Israel is a democracy, as is India. Pakistan is not. I would always trust a democracy over a dictatorship, any day, and frankly so should you.spare ribs said:
North Korea conducts first nuclear test
- Thread starter kkcbl
- Start date
We should send in Bono and the U2 boys on the back of their last album.golden_blunder said:
It's a shame people support North Korea having nukes...it seems to me some are just blinded by their hatred of US foreign policy - which is a different issue altogether.
Just a quick reminder that North Korea is a Stalinist tyranny responsible for the starvation and malnutrition of its own citizens. It wants nukes for continuation of this policy and more importantly to hold hostage its neighbours.
Just a quick reminder that North Korea is a Stalinist tyranny responsible for the starvation and malnutrition of its own citizens. It wants nukes for continuation of this policy and more importantly to hold hostage its neighbours.
Frankly I don't trust any country that has the bomb, neither should you.nickm said:
Being a 'democracy' doesn't mean you'll do the right thing.
Apparently North Korea got their technology from Pakistan, but I don't hear any 'democracies' calling for action against them. It's said South Africa (when it was apartheid run) got their technology from Israel.
I dont support anybody having nukes. I think its rich that countries with nukes are telling other countries they cant develop them and I find it hard to understand that the only country who has used them in active combat is leading the band of hypocrites.Sultan said:
point taken, can admit that I merely read the first line.Grinner said:
That's how I feel too.Stick said:
Do you believe that Democracies are beyond corruption?nickm said:
It's very much my line of thinking, my second post suggested the world powers should open up a dialogue to rid the world of nuclear weapons.Stick said:
Both democracies and tyrants have made disastrous mistakes in their foreign policies...Stick said:
No!Stick said:
But I know which I would prefer...
Yes I agree here and maybe they could use their combined knowledge to make nuclear power safer and cleaner as our fossil fuels get more and more depleted.Sultan said:
I see your point. I'd agree the US didn't achieve their stated goals, that much is clear to anyone. The fact is that the US only has/had so much influence in the region. This was China's sphere, and they had the most influence on North Korea and they are not happy about Kim's actions. The most pissed off is probably Japan, we may now see them arm in accordance with MAD theory.nickm said:
There was never a military option in North Korea so Iraq has nothing to do with it, whatever anyone said at the time. It is disingenuous for the chattering classes to claim military action against North Korea would have been an option, particularly since they would have opposed that action on similar grounds as they have opposed the Iraqi action.nickm said:
nickm said:
Hilarious.
You really are as retarded as you seem, aren't you?ellie brown said:
Hilarious.
jasonrh said:
So you think elections are free in the US.
Who's the retarded one?
last time I voted there I had to pay...Grinner said:
no wait...that was for sex...nevermind
Clearly the US is under the dictatorial control of the scheming name-changing Nazi-Jews.Grinner said:
No. But I'd rather live in a western democracy, even with all its flaws, than anywhere else.Stick said:
It's one thing to hope the world could be nuke free. It's another thing entirely to make a dumb moral equivalence between nukes under democratic control, and those under the control of dictators. And this charge of hypocrisy is a teenaged nonsense.Stick said:
No, but it does at least mean that whatever the thing is to be done, usually has to have broad support.spare ribs said:
Cynical nonsense.ellie brown said:
Hilarious.
"Over half of Europeans think Israel poses the "biggest threat to world peace," according to a controversial poll commissioned by the European Commission. "(2003)
jasonrh said:
Supreme Court Justices decided the outcome a few years back.
Not exactly democratic.
We did have such a thing, it was called the Non Proliferation Treaty and not one of these numbskulls (not you) has bothered to castigate North Korea for breaking it. Instead, they'd rather make lazy statements about 'hypocrisy'. Unbelievable.Sultan said:
what a comeback!ellie brown said:
Hilarious.
I'm glad we have you here to clear up such issues.Grinner said:
Here I was, a Floridian and an attorney, and I was mistakenly led to believe that the USSC declared that any further RERERERECOUNTS, using DRAMATICALLY DIFFERING STANDARDS than ever used before, and ONLY IN DEMOCRATIC COUNTIES and continually redone AFTER THE LEGAL DEADLINE FOR CERTIFICATION violated due process.
