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.


- - - - -

north korea's 'pre emptive' strike against US


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

#31    shrooma

shrooma

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 3,985 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:10 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 07 March 2013 - 09:02 PM, said:

NK doesnt even claim there trying to develop nuclear energy power plants from what Ive read. All there talk is about building missiles and using them.
.
I started a thread about using thorium in reactors instead of uranium because of this very subject X, it's incredibly difficult to make weapons from thorium byproducts, so any country willing to undertake a new atomic power programme that DOESN'T use thorium,
has another agenda.....

"Get off your knees, the party's over."
.
-How do you sleep-
The Stone Roses.

#32    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:15 PM

View Postshrooma, on 07 March 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

.
I started a thread about using thorium in reactors instead of uranium because of this very subject X, it's incredibly difficult to make weapons from thorium byproducts, so any country willing to undertake a new atomic power programme that DOESN'T use thorium,
has another agenda.....

I don't think there was any doubt about their ambitions when it came to their nuclear plants. I mean, they didn't sign the NPT, which is basically like shouting 'We're building nukes. Nana, nana, na-na!'.

Just look at India, Israel and Pakistan.

(Edit - sorry for the caps, changed now).

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 07 March 2013 - 09:25 PM.


#33    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,903 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 07 March 2013 - 09:24 PM

View Postshrooma, on 07 March 2013 - 08:59 PM, said:

.
do you REALLY think north korea are developing long range missiles and nuclear weaponry so they DON'T use them??
seriously?

I did not say any such thing, so don't be so quick to put words in my mouth. What I said is that you cant cancel a ceasefire, and then sit there not firing. If they're currently "developing" long range missiles and plan to use them next year, then how is the cease fire "canceled" between now and then?

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

----Seraphina

#34    shrooma

shrooma

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 3,985 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:26 PM

View PostExpandMyMind, on 07 March 2013 - 09:15 PM, said:

Just look at India, Israel and Pakistan.
.
I don't understand ex,-
india is just about the only country committed to thorium development, so that pretty much makes their intentions clear when it comes to the difference between power and arms...??

"Get off your knees, the party's over."
.
-How do you sleep-
The Stone Roses.

#35    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:28 PM

View Postshrooma, on 07 March 2013 - 09:26 PM, said:

.
I don't understand ex,-
india is just about the only country committed to thorium development, so that pretty much makes their intentions clear when it comes to the difference between power and arms...??

The three countries I mentioned built nuclear reactors without signing the Non-Proliferation Treaty. They were all obviously after nukes because, if you're not, you don't have a problem signing it and allowing the IAEA in for inspections. We now know that all three (four including NK) have nukes.

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 07 March 2013 - 09:30 PM.


#36    shrooma

shrooma

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 3,985 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:30 PM

View PostStellar, on 07 March 2013 - 09:24 PM, said:



I did not say any such thing, so don't be so quick to put words in my mouth.
.
yes, you did.
.

What I said is that you cant cancel a ceasefire, and then sit there not firing. If they're currently "developing" long range missiles and plan to use them next year, then how is the cease fire "canceled" between now and then?
.
do you not understand the meaning of the word 'intent'....?

"Get off your knees, the party's over."
.
-How do you sleep-
The Stone Roses.

#37    shrooma

shrooma

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 3,985 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:40 PM

View PostExpandMyMind, on 07 March 2013 - 09:28 PM, said:



The three countries I mentioned built nuclear reactors without signing the Non-Proliferation treaty
.
that's a bit of a false opposition dude.
we signed the non-proliferation pact AFTER we'd developed nuclear weapons, but we've still kept building bigger and better ones (trident replacement anybody....), so just because india has nukes, it doesn't mean that they're not commited to building thorium reactors for power.....

"Get off your knees, the party's over."
.
-How do you sleep-
The Stone Roses.

#38    Himawari69

Himawari69

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 304 posts
  • Joined:06 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Harbor city

  • No matter how hard I grip the crown, in the end,it won't matter, because I will not die a queen

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:42 PM

My economics teacher showed us a film about North Korea, they really hate us Americans. And their dictatorship economy is like a prison, it's pretty sad for the innocent ones living there


#39    shrooma

shrooma

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 3,985 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:46 PM

View PostStellar, on 07 March 2013 - 09:39 PM, said:



Now how about you remove the stick that's lodged up your ass and drop the attitude?
.
hahahahahahahaha!
dummy.
you want to see 'attitude', then please, just give me a reason.
if you can't reason with a differing viewpoint, then maybe you'd be better off on twitter, answering justin beiber's tweets, instead of a discussion forum, clungedrip.

