humanitarian aid and food to flow through to the levels in the 1990s; formally end the declaration of war between North Korea and both South Korea and the US; revoke the "Axis of Evil" labeling by Saint Bush; remove sanctions on North Korea in exchange for Japanese abduction victims to be released or compensated and/or UN jurusdiction over uranium enrichment, with possibly China fulfilling this role.

[Caael]

Golden Legacy, on Apr 8 2009, 12:20 AM, said:

Russia and China to be the middlemen; allow humanitarian aid and food to flow through to the levels in the 1990s; formally end the declaration of war between North Korea and both South Korea and the US; revoke the "Axis of Evil" labeling by Saint Bush; remove sanctions on North Korea in exchange for Japanese abduction victims to be released or compensated and/or UN jurusdiction over uranium enrichment, with possibly China fulfilling this role.

Please become president.

[Split Infinity]

I always thought you were more for dictators, Caael. :B

[Toasty]

Golden Legacy, on Apr 7 2009, 05:20 PM, said:

Russia and China to be the middlemen; allow humanitarian aid and food to flow through to the levels in the 1990s; formally end the declaration of war between North Korea and both South Korea and the US; revoke the "Axis of Evil" labeling by Saint Bush; remove sanctions on North Korea in exchange for Japanese abduction victims to be released or compensated and/or UN jurusdiction over uranium enrichment, with possibly China fulfilling this role.

That is assuming that North Korea is just going to be a good little boy and back off of the intimidation.

The North Korean government is bad, and it's very likely that it won't change that easily. Doing what you propose will only give it more freedom to do what it wants.

[Caael]

Split Infinity, on Apr 8 2009, 01:53 AM, said:

I always thought you were more for dictators, Caael. :B

lrn2notassumecommunismisadictatorshipbecauseitsnot;marxismcommunismhasnosetleade
andthatsthetheoryifollowso****u

[Legolastom]

Caael, on Apr 8 2009, 08:06 PM, said:

lrn2notassumecommunismisadictatorshipbecauseitsnot;marxismcommunismhasnosetleade
andthatsthetheoryifollowso****u

wherearethespace?

[Nosferatu]

We wouldn't if you could provide an example of true communism ever happening.

[Legolastom]

Nobody said it has ever happened.

[Nosferatu]

Legolastom, on Apr 8 2009, 01:31 PM, said:

Nobody said it has ever happened.

Case in point.

Gah holy **** I'm not awake. Gimme a sec.
We wouldn't assume communism is a dictatorship if we had some kind of proof that it has not turned into a dictatorship whenever it is tried.

[Caael]

Nosferatu, on Apr 8 2009, 09:44 PM, said:

Case in point.

Gah holy **** I'm not awake. Gimme a sec.
We wouldn't assume communism is a dictatorship if we had some kind of proof that it has not turned into a dictatorship whenever it is tried.

Calling the USSR Communist is not correct. Communism, in it's most purest form, is a stateless, classless and moneyless society of perfect humans and absolute equality. Name one category out of them that the USSR fitted into. Socialism and Communism are completely different things; the USSR was a fascistic socialist nation, not a communist one.

Communism has never been achieved, so it's just wrong straight off to assume that Communism is a dictatorship because there's no evidence to base it on, seeing as it's never happened. It's been attempted, but straight off the bat it's been warped from Communism to socialistic fascism. Just look at how Cuba turned out. Communism cant work in today's world as humans are not perfect. Marxist Communism (pretty much pure communism) requires perfect, selfless human beings to co-exist in a state where there is no government to rule over the people, as the people are perfect and flawless and therefore need nobody to regulate them because there is no need to regulate something that has no flaws.

Now has that been achieved? Name one instance where Communism has been achieved in the world? When you try and force Communism on a society of non-perfect human beings, you have to impose rules and regulations in an attempt to make them more perfect, and gradually getting more and more controlling until you have a totalitarian socialist society in a state of poverty. This is not because of "Communism" itself but because of human nature. Humans desire power, that's just how we are, and so when one person has more power than another, he'll abuse it, which is exactly what Stalin did, what Castro, Zedong and Jong-Ill did and it leads to what the modern perception of Communism is, which, by all accounts, is the wrong perception.

So Nos, seeing as Communism has never been achieved, how can you say it's always been a dictatorship, seeing as it's theories have never properly been emplaced?

