What's the commotion about North Korea?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by NickBallard, Jun 23, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. NickBallard

    NickBallard member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    83
    What's all this political debate about North Korea wanting to test their new missile? I hear politicians saying that we should go onto their own soil and blow up their missile. Others say not to do anything until the missile is fired, then blow it up. Should we really worry about this? I think that North Korea knows that if they tried anything we could squash them like a fly. How would we feel if another country wanted to fly over are land and blow up our missiles? Or if they blew up our missiles that we were testing? Like let's say some other country blew up the missiles that we launch when testing at White Sands Missile Range? Why do we get mad at them for things we do? We test and have missiles that are much further ranging than theirs? It's just like the Cold War again, both sides honestly believe that their military buildup is out of self-defense and that the other's is out of aggression. The U.S. claimed they sent in CIA assassins to various countries for the greater good, at the same time the Soviets invaded Afghanistan because they thought it was for the greater good. If we blow up the missile if it launches at us, fine. But if we blow it up because they're test firing it, wouldn't they see it in the same way as we would if another country attacked Pearl Harbor, Ft Bliss, or just blew up some missiles that we were testing? We blew up the Bikini Islands with a hydrogen bomb, wasn't that worse than anything North Korea has tried? How many times have we been attacked on our own soil vs. what North Korea has? How many times has the U.S. invaded another country compared to what North Korea has? Aren't the chances of the U.S. invading North Korea on their own soil more likely than them invading us on our own soil? We've tried to overthrow many more governments than they have, so if we were to put ourselves in their shoes, wouldn't they be afraid for their own lives? The U.S. has already invaded their airspace (what would we do if military planes invaded our own airspace). We made an agreement earlier with them that if they held off on some of this, we'd offer them protection, but we haven't solidified it. So what's wrong with a country wanting to have reasonable force self-defense available (since we wouldn't solidify)? Just like these people passing anti-gun laws. I'm not saying that anything we've done is wrong, I'm just not quite getting why we freak out when other countries test weapons for defense (who couldn't hurt us if they wanted to), but it's quite all right for us to. We have so many weapons that can strike anywhere in the world. It seems like the U.S. has used more weapons to kill innocent bystanders than others have. Do we want to create new enemies by blowing up test missile launches that aren't headed towards the U.S.?
     
  2. bedlamite

    bedlamite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    218
    Location:
    Back row of the peanut gallery
  3. ctdonath

    ctdonath Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,618
    Location:
    Cumming GA
    The commotion is that a crazed lunatic who hates the USA and has nuclear weapons currently has an ICBM sitting on a launch pad, ready to fly, can reach the USA in 20 minutes flat, the payload is unknown, the guy with the button is threatining to push it, and it can't be left there indefinitely without either launching or unloading it no later than ... well ... right about now. And we don't know where it would go if launched, it's designed to be launched at US, and unloading it is a big dangerous hassle.

    Put another way: Kim Jong Il is insane and is currently holding a gun to our head, and we don't know if it's loaded.

    Put yet another way: due to the subject of the commotion, LA, Seattle, or Portland could cease to exist by the time you read this.
     
  4. MIL-DOT

    MIL-DOT member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    3,110
    Location:
    Georgia,C.S.A.
    howdy nick,from one new member to another,welcome to the forum. it's pretty cool in here ,i guess,but i don' think i have these guys quite figured out yet. my problem.
    but just to help kick off what may (or may not) be a long train of responses,i'm thinkin' that the big difference between "them" and "us" is that we're pretty sure we ain't about to start lobbing nukes. we're not nearly so sure about kim.
     
  5. GoRon

    GoRon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,495
    Location:
    west burbs of Chicago
    Your whole post is reminiscent of the policy toward al-Quaida during President Clinton's term. Bin Laden and his gang were an annoyance at worse. They weren't really at war with us (despite their own words), they only killed our employees at embassies and our servicemen, not real people. Harsh words and a token lobbing of some missiles, mission accomplished.:rolleyes:

    Take Crazy Kim at his word, he wishes us no good. Stop him now before he acquires the means to accomplish his goals. Or you can wait for him harm us and/or arm our enemies.
     
