Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

N. Korea fires 2 short range missiles


  • Please log in to reply
110 replies to this topic

#46    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,813 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 16 March 2013 - 02:51 PM

View PostCoffey, on 16 March 2013 - 01:23 PM, said:

Ah yes this again.... Please show me where this was actually said, because even And then, the biggest PRO Israel supporter on this forum has never once posted the evidence showing this was said. So please post exactly where this was said. The only thing Iran said was that they won't take being attacked and will fight back with passion. They never mentioned attacking Israel once. If you listen to jsut one of Ahmajinedad's speaches you would know damn fine that is not what he thinks or wants. You would know damn fine he wants peace with all countries and all religions, he tlaks of holding hands and bringing a new age of peace. These speeches that the US don't even listen to, they leave the room an UN meeting when he talks. (which is rude as hell) You listen to much to western media propaganda.

Ahh, yes. The world is a nice and peaceful place outside of the borders of the US and Isreal. No one's mean. Not a single person. The US is the root cause of all evil in the world. :rolleyes:

http://www.guardian..../27/israel.iran

Not to mention that Iran funds and supports anti-Israel terrorist groups. You really think the "common sense" option for Isreal is to just ignor Iran and allow their enemy to get stronger? Thats not how the world works, buddy.


Quote

Yes they do. lol They threaten all Arab countries and Muslim countries.
Prove it.

Quote

They are commiting genocide right now and have been for a long time. They send soldiers to break go into Palestinian houses int he night and torture fmailies. I've seen it happening in video footage. They terrorise palestinian civilians with Tanks and helicopters etc. (Apaches etc) Armed with American wepaons.
Prove it. You're just too full of anti-western propoganda.




Quote

That's nto the point whatsoever. If the US put sanctions on Israel, they would also threaten the US.

Probably. They would at least no longer be allies, and the US would lose an ally of vital tactical importance by it, who otherwise will not ever harm the US. In NKs case, NK has been the US and SKs enemy since the 50s. Its illogical to think that SK and the US would just sit back and be ok with their enemy getting stronger.


Quote

If the US bullied Israel, Isreal would again threaten the US. If the US put warships in Israels region and had the crotch boasting shows it puts on in front of NK's face but aimed at Israel... Again Isreal would not be happy. Look at the bigger picture and all the facts please.

The US isnt a bully to NK. NK is a bully that made the wrong moves, and is suffering from the reprocussions from a country (and the world infact) that is stronger than them. Of course, you're judgement is too clouded to see that because the letters "US" is in your definition of "bully".


Quote

Israel is causing mass genocide right now as we speak and you compare to WW2? LOL Hilerious......

Right. When Israel starts burning palestinians, then we can talk.

How about instead of dodging my question, you answer it. Were the allies right to hamper the German weapons development programs in WWII?

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#47    Coffey

Coffey

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,671 posts
  • Joined:09 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norwich UK

  • "Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts." - Winston Churchill

Posted 16 March 2013 - 03:31 PM

View PostStellar, on 16 March 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:

Ahh, yes. The world is a nice and peaceful place outside of the borders of the US and Isreal. No one's mean. Not a single person. The US is the root cause of all evil in the world. :rolleyes:

http://www.guardian..../27/israel.iran

Not to mention that Iran funds and supports anti-Israel terrorist groups. You really think the "common sense" option for Isreal is to just ignor Iran and allow their enemy to get stronger? Thats not how the world works, buddy.

Hahaha, so the guardian... Yes that's not going to be biased. Also anyone with half a brain can see that was not said as a threat. He said it SHOULD be, not I will do it. LOL There is a huge difference, I also agree with him to an extent. Read the Talmud and educate yourself on what the Israel leaders beleive. You might learn something.

View PostStellar, on 16 March 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:

Prove it.


"We must expel Arabs and take their places."
-- David Ben Gurion, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.

"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs."
-- Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the 'Beasts,"' New Statesman, June 25, 1982.

"(The Palestinians) would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls."
-- Isreali Prime Minister (at the time) Yitzhak Shamir in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988

"If we thought that instead of 200 Palestinian fatalities, 2,000 dead would put an end to the fighting at a stroke, we would use much more force...."
-- Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, quoted in Associated Press, November 16, 2000.