[Nosferatu]

Caael, on Apr 8 2009, 02:03 PM, said:

So Nos, seeing as Communism has never been achieved, how can you say it's always been a dictatorship, seeing as it's theories have never properly been emplaced?

I'm way too tired to actually type out a whole thing so lemme just summarize.

I'm not saying communism is a dictatorship, I'm saying that so far whenever it has been tried it gets warped into a dictatorship. I'm not arguing that it is a dictatorship, I'm saying that we have yet to actually see a purely communist state be achieved.

Hell, I'm an anarchist if anything so I don't particularily care about if it works out or not. As long as **** like North Korea/ Stalin doesn't happen I don't care.

Edit: For all that it matters, I knew I was going to get read wrong. I can't type for **** when I'm tired.

[Golden Legacy]

Toasty, on Apr 8 2009, 01:42 AM, said:

That is assuming that North Korea is just going to be a good little boy and back off of the intimidation.

The North Korean government is bad, and it's very likely that it won't change that easily. Doing what you propose will only give it more freedom to do what it wants.

So let me get this straight. You want to invade North Korea, confirming every belief they have of the USA being an imperialist world force, and knock on the doors of China and Russia who border it?

It's about time you came to realize that the world can't be shaped to your liking. The biggest 'threat' from North Korea is not the States but are Japan and South Korea - Japan has a US military presence which can be heightened, and the important thing is to end the declaration of war between North and South Korea. Missile technology from North Korea (if they are even capable of having a launch that lasts more than a minute) is far too weak to pose a legitimate threat - even if it existed, that is not reason enough and the implications are too uncertain.

[Caael]

tl;dr- America wants to show off it's manly muscles by picking on the weak country that nobody really likes.

[Golden Legacy]

You don't think? Where have we seen that before?

Ahh, yes...

[Caael]

To be fair, it's more the UN than the US but same context.

[Golden Legacy]

The UN is effectively another arm for the US to expand its interests around the world. That and NATO too.

[Toasty]

Golden Legacy, on Apr 8 2009, 02:43 PM, said:

So let me get this straight. You want to invade North Korea, confirming every belief they have of the USA being an imperialist world force, and knock on the doors of China and Russia who border it?

It's about time you came to realize that the world can't be shaped to your liking. The biggest 'threat' from North Korea is not the States but are Japan and South Korea - Japan has a US military presence which can be heightened, and the important thing is to end the declaration of war between North and South Korea. Missile technology from North Korea (if they are even capable of having a launch that lasts more than a minute) is far too weak to pose a legitimate threat - even if it existed, that is not reason enough and the implications are too uncertain.

Way to put words in my mouth there GL...


What I'm saying, is that we can't simply "forgive and forget" because North Korea won't change even if we back off. Besides that, chances are that any kind of aid given by other countries will just be sucked up by the NK government, if they even allow any aid at all.



The world isn't made of bunnies and sunshine GL. Very rarely is it ever possible for two opposing nations to really come to terms. Let alone ever become allies, for that matter (not saying you want NK to be an ally btw).

And really, the first sentence in that last paragraph applies to communism as well, since the only way you'll really be able to achieve true communism is if the world suddenly becomes made of bunnies and sunshine. And maybe a little sugar too.

[Legolastom]

Don't know what world you live in Toasty but it seems very easy for two opposing nations to at least stop hostilities and possibly become allies these days.

[Golden Legacy]

Toasty, on Apr 9 2009, 01:02 AM, said:

Way to put words in my mouth there GL...
What I'm saying, is that we can't simply "forgive and forget" because North Korea won't change even if we back off. Besides that, chances are that any kind of aid given by other countries will just be sucked up by the NK government, if they even allow any aid at all.
The world isn't made of bunnies and sunshine GL. Very rarely is it ever possible for two opposing nations to really come to terms. Let alone ever become allies, for that matter (not saying you want NK to be an ally btw).

And really, the first sentence in that last paragraph applies to communism as well, since the only way you'll really be able to achieve true communism is if the world suddenly becomes made of bunnies and sunshine. And maybe a little sugar too.