  6. ctdonath

    ctdonath Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,618
    Location:
    Cumming GA
    Yup, that's another way to put it. Nobody worries about cops being armed despite the number of people shot by them; likewise for the USA effectively being the world's police. Plenty of worry when a known psycho starts running around waving guns and threatening cops; likewise for NK having nukes & ICBMs, preparing to use them, and making wild threats.
     
  7. Biker

    Biker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    6,139
    Location:
    Idaho
    GoRon...

    How do you suggest we stop Crazy Kim?

    Biker
     
  8. NickBallard

    NickBallard member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    83
    Like I understand if their missile launches towards us and we blow it up, but if it is launched for testing, do we really have a gun to our head? I understand us being nervous, but the part about attacking them or interferring with a test launch? If someone blew up pearl harbor or interferred with White Sands Missile test launches, wouldn't that provoke us? So wouldn't that provoke them?

    Could Kim Jong Il be be just like us and think that he has no intentions of using nukes, but not being sure if we have the intentions? He's probably afraid of us. I mean honestly, if one was to attack the other's soil, would the U.S. or North Korea be more likely (looking at the past military behaviors)? Not that I think we should say, "Here are some of those weapons that can blow up the earth to go along with your own weapons, as a token of friendship", but is it really a big deal if another country wants to test a missile?

    Some say that during World War II many said we should stay out and that was a mistake, but is North Korea in the middle of some world conquest? The Afghanistan Taliban and groups from Iraq were involved in terrorist activity, so I definitely supported Bush in those polls for invasion, but is North Korea?
     
  9. MIL-DOT

    MIL-DOT member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    3,110
    Location:
    Georgia,C.S.A.
    nick....are you just pulling our leg?;) it's pretty well established that kim is a full-blown nutjob. you seriously think he's all of a sudden wondering if WE have nuclear ambitions? come on, till recently most americans couldn't find north korea on a north korean map !!! this all started because this idiot started running his mouth.it's a classic shakedown.
     
  10. ctdonath

    ctdonath Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,618
    Location:
    Cumming GA
    We don't know if it's a test.
    We don't know what's in the payload bay.
    We don't know where it's going until it's going there - which takes time to figure out, takes time to respond to if appropriate, and we'd only have 20 minutes from "go".
    20 minutes to react to a possible threat isn't very long when the thing you're trying to stop is covering 7,000 miles in that time.

    The "gee whiz maybe he's not doing anything harmful" doesn't fly when the difference between harmless and harmful is 20 minutes and 1,000,000 dead.

    Kim Jong Il is certifiably nuts. He maintains power only by making his people think the world is out to get them; at some point this strategy will result in him actually threatening others to a degree that others cannot take lightly - and that point is right about now.

    What part of "North Korea has nuclear weapons, ICBMs, and an active desire to vaporize Los Angeles" do you not get?
     
  11. GoRon

    GoRon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,495
    Location:
    west burbs of Chicago
    I may not have the answer to that question but this much I know. You don't discount, ignore or downplay the threats as we have done in the past. Just because a country or group doesn't obviously have the means to hurt us doesn't mean they can't, 9/11 case in point. If a nation or people want to set themselves up as an adversary of the US then they should be prepared to be treated as an enemy.
     
  12. MIL-DOT

    MIL-DOT member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    3,110
    Location:
    Georgia,C.S.A.
    The "gee whiz maybe he's not doing anything harmful" doesn't fly when the difference between harmless and harmful is 20 minutes and 1,000,000 dead.

    damn,dude.......that was good!
     
  13. NickBallard

    NickBallard member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    83
    CONCERNING:confused:

    <<Your whole post is reminiscent of the policy toward al-Quaida during President Clinton's term. Bin Laden and his gang were an annoyance at worse. They weren't really at war with us (despite their own words), they only killed our employees at embassies and our servicemen, not real people. Harsh words and a token lobbing of some missiles, mission accomplished.>>

    According to msn news, it appears that Clinton would have taken a different viewpoint than me. "William Perry, a Clinton administration defense secretary, advocated a strike on the missile on its launch pad." and "Vice President Dick Cheney said North Korea’s 'missile capabilities are fairly rudimentary' but developments were being closely monitored. In a CNN interview, Cheney rejected Perry’s suggestion of a pre-emptive strike, saying, 'The issue is being addressed appropriately.'" Clinton would have just hastely attacked.

