Fucking noodle niggers.
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
Saltah'na
Chinese Canadian, or 75% Commie Bastard.
Member # 33
posted
"Wow, some people actually backed me up. I waited a while to post a response to see if anyone else interpreted Fo2's comment as I did."
I actually agree with Liam's analysis.
If negotiation is on the menu in this case, then we have a serious double standard here. It's obvious that Kim is resorting to blackmail and extortion to achieve his means. Which, to me, makes him worse than Saddam. And the bigger threat.
"North Korea is too risky, bomb Iraq."
BTW: I believe it was UM who implied that NK was not a threat.
-------------------- "And slowly, you come to realize, it's all as it should be, you can only do so much. If you're game enough, you could place your trust in me. For the love of life, there's a tradeoff, we could lose it all but we'll go down fighting...." - David Sylvian FreeSpace 2, the greatest space sim of all time, now remastered!
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
NK has been rattling their saber since the end of the conflict, so it is kind of a known thing, SH rattled his saber and gassed his own people, the Iranians before hand, and invaded Kuwait, making him the bigger threat to the oil supplies.
A semi side thought, would the UN be able to react to an invasion of SK in a timely manner, or would the whole thing continue being a sham?
-------------------- "You are a terrible human, Ritten." Magnus "Urgh, you are a sick sick person..." Austin Powers A leek too, pretty much a negi.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Gee whiz, I'm confused--is this the UN that authorized us to fight in Korea in 1950? or authorized Bush I to launch Gulf War I? Is this the UN that's peacekeepers have helped to keep warring countries at bay? Is this the same one who's organizations has helped bring relief to poorer countries? But when they fail to authorize an exteremely unpopular war, they are called a sham. The UN is not a sham, and yes, it would condemn an invasion of SK as soon as it could.
Saltah'na
Chinese Canadian, or 75% Commie Bastard.
Member # 33
posted
A case for invasion for NK would probably hold up to less scrutiny than Iraq. The only obstacle would be China.
"making him the bigger threat to the oil supplies."
So is that what really counts here? No wonder why we aren't giving NK the same treatment.
-------------------- "And slowly, you come to realize, it's all as it should be, you can only do so much. If you're game enough, you could place your trust in me. For the love of life, there's a tradeoff, we could lose it all but we'll go down fighting...." - David Sylvian FreeSpace 2, the greatest space sim of all time, now remastered!
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote: UN that authorized us to fight in Korea in 1950? or authorized Bush I to launch Gulf War I? Is this the UN that's peacekeepers have helped to keep warring countries at bay? Is this the same one who's organizations has helped bring relief to poorer countries?
This is also the UN that dragged out the war in Korea, that didn't authorise the removal of Hussein in 1991 but authorized 12 years of ultimately-pointless sanctions, whose 'peacekeepers' performed so wonderfully in Rwanda, (and Somalia, and Yugoslavia). And who don't pay their parking tickets.
The UN has it's good points and its bad points, but it is NOT the nigh-infallible, unbiased, democratic, Round Table of nations some make it out to be.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
It was the UN's fault that Hussein wasn't removed from power? Nothing to do with that Bush fellow, you know, not this Bush but that Bush, the one who being Republican could do no wrong?
Holy fucking myopia.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
It's Bush I's fault in that he made the mistake of building a "Coalition" for Gulf War I.
The biggest price paid for the creation of that Coalition was a compromise which watered down the goals of the military action to "merely" doing that, rather that effecting immediate regime change within Iraq.
Holy fucking amnesia.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
All I am saying is...the UN is not an organization that should be disbanded or disregarded because it failed to authorize this war. It could have prevented the genocide in Rwanda in 1994 and could've stopped the Serbian ethnic cleansing, but who can say it should be disregarded now?
posted
I can feel my brain's being sucked out of my head, reading a lot of the responses to this thread. Some of ya'll don't seem to do more than catch the talking heads on FOX "News". "Fair and balanced" my sphincter....
Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