LOL. You do believe in bunnies and sunshine. You believe American bombs carry fun little candies of "democracy" for people. You believe pounding a starved, helpless population into further oblivion will cause them to sing and praise America and hold hands singing songs about freedom. Hallelujah once the bombs fall, kumbaya towards democracy as children are maimed and innocents are waterboarded, and yet instead, those people prefer to throw their shoes at everything the USA has done and call the president "a dog".

You say you want North Korea to "change". Their leadership is self-centered, their ambitions come at the expense of their people, yes, but who are you to say they must? Why should there even be a need to "come to terms"? There is no reason why every nation in the world is a situation that has to be dealt with, that it's a pressing issue that must be resolved now.

While we're at it, you know what might help? Not labeling them the 'Axis of Evil' and giving them more reason to incite hatred. Leave them be.

[Ironsight]

Golden Legacy, on Apr 8 2009, 10:23 PM, said:

LOL. You do believe in bunnies and sunshine. You believe American bombs carry fun little candies of "democracy" for people. You believe pounding a starved, helpless population into further oblivion will cause them to sing and praise America and hold hands singing songs about freedom. Hallelujah once the bombs fall, kumbaya towards democracy as children are maimed and innocents are waterboarded, and yet instead, those people prefer to throw their shoes at everything the USA has done and call the president "a dog".

Well, they aren't getting any healthier under the current program.

[Toasty]

GL, you entirely misunderstood what I meant by bunnies and sunshine.

By spreading democracy, we're not trying to create world peace, we're trying to make the world somewhat safer.

And clear minded conservative doesn't believe it's possible to have a perfect world, and no clear-minded conservative strives for that. They strive to make the best of what reality gives them.


However, Obama really sems to love the thought that the world is in fact, made of bunnies and sunshine, as he's shown quite often in his foreign relations thus far. He's weak and clearly inexperienced, and doesn't even know how to get things done. Let alone get them done without angering other world leaders.

[Golden Legacy]

Quick lesson for you: 'true' conservatism believes in a philosophy of non-intervention and isolationism. Idealism believes in spreading values around the world. Most scholars would argue that Bush and his fellow neoconservatives, in believing in the 'spread of democracy' (as they claim) are the ultimate Wilsonian idealists.

And it would be nice if you could clarify what you mean by 'democracy'. Believe it or not, if given a choice between their families' lives and this 'democracy', most people would rather choose to live. Amusingly, the nations where "democracy" is being spread tend to be the nations that have the most to gain geopolitically and in terms of resources.

Of course as history has shown, in the eyes of the US, dictators are perfectly fine as long as they are America's ol' buddies.

[My Best Wishes]

Caael, on Apr 9 2009, 07:03 AM, said:

Calling the USSR Communist is not correct. Communism, in it's most purest form, is a stateless, classless and moneyless society of perfect humans and absolute equality. Name one category out of them that the USSR fitted into. Socialism and Communism are completely different things; the USSR was a fascistic socialist nation, not a communist one.

Communism has never been achieved, so it's just wrong straight off to assume that Communism is a dictatorship because there's no evidence to base it on, seeing as it's never happened. It's been attempted, but straight off the bat it's been warped from Communism to socialistic fascism. Just look at how Cuba turned out. Communism cant work in today's world as humans are not perfect. Marxist Communism (pretty much pure communism) requires perfect, selfless human beings to co-exist in a state where there is no government to rule over the people, as the people are perfect and flawless and therefore need nobody to regulate them because there is no need to regulate something that has no flaws.

Now has that been achieved? Name one instance where Communism has been achieved in the world? When you try and force Communism on a society of non-perfect human beings, you have to impose rules and regulations in an attempt to make them more perfect, and gradually getting more and more controlling until you have a totalitarian socialist society in a state of poverty. This is not because of "Communism" itself but because of human nature. Humans desire power, that's just how we are, and so when one person has more power than another, he'll abuse it, which is exactly what Stalin did, what Castro, Zedong and Jong-Ill did and it leads to what the modern perception of Communism is, which, by all accounts, is the wrong perception.

So Nos, seeing as Communism has never been achieved, how can you say it's always been a dictatorship, seeing as it's theories have never properly been emplaced?

I studied Russia's history in my final year of school last year from I think 1914 to the end of the cold war. I believe that at least Lenin, if not Trotsky as well (although he started as a Menshevik) desired to build pure communism, but that was thwarted by Lenins ill health and Stalin's purge of the Right and Left. But communism in practice never succeeds, the lure of power is too corrupting, as Orwell stated in Animal Farm "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"
I do think that Communism is the best form of government we have, but only in theory beause it has yet to succeed in the real world.
Why are you and Tom so into it as well.