"Israel may have the right to put others on trial, but certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial."
-- Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, 25 March, 2001 quoted in BBC News Online




View PostStellar, on 16 March 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:

Prove it. You're just too full of anti-western propoganda.
http://http://www.yo...c.1.qjztC9f3nzs

There thousands of videos proving it.


View PostStellar, on 16 March 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:

Probably. They would at least no longer be allies, and the US would lose an ally of vital tactical importance by it, who otherwise will not ever harm the US. In NKs case, NK has been the US and SKs enemy since the 50s. Its illogical to think that SK and the US would just sit back and be ok with their enemy getting stronger.

You do realise if the US tried to interfere in the "Prophecy" tIsrael would be problem.... The Orthodox Jews beleive every other race is sub human... These people run Israel.

View PostStellar, on 16 March 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:

The US isnt a bully to NK. NK is a bully that made the wrong moves, and is suffering from the reprocussions from a country (and the world infact) that is stronger than them. Of course, you're judgement is too clouded to see that because the letters "US" is in your definition of "bully".

Let me see now, so the US doesn't attack countries who try to sell oil/gas etc in other currencies? Oh wait they do... That's called bullying.

View PostStellar, on 16 March 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:

Right. When Israel starts burning palestinians, then we can talk.

How about instead of dodging my question, you answer it. Were the allies right to hamper the German weapons development programs in WWII?

Yes they where right, just like the US should take away Israels nukes. I made thta clear, but obviously you are the one who can't follow logic and see that Israel is similar to Nazi Germany.

Why would they need to burn bodies for it to be mass genocide? I thought bombing them, shooting them, torturing them etc because of their race was enough?! Obviously it's only genocide if they burn the bodies... Nice logic.. :whistle:

When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.

#48    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,813 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 16 March 2013 - 04:29 PM

Quote


Hahaha, so the guardian... Yes that's not going to be biased. Also anyone with half a brain can see that was not said as a threat. He said it SHOULD be, not I will do it. LOL There is a huge difference, I also agree with him to an extent. Read the Talmud and educate yourself on what the Israel leaders beleive. You might learn something.

:rolleyes: There's plenty of other links, but of course, you'll just dismiss them anyway.

Quote

"We must expel Arabs and take their places."
-- David Ben Gurion, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.

"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs."
-- Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the 'Beasts,"' New Statesman, June 25, 1982.

"(The Palestinians) would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls."
-- Isreali Prime Minister (at the time) Yitzhak Shamir in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988

"If we thought that instead of 200 Palestinian fatalities, 2,000 dead would put an end to the fighting at a stroke, we would use much more force...."
-- Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, quoted in Associated Press, November 16, 2000.

"Israel may have the right to put others on trial, but certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial."
-- Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, 25 March, 2001 quoted in BBC News Online

So because of this, Israel should'nt have nukes?

Quote

http://http://www.yo...c.1.qjztC9f3nzs

There thousands of videos proving it.

Rape and torture? I see none of that. What I see is that you have a naive view of war and the world.

Quote

You do realise if the US tried to interfere in the "Prophecy" tIsrael would be problem.... The Orthodox Jews beleive every other race is sub human... These people run Israel.

So because of this, Israel shouldn't have nukes?

Quote

Let me see now, so the US doesn't attack countries who try to sell oil/gas etc in other currencies? Oh wait they do... That's called bullying.

Read what I wrote. "The US isnt a bully to NK. NK is a bully that made the wrong moves, and is suffering from the reprocussions [...]"

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#49    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,813 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 16 March 2013 - 04:32 PM

Quote

Yes they where right, just like the US should take away Israels nukes. I made thta clear, but obviously you are the one who can't follow logic and see that Israel is similar to Nazi Germany.

So then it is logical for a country to try to prevent others from obtaining certain weapons! Excellent! Now we're getting somewhere.

So now why should the US be concerned about losing a strategic ally who is no threat to the US over nukes, but is completely wrong to try to prevent a country that they are technically at war with from obtaining nukes? Thats what this discussion is about.

Quote

Why would they need to burn bodies for it to be mass genocide? I thought bombing them, shooting them, torturing them etc because of their race was enough?! Obviously it's only genocide if they burn the bodies... Nice logic..

As much as I want to answer this ridiculous load of bs, this thread isnt about Israel and their actions. Its about the US and NK.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#50    pallidin

pallidin

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,411 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

  • "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 16 March 2013 - 04:39 PM

View Postand then, on 15 March 2013 - 07:27 PM, said:

NK needs to grow up and sit down at the table of nations or it needs to cease from being a nation. It is shameful what we've allowed to happen there all these years - those people being treated so inhumanely for so long.  If war ever did begin, I feel really badly for the people of Seoul.

Yep.

And the only reason they want re-unification with SK is to rape their resources, put the populace in poverty, expand their military, and make fat-boy and cohorts even fatter.

There it is, plain and simple.


#51    pallidin

pallidin

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,411 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

  • "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 16 March 2013 - 05:25 PM

Oh, and I would like to point-out that NK state-sponsors not only opium production, but also counterfeits US currency that is considered by the US Secret Service to be nearly undetectable. The USSS consider them "super bills".

In short, NK leadership are bonafide thugs.


#52    Sakari

Sakari

    tohi

  • Member
  • 12,025 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Safford, Arizona

  • Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Posted 16 March 2013 - 05:31 PM

View PostCoffey, on 15 March 2013 - 03:47 PM, said:

Well the thing is, if a big bully told you what to do..... Would you obey them or would you be really annoyed?

Cause the US keeps putting sanctions on them, the US puts sanctions on Iran as well. Do you know what thta does to the innocent people of those coun tries? People starve, their money becomes useless and their living conditions suffer.

Do you expect these countries to just sit and take that? I sure as hell wouldn't. So when you read these stories in the western media, remember that it's our goverments fault in the first place, these countries are being pushed and pushed until they hit back. You back an animal into the corner and it will fight back.



Yes that's what happens when a big bully country puts sanctions on another country.



The UN put the sanctions on, not just the US.

Our Wolf's Memorial Page

http://petsupports.com/a04/sakari.htm


#53    Coffey

Coffey

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,671 posts
  • Joined:09 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norwich UK

  • "Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts." - Winston Churchill

Posted 16 March 2013 - 05:42 PM

View PostSakari, on 16 March 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

The UN put the sanctions on, not just the US.

The US controls the UN... Otherwise the Un would be held accountable for war crimes. Seeing as the Un has bene used as a reason to cause more wars. The UN is just a war machine not a rela attempt at peace.

When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.

#54    sear

sear

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 429 posts
  • Joined:04 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Adirondack Park, NY

  • "A prudent question is one half of wisdom." William James

Posted 16 March 2013 - 05:44 PM

Quote

"China doesn't want to annex North Korea." C
China would have several options, each less desirable than the next.

Quote

"They already have a big problem with Koreans sneaking across the border looking for a better life." C
Yes.
China is about authoritarianism. It's about control. China is run by control-freaks.

And if their choice boiled down to China claiming sovereignty there, or the U.S., I think they'd choose the former.

AND, if China did claim sovereignty, that wouldn't necessarily require they open the border.
China could leave it shut for a few decades, until the mentally deficient generations died off.
It might be a burden, but:

- it would keep the Chinese politburo in control. They like that. &
- it would keep a U.S. friendly nation (SK, or the U.S.) off its border. They like that too.


#55    Coffey

Coffey

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,671 posts
  • Joined:09 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norwich UK

  • "Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts." - Winston Churchill

Posted 16 March 2013 - 05:50 PM

View PostStellar, on 16 March 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

So then it is logical for a country to try to prevent others from obtaining certain weapons! Excellent! Now we're getting somewhere.

So now why should the US be concerned about losing a strategic ally who is no threat to the US over nukes, but is completely wrong to try to prevent a country that they are technically at war with from obtaining nukes? Thats what this discussion is about.

Israel is a threat to every none Jew. So how is Israel not a threat?! Hence why it's hypocritical.

View PostStellar, on 16 March 2013 - 04:29 PM, said:

As much as I want to answer this ridiculous load of bs, this thread isnt about Israel and their actions. Its about the US and NK.