"Get off your knees, the party's over."
.
-How do you sleep-
The Stone Roses.

#40    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:48 PM

View Postshrooma, on 07 March 2013 - 09:40 PM, said:

.
that's a bit of a false opposition dude.
we signed the non-proliferation pact AFTER we'd developed nuclear weapons, but we've still kept building bigger and better ones (trident replacement anybody....), so just because india has nukes, it doesn't mean that they're not commited to building thorium reactors for power.....

I wasn't suggesting that they weren't building reactors for power. I think you're misunderstanding my meaning.

I was stating that when a state first goes nuclear and they are not signatories of the NPT, then it is usually safe to assume that they are building nukes - otherwise they would allow inspectors in. I didn't mention anything about India's thorium production. They may well be concentrating on thorium, but they still have nuclear weapons and they still do not allow the IAEA in to inspect their installations. I then used the three above countries as examples.

Not allowing the IAEA in and not signing the NPT when you are building nuclear reactors is a tell-tale sign that a country is looking to build nuclear weapons. This is how we knew that Korea was doing so (which was the original point being made that you replied to).

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 07 March 2013 - 09:53 PM.


#41    shrooma

shrooma

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 3,985 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:51 PM

View PostHimawari69, on 07 March 2013 - 09:42 PM, said:

My economics teacher showed us a film about North Korea, they really hate us Americans. And their dictatorship economy is like a prison, it's pretty sad for the innocent ones living there
.
hima, you can't base an opinon on just one source, you have to hear the tale from every perspective, and then decide how you feel.....

View PostHimawari69, on 07 March 2013 - 09:42 PM, said:

My economics teacher showed us a film about North Korea, they really hate us Americans. And their dictatorship economy is like a prison, it's pretty sad for the innocent ones living there
.
hima, you can't base an opinon on just one source, you have to hear the tale from every perspective, and then decide how you feel.....

"Get off your knees, the party's over."
.
-How do you sleep-
The Stone Roses.

#42    pallidin

pallidin

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,654 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

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

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:03 PM

Let's just "glass" NK and get it over with before they become even more of a threat. Wait, that would involve innocent civilians too.

At least take-out the leadership with one good bomb while they're congregated at some function.


#43    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,903 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 07 March 2013 - 10:05 PM

View Postshrooma, on 07 March 2013 - 09:46 PM, said:


.
hahahahahahahaha!
dummy.
you want to see 'attitude', then please, just give me a reason.
if you can't reason with a differing viewpoint, then maybe you'd be better off on twitter, answering justin beiber's tweets, instead of a discussion forum, clungedrip.

Clungedrip? Cute.

It's not your viewpoint I have a problem with, it's you strolling around here quoting something you clearly don't understand and acting as if you're the authority on the issue. No where did I state that I think NK is developing weapons without the intent of using them. My beliefs on their intent regarding their weapons development programs is completely irrelevant to what I said.

Now let me rephrase my post in a way that the simpleminded may understand: it is nonsensical for them to say they cancel the ceasefire, yet sit there and not conduct hostilities. Why is it nonsensical? Because there's been no change in the situation. If they're not firing still, then it's still a ceasefire and the "cancellation" of it was completely meaningless. The only way to "cancel" a ceasefire is to resume hostilities. I thought that was self evident. Do you understand now? Good.

If you need any further help understanding my "complex" and "confusing" posts, feel free to simply ask me for clarification next time instead of ranting and raving like a degenerate lunatic looking for a fight.



Edited by Stellar, 07 March 2013 - 10:07 PM.

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

----Seraphina

#44    Corp

Corp

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,951 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:08 PM

View PostExpandMyMind, on 07 March 2013 - 07:52 PM, said:

First, I wasn't blaming the U.S. for the current hostilities - I personally believe that both parties hold equal blame for the state of North Korea. All I was doing was explaining to Lib why the North Korean leadership is so paranoid towards the U.S., and I thought I had made that clear.

Second, that is not the 'way war was fought'. After WW2 the World brought about international treaties and laws to prevent the sort of massacre of that war; the sort of massacre that happened in Korea. The UN Charter was signed, the Geneva Convention, and the Declaration of Human Rights, all of which the U.S. were great advocates and signatories of. So the old, 'it was just the way things were' argument really doesn't hold up. Would you use the same argument for atrocities carried out during the Vietnam War, also? Of course the North were also guilty of crimes, but they were nowhere near the scale of devastation of the U.S. crimes, and more often than not, carried out against other soldiers, not entire towns and villages.

Third, the embargoes and sanctions have been a direct cause of North Korea's communism model. As soon as the Soviet Union fell - their greatest ally, along with China - they were punished for their communist model, then in the mid 90s the punishment had its greatest effect, with the mass famine they experienced. These two things are directly related and all part of documented record.

Fourth, I was not absolving North Korea's leaders of any responsibility for the way they have treated their civilians (again, I thought I had made this clear). I was simply explaining the reasons for their paranoia, and that it was directly related to the U.S. treatment of the country. This is not even controversial, Corp. Now, while I do believe that there is an element of 1984 in their policies, I do not believe it is so for the same reasons as Orwell put forward. Theirs is a totalitarian state born through paranoia and fear of the South and U.S.. The fear and paranoia is probably warranted, their actions are not.

I'm sorry Expand but it does sound like you're blaming the current situation on the US. How I read your argument was that the North Korean leaders are bad, but it's only because the US was mean to them. That somehow America is to blame for North Korea being nuke happy. It shifts the blame and give the North Korean leaders an out, and I feel that this is wrong to do. Yes America did nasty things during the war, just like all sides did, but that does not warrant the level of paranoia they've kept up over the past sixty years.

Your position about the bombings, which I want to make clear that I believe were horrible, is that this is why North Korea is crazy and paranoid. That their aggressive actions are only a result of the Korean War. However as I pointed out both Japan and Germany suffered similar bombing campaigns and you yourself have noted that during the Vietnam War other nations suffered under American military strikes. However none of them have reached the level of paranoia and international hostility that the North Koreans have. Japan and Germany are allies of the US and even Vietnam is willing to work with them. So I don't see how you can directly link the American bombing campaign with the current North Korean outlook. Plus during the war the South suffered almost as many civilian loses, 850,000 compared to 1.13 million, and they seem willing to accept the status quo. A far more reasonable explaination is that they're just mad the US won't let them conquer South Korea.

The sanctions were not a result of communism. If they were China and Vietnam and other countries who followed a communist model would have been hit would the same sanctions. They weren't. Thus communism didn't have a damn thing to do with the sanctions. Instead it was a result of North Korea starting up their nuclear program with the aim of creating weapons. The US even gave them a few nuclear reactors in the 90s in an effort to get them to stop their program. Hell the Sunshine Policy tried to breakdown some of the sanctions without asking the North to change their government. Plus these sanctions started coming into play while North Korea started getting rid of mentions to communism and moved more towards a military dictatorship. Communism didn't have thing one to do with the sanctions.

The famine was not the result of sanctions but rather the collapse of the Soviet Union (their main aid supplier), widespread flooding, and poor government policy. In 1993 China was proving them with 68% of their food imports, but then suffered their own shortage which resulted in a cut to aid. Of course the government didn't to much to help, trying to use propaganda instead of actual solutions. Then there was the flooding that not only destroyed crops but also destroyed emergency food reserves that were stored underground. A few years into the famine the North Koreans were being provided food aid from the UN, South Korea, the US, China, and other nations. So to pin blame for the famine on American sanctions is plain wrong. National disasters, the loss of key allies, and the North Korean government are to blame.

I agree that the North is massively paranoid of the US and the South. But claiming that paranoia is justifed? No, not at all. Both the US and South Korea have shown time and time again that they're willing to leave the North on its own and have made several attempts to improve relations. Plus with China watching over them North Korea has always had a strong ally to protect them. Yet despite this North Korea continues to make threats and has come close to restarting the war several times. They started the Korean War. They built tunnels under the DMZ to provide them with invasion routes. They have opened fire on South Korean forces several times. They are the aggressors in this case. They build up the paranoia against the US not because the Korean War left them deep cultural scars but because it suits their needs. It provides them with a big bad enemy that they use to justify their military spending. As a target for all their problems. As someone for their people to hate instead questioning why blind women are forced to work in the mines. Because thanks to the US they weren't able to conquer South Korea.

Edited by Corp, 07 March 2013 - 10:09 PM.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse...A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

#45    shrooma

shrooma

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 3,985 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:09 PM

View PostExpandMyMind, on 07 March 2013 - 09:48 PM, said:



I wasn't suggesting that they weren't building reactors for power. I think you're misunderstanding my meaning.
I didn't mention anything about India's thorium production. They may well be concentrating on thorium
(which was the original point being made that you replied to).
.
my mistake ex, sorry.
(it IS my birthday, and the brandy has been flowing like.. erm.... wine, since dinnertime.....

"Get off your knees, the party's over."
.
-How do you sleep-
The Stone Roses.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users