And Toasty, please just shut up. I get patriotism, I love Australia and don't think any nation anywhere (apart from maybe Canada) comes close to it. But you are clearly just a robot. Your nation is not perfect, it is hated everywhere including western countries, and it is corrupt. Just face it, you always brag about how smart you are, just wake up mate.

I don't know a great deal about North Korea but if they're opposing whatever restrictions are placed on them, a show of force won't work.

[Toasty]

watch, on Apr 9 2009, 01:14 AM, said:

And Toasty, please just shut up. I get patriotism, I love Australia and don't think any nation anywhere (apart from maybe Canada) comes close to it. But you are clearly just a robot. Your nation is not perfect, it is hated everywhere including western countries, and it is corrupt. Just face it, you always brag about how smart you are, just wake up mate.

I'm not saying America is perfect. I'm just saying that people always make us out to be the root of all evil in the world, and it pisses me off sometimes.


Personally, I believe Isolationism can have it's advantages, and if I was President I'd probably try to keep out of the world's business as much as possible. But that's also a hard thing to do when you're a world super power, and everyone wants you to do something about the worlds problems (however, when you do, they tell you to GTFO because it's none of your business).

From my point of view, it's smart to be weary of NK. I'm not saying we should invade for christ's sake, I'm just saying we should put a good amount of surveillance on them.

To be honest, I think they're just pulling everyone's leg because they're trying to scare people and hope that they can get America worried enough to make a bad decision. However, I also believe that if they were given the chance, they'd probably try and attack America.



And GL, Conservatives also like to protect their country. There was evidence that Saddam had WMD's and was helping the terrorists who bombed the towers blah blah blah etc.

We took him out. I would've been wise to just leave right then, but if we did so, we'd be blamed for throwing Iraq into an anarchic bloodbath. So we tried to help establish a government there.

Basically, one thing led to another, and that's how it worked out. But at least now the Iraqi people can have a chance at a fair government.

[Golden Legacy]

Toasty, on Apr 10 2009, 02:43 AM, said:

From my point of view, it's smart to be weary of NK. I'm not saying we should invade for christ's sake, I'm just saying we should put a good amount of surveillance on them.

That's already being done.

Quote

To be honest, I think they're just pulling everyone's leg because they're trying to scare people and hope that they can get America worried enough to make a bad decision. However, I also believe that if they were given the chance, they'd probably try and attack America.

If given the chance, I'm sure anyone would do anything.

Quote

And GL,
<Bush loving lies>

Ahh yes, the classic argument. Saddam Hussein, put into power by the USA, given weapons through the CIA under Reagan, supported and once called the "bulwark and fighter against communism", later become the new Hitler when it became convenient for the USA. America's hypocrisy is legendary.

You don't know your history, do you? You don't know about the sanctions that were placed on Iraq in the 1990s that starved 500,000 children to death? You don't know about the tens of thousands of Iraqi babies born with defects because of the US' bombings under Clinton?

Coming from someone who lives thousands of miles away hiding behind his computer screen and preaching pro-life morality, it is absolutely sickening that you support the slaughter of 500,000+ Iraqis, the ethnic cleansing of 4 million refugees, 90% of people without clean water and electricity, 1/3 of Iraqi babies born with genetic mutations and the sheer destruction of a 5000 year old ancient civilization.

Please do not pretend yourself knowledgeable. Iraq is not a country anymore. It is a military base for the United States.

[Caael]

Toasty, on Apr 9 2009, 06:02 AM, said:

And really, the first sentence in that last paragraph applies to communism as well, since the only way you'll really be able to achieve true communism is if the world suddenly becomes made of bunnies and sunshine. And maybe a little sugar too.

If this is aimed at me, I've made it pretty clear that I dont think Communism can be established for a very long time.

Though Watch, Toasty, take any further comments about Communism to the thread seeing as this has been de-railed enough already.


As for GL, the comment about Iraq being a US military base could not be more true. I'll have more to say on the matter when I've read through the rest of the thread.

[Toasty]

It wasn't directed towards you in particular. It was just a side thought.