And silly me, I thought that part of the decision was 7-2. The remedy of an immediate cessation of further counts was the only part of the decision that was 5-4. Two members of the court wanted the in-progress rerererecounts to continue.
You see, only when the left is involved can I have a civil rights violation against me remedied by a court, and this means suddenly we live in a Jewish Neo-Con Dictatorship.
No count ever gave Gore a statewide lead. No unofficial count ever did this either.
Florida state law mandates a manual recount, which was held. Counties at their discretion could do one further count before certifying the results. Once the deadline for certification (a month after the election) had passed, Florida had a legal duty to certify the results given after multiple counts continued to verify the same result.
Continued re-re-re-re-counting, using post hoc made-up standards which suddenly differed in each county, and only in Democratic counties, violated due process.
Democracy was preserved, even while your hate-filled friends tried to trample over it and violate the rights of millions of Floridians.
But as long as you have a catchphrase, you'll continue in your assault on truth, democracy, and logic.
1960 election was as rigged as they come.
How do you explain that one?
How do you explain that one?
People are shutting their eyes to the reality of the situation. I would not put it past Kim to use it as a first strike offensive weapon...it's potentially catastrophic for the region and the world - another problem could very well be NK selling secrets to anyone with money - we know it's in serious need of finances.
what´s the date of your next departure?ellie brown said:
Hilarious.
Sultan said:
WHAT????? ......It's bad enough these nutters havin 'em, without other nutters gettin their paws on them too!Stuff the Goat said:
Read my post again Goatie...
No doubt - but a failing of the policy itself, or its execution? Your view would appear to indicate the latter - and I would agree with that in so far as the US should clearly - by some means - have been aiming to avert this type of situation and ease the atmosphere of brinkmanship developing in North Korea in particular... but where to start? Certainly not by making heavy-handed commitments like those in that speech, and not even by renouncing the regime publicly as part of an axis of evil. All of this was just garnering support for the war in Iraq, and didn't help matters one jot. The only way was clearly through China, and I still think the US has been incredibly poor at fostering relations there. The whole idea that the US could somehow deliver on such a policy objective is kind of silly when you think about it - it's clearly in no position to do so on its own, and can only engage for the long term by diplomacy. Such an objective should have been stated in much softer terms, and perhaps could have been were it not for Iraq. A catalogue of errors, it seems, though it's hard to know whether things would be any better if things had been played differently. Kim is pretty mad.nickm said:
Fairness and hypocrisy are nothing to do with it. We're not talking about access to AIDS drugs here. It's nuclear weapons - as few countries as possible should be allowed to have them. Especially crackpot countries like North Korea.Stick said:
Pakistan and Israel were not permitted to develop weapons, as members of some club. They did it secretly. In both cases, the Americans were far from happy about it, the alliance with Israel notwithstanding.
Dictatorial nutters who would rather spend what little cash they had on developing nukes when they can't even feed their people concern me greatly. That sort of fecked up logic doesn't fill me with confidence that NC wonlt use the weapons offensively.
The only worrying thing on this forum is that some nutters actually expected Bush to stop them from acquiring wmds
North Korea are even more of a concern than India, Israel or Pakistan. It's almost a given that they will start selling nukes to the highest bidder - after all, they're already selling massive quantities of drugs and weapons to the highest bidder.Plechazunga said:
And to anyone that claimed US military action in NK would've stopped them from acquiring nukes, you're off your rocker. China would've stepped in - just as they did last time round, leading to World War III.
I am not making that claim, but I am making the claim that Iraq has weakened the US's bargaining position by taking the possible use of US force off the table.Stamford Bridge said:
US force was never an option in the first place. Kim and co. know that any possible invasion would've been strongly opposed by China and even South Korea (who, crazilly enough, think their Sunshine Policy can one day lead to 're-unification' with the North).nickm said:
With a 1-million man army and another 1.5 million army next door in the form of their Chinese allies, stopping the North from obtaining nukes via military means was never an option, Iraq or not. And witness how the north threatening the UN against declaring strict sanctions scared the UN shitless? Even now, the "sanctions" the UN are trying to impose are empty threats. Who the feck in North Korea uses luxury items?
If there was any hope in stopping north korea from getting nukes, it was imposing crippling sanctions 10 years ago, or else in an extremely ambitious attempt to assasinate Kim Jr.