    The al-Quaida were already committing terrorist acts and were at war with America during Clinton's era. What about the Unabomber, etc? Kenya bombings? If North Korea was already attacking us, that would be different.

    Many countries in the past said that the U.S. shouldn't form an SDI Defense system because they thought it would cause contention around the world, even though it was meant to be self-defense. Other countries said that the U.S. was using propaganda to make its citizens think that they were threatened from outside forces, just like our governement says that North Korea is using propaganda on their citizens, while their citizens don't want to be attacked and so many support.
     
  14. shooter94

    shooter94 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    97
    Location:
    Southern Nevada, where Hairy Reed lives
    cdonath's analysis is correct. Kim jung Il's missle test is a cry for help to the Western world. The only people who have enough to eat barely is his Military. His Communist system is classic Soviet, not Maoism. He wouldn't be in the position he's in now if he were using Maoism...

    Kim Jung Il would with regularity kidnap Japanese Nationals from Japan for Intel purposes. I'm not sure about the exact numbers, but only a small handfull have been rapatriated. Kidnaping Citizens of a foreign Nation for intel purposes is an act of war...unfortunately Japan is forbidden from declaring war on anybody do to their Constitutional constraints.

    The real tragedy of the situation is how understrength we are now after the Soviet Union collapsed. Despite having the most highly motivated, best equiped Military in the world, we're understrength. 8 years of Clinton who hated the Military, and Rumsfeld's continued policies of troop strength reductions and base closures...we are not prepared for a conventional war with another Nation. Not without a draft...

    I'll use the Marine Corps for illustrative purposes...in 1983 when I graduated from Highschool the USMC was 400,000 strong. Now it's one fourth of that...

    That's why the Army has raised it's enlistment age to 42 years of age...if Bush is going to maintain his interventionist foreign policy at all, he needs an Army large enough to facilitate it. I'm not fully understanding why Bush has kept Rumsfeld around up to now...and let him run amok trying to close bases during a terrorist insurgency.

    On the flip side to all of the above...we have the American broadcast media. Most people are not that bright or capable of independant thought and are easily swayed. There's your main audience of broadcast journalism... The news everynight, right about supper time will give you an update of KIA numbers, show clips of combat designed to make our Military to look like they're fighting a war of futility that they can't possibly win. Ever since the start of the Iraqi invasion, they've been broadcasting in the "Vietnam mode." They've even found the Iraqi version of "Maylai" with an updated version of "Philip Caputo." The media have been spectacularly successfull in sapping America's will to fight.

    Are we ready to go "toe to toe" with Iran or North Korea?

    Bush supporters flame me all you want...but you all cannot deny or despute what I've stated.

    If the Democrats take the House in November, nothing will change...it will get worse. If they take the Excecutive, it's all over.
     
  15. CCWMAN

    CCWMAN member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    31
    WE NEED TO STOP KIM HARD RIGHT NOW!

    Hello I'm a New Member,
    I think we need to send a message to both North Korea rogue President Kim and to China by doing what both former Secretaries of Defense Eagleberger and Asheley(George H.W. Bush & Billy Clinton's Administrations) recommended-BLOW THE DANG THING UP ON THE LAUNCH PAD BEFORE THEY GET THE CHANCE TO STRIKE US-PERIOD! When are we gonna stop screwing around and take a hardline stance for our Country's sake?:banghead:
     
  16. GoRon

    GoRon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,495
    Location:
    west burbs of Chicago
    Actions belie the words.

    The Clinton Administration gave them technology for unkempt promises. There was no strong Clinton response to N Korea, he sent Madam Albright there and came away with nothing.

    In defense of President Clinton, his attempts to appease the rogues of the world did us all a service.

    If you didn't take the deal Clinton was willing to offer it was obvious you weren't really willing to deal. Made the job of this administration easier. They can with a clear conscience set our conditions for being considered friend or foe.
     
  17. ctdonath

    ctdonath Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,618
    Location:
    Cumming GA
    Since this thread attracted a bunch of new members, may I suggest:
    Those new here would be wise to spend some time observing the tone, protocol, topics and style of this board. Just kinda helps everything go more smoothly, friendly, and fun.
     