No it's about why the US has the right to make these sanctions and the reasonons behind it. Which does involve Israel.


View PostStellar, on 16 March 2013 - 04:29 PM, said:

:rolleyes: There's plenty of other links, but of course, you'll just dismiss them anyway.

None from non western media and none of them state he threatened Israel, they all state he said Israel shouldn't exist. Something a lot of normal people also beleive. Obviously you haven't read the Talmud.

View PostStellar, on 16 March 2013 - 04:29 PM, said:

So because of this, Israel should'nt have nukes?

So you think ac ountry led by a goverment that beleives beleives in destroying a race should be allowed nukes? If so you would have wanted Hitler to have nukes too?

View PostStellar, on 16 March 2013 - 04:29 PM, said:

Rape and torture? I see none of that. What I see is that you have a naive view of war and the world.

War? LOL No Israeli soldiers breaking into peoples houses at night and torturing them is not war.

View PostStellar, on 16 March 2013 - 04:29 PM, said:

So because of this, Israel shouldn't have nukes?

No a country who is religious fanatics should not have nukes. Not when they beleive ina prophecy of destruction that they are triyng to bring into existance. You wouldn't give a Fanatical extreme muslim a sucide jacket would you?! lol

When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.

#56    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,813 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 16 March 2013 - 06:32 PM

Quote

Israel is a threat to every none Jew. So how is Israel not a threat?! Hence why it's hypocritical.

Hypocritical? If your point of view is correct, maybe. But the thing is, the US isnt going around preventing just every country except Israel from obtaining nukes, it's mainly focused on the ones that are a threat to her and her allies.

I mean, look at it this way: If Person A is threatening to kill me, and my friend is threatening to kill Person B, I'm going to let Person B deal with my friend while I deal with Person A. Its not "wrong" per say.

Now, I agree with you in the ethical stance that countries should be held to the NPT, and "exceptions" should NOT be made. Having said that, the realistic situation is that countries do have to decide just who they should p*** off and alienate. Israel is, among other things, a strategic ally to the US. They are the USs foothold in the Middle East, and its not in the USs interest to lose this foothold. North Korea is a threat to the US and a select other number of countries, and so it's in the USs best interest to do whatever they can to prevent their enemy from hitting them.

I'm going to avoid quoting every sentence of the rest of your reply and just answer the rest with one quote:

Quote

No a country who is religious fanatics should not have nukes.

And that makes my point: There are justifiable reasons to prevent a country from obtaining nukes. That's been my point all along.



Let me explain to you my position from my perspective in a little more detail: I live in Canada and, by virtue of our proximity to the US and to our political ties, if the US is attacked by North Korea, it will impact Canada. Israel having nukes doesnt affect me. They're not going to attack the US, and so I'm not concerned with them. North Korea, since they can affect me, I'm concerned about and feel we should do what we must to weaken them.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#57    Sakari

Sakari

    tohi

  • Member
  • 12,025 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Safford, Arizona

  • Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Posted 16 March 2013 - 06:33 PM

View PostCoffey, on 16 March 2013 - 05:42 PM, said:

The US controls the UN... Otherwise the Un would be held accountable for war crimes. Seeing as the Un has bene used as a reason to cause more wars. The UN is just a war machine not a rela attempt at peace.



If your opinion were fact that would be all fine and dandy.....Sorry to say, your opinion is not true to the fact, not at all.




The structure of the United Nations

The structure of the United Nations is based around its charter. The United Nations Charter consists of 111 articles. These articles explain how the United Nations works.
The charter established six parts of the United Nations:
General Assembly Security Council Economic and Social Council Trusteeship Council International Court of Justice Secretariat
The General Assembly has the brief to discuss and decide on issues of international peace and security. All members of the United Nations are represented in the General Assembly. It can make recommendations to promote international peace; international economic and social co-operation and it can promote human rights. The General Assembly is expected to meet on a regular basis and when a vote is taken it needs a two-thirds majority for it to be passed.
The Security Council consists of eleven members. Five of these are permanent (USA, USSR, GB, China, France). The General Assembly appoints another six members who are non-permanent members. The Security Council is given the primary task by the United Nations of maintaining peace and security at an international level. Each member of the Security Council is given one vote and a vote of seven members is needed for action to be taken. All five permanent members have to agree with the course of action. The Security Council can recommend the use of a blockade or other financial impositions for any nation that is deemed as breaking international law. If these do not work, then the Security Council can call on the United Nations to use military force to enforce its will. This is the major difference to the League of Nations – the United Nations has the ability to enforce its decisions as each member state has to pledge to provide a military component dependent on its national wealth and capability.
The main task of the Economic and Social Council is to promote and improve the economic and social well-being of those living in the member states. This council deals with human rights and seeks to develop a greater understanding of cultures throughout the world. An improvement in world health is also in its remit. Article 57 gives a clear indication of the areas this council covers: health, education, economic, social and cultural issues and the promotion of the position of women in the world. Each member of the Council has one vote.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the main judicial body of the United Nations. All members of the United Nations are party to the International Court. The ICJ consists of 15 members and only two members come from the same country at any one time. All members of the United Nations have to agree to abide by the decisions of the ICJ.
The Secretariat comprises of a Secretary-General and it is the body that runs the United Nations. The Secretary-General is appointed by the General Assembly which receives recommendations from the Security Council. The Secretary-General is the United Nations’ chief administrative officer.
Since 1945, the United Nations has been involved as a peacekeeper in Iran and the Balkans, Indonesia, Palestine and the Middle East in general, Korea and the Congo.

Our Wolf's Memorial Page

http://petsupports.com/a04/sakari.htm


#58    sear

sear

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 429 posts
  • Joined:04 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Adirondack Park, NY

  • "A prudent question is one half of wisdom." William James

Posted 16 March 2013 - 06:57 PM

Quote

"There are justifiable reasons to prevent a country from obtaining nukes. That's been my point all along." S
I know of no precedent for it.
Since there was a thing called national sovereignty, the sovereign had the right to do as he / she / they pleased.

I understand the U.N. Security Council can point fingers, etc. etc.

Suppose the U.N. Security Council ordered President Obama to cut U.S. atmospheric CO2 emissions 40% by Dec. 31, 2014.

Do you think he'd be obliged to comply?

If the U.N. told Obama he had to get rid of his nukes, do you think he would have to comply?


#59    Sakari

Sakari

    tohi

  • Member
  • 12,025 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Safford, Arizona

  • Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Posted 16 March 2013 - 06:59 PM

View Postsear, on 16 March 2013 - 06:57 PM, said:

I know of no precedent for it.
Since there was a thing called national sovereignty, the sovereign had the right to do as he / she / they pleased.

I understand the U.N. Security Council can point fingers, etc. etc.

Suppose the U.N. Security Council ordered President Obama to cut U.S. atmospheric CO2 emissions 40% by Dec. 31, 2014.

Do you think he'd be obliged to comply?

If the U.N. told Obama he had to get rid of his nukes, do you think he would have to comply?



Yes, and Yes.

Do I think the UN would do either one....No, not unless there were good reason.

Our Wolf's Memorial Page

http://petsupports.com/a04/sakari.htm


#60    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,813 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 16 March 2013 - 07:05 PM

Quote

Since there was a thing called national sovereignty, the sovereign had the right to do as he / she / they pleased.

And theres also something called international relations, where one country deals with another for their best interests.

Quote

Suppose the U.N. Security Council ordered President Obama to cut U.S. atmospheric CO2 emissions 40% by Dec. 31, 2014.

Do you think he'd be obliged to comply?

No he wouldnt. And then if the UN wanted to punish the US for doing it, they could decide to cut trade with the US.

Quote

If the U.N. told Obama he had to get rid of his nukes, do you think he would have to comply?

They are saying "If you do this, we're going to do this in return." Repercussions. Are you saying the UN has to trade with NK?

Are you saying the US had to let the soviets install missile's in Cuba?

There are consequences for every action. The US feels that NK developing nukes is a threat to them and SK, and so the US is going to do what it can to minimize the threat.

Similarly, the world feels that NK is being too menacing and should not have nukes, hence they are taking measures to try to minimize the NK menace.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users