  18. k_semler

    k_semler member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    200
    Location:
    Democratic People's Republic of Washington
    Here's thier official side of the story as published by KCNA. As you know, KCNA is the official, (and only), media source in the DPRK. All media in the DPRK is KCNA. http://www.kcna.co.jp/index-e.htm

     
  19. Geno

    Geno Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    15,741
    Let them launch it--OVER CHINA!

    Do they have a right to defense? Yes.

    Do they have a right to test-fire defensive systems? Yes.

    Do they have the right to "aim a big gun at us"? No.

    Do we have the right to preempt the missile potentially reaching the U.S.A.? Yes--if it launches in our direction.

    Solution 1: Turn on the missile defense system (untested as it may be). Position our nuke subs as -close-as possible. Blow it out of the sky if it comes in our direction or over our alies. Declare war if it violates our airspace.

    Solution 2: Let them launch their missile over China. Then, we know that there is nothing dangerous to us aboard. Seems a simple solution.

    Closing thought: I am SO GLAD that I am not the one responsible for making the decisions in this case.

    Doc2005
     
  20. Mannlicher

    Mannlicher Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,437
    Location:
    North Central Florida and Miami Florida
    Whats the commotion?

    You can learn a lot from reading history. Google the Korean War, for example.
     
  21. Serendipity

    Serendipity member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Messages:
    99
    Either Nick's writing tongue-in-cheek, or his view and understanding of the Real World are severely lacking and immature. I don't think we should invade N. Korea; taking their missile out with a cruise missile seems like a pretty good plan to me. Others have posted the adult-thinking answers to the threadstarter's questions, so I won't belabor those points.

    The analogies to Pearl Harbor are invalid, of course.
     
  22. ctdonath

    ctdonath Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,618
    Location:
    Cumming GA
    North Korea is the pesky little kid that just won't stop screaming insults at people, telling people others are out to get him, and threatening to do violent things while on the verge of doing so. Most people just learn to ignore him most of the time, doing something only when he really is on the verge of harming someone. When someone does try to stop him, he screams hysterically and throws a temper tantrum. This leaves the adults in an uncomfortable position of trying to contain him while ignoring him, and occasionally having to haul him off.

    What NK says is pretty much irrelevant, as there is a constant (and I do mean non-stop continuous) stream of threats, posturing, insults, accusations, etc. against the rest of the world. South Koreans, being at most risk, only roll their eyes and snort when Americans point out the horrible threats NK makes.

    It's only when they start doing something potentially dangerous that anyone takes NK seriously. Having an ICBM fueled & on the launch pad is serious. Blowing it up there, however, would not go over well as doing so would give the snotty kid a reason to really let loose (and NK could destroy Seoul in about a half hour, right now).
     
  23. shermacman

    shermacman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,751
    Wow. Dude, I think your problem is right there in that sentence. Li'l Kim is not just like us. He is evil, we are not. He presides over a slave state, ours is at least nominally a Constitutional Republic. For better or worse, our people wallow in the fat of self-consumption. His people are starving to death.
     
  24. Desertdog

    Desertdog Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,980
    Location:
    Ridgecrest Ca
    I think that his ICBM would make a very good test target for our Anti-ICBM arms. Blow them out of the sky and then let them wonder what went wrong.:evil:
     
  25. pablo45

    pablo45 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    544
    NK need to be stopped. I feel very unconfident that anyone has any onions to do the job. What alot of people keep ignoring is that the rest of the world is our enemy. Maybe it is my mentallity that makes people hate us but how can we really trust other countries when most of the time we can not even trust our own. We dont know if one day the government is going to try to take our home one day to the next. We were attacked and we still can not find the people who are responsible for that. This is america we should be taking care of our own instead of helping out those who can help themselves. I love this country and i love my neighbors but i watch them very closely. If NK is planning an attack we will not know until it is too late. Yes we can crush them but do we have to lose precious american lives waiting for them to quit acting like children. Kim is exactly what he is in team america a spoiled little brat who thinks he is some sort of god born under the right stars. I hope our president or the next really shows the rest of the world what america is capable. I really hope we take care of the power hungry, no girl getting, nerdy little,high school wedgey getting little sissy. Thanks for letting me vent
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice