Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Is North Korea really a problem?


imrunningthismonkeyfarm
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, and then said:

You can be really tiresome, man.  MY mission (speaking rhetorically of the US) is to stop a threat against citizens here that have done nothing to those children OR their parents.  You have bought in totally to the idea that America is the root cause of all evil in the world or at least, we're guilty ENOUGH that we don't even have a right to self -defense.

Not at all I just think bush#43 altered the meaning of self defense and our nation has been less safe as a result - in other words I dont believe that what you are calling for is actually self defense. 

Just now, and then said:

Here's an exercise for ya, how about they leave us the frig alone?

You do realize the incredible irony in that statement right? We're bombing people who live in near poverty who the vast majority of dont stand a chance of getting over here to harm us, all the while creating future generations of people to hate America in the process. 

Just now, and then said:

 I know little of you but I assume that if somebody started shoving you around in a public place, you'd stand up for yourself to make them stop - or do I mistake your resolve?  I get sick of hearing citizens in this country finding fault, ALWAYS, with America first.

Yes I am a fighter. As a result of that however I have learned when defense is needed and when it isnt. Trash talking isnt shoving someone around (referring to N. Korea) hell if you dig beyond the headlines you'll find the vast majority of what NK has said has been preceded b

Just now, and then said:

Tell me, farmer, when these disaffected "children" begin blowing up buses or church services or shopping malls, will you be as protective of their motivations?

 I don't understand your position here. Is it just that they're muslims so you're convinced theyre gonna be terrorists? All im arguing for is some common sense. What we're doing isnt working, its clear the war on terror has made exactly nobody's life better or safer - ok well besides the folks getting rich off of it and the politicians who use it to get elected. 

Just now, and then said:

 'cause I gotta tell ya, that ain't going down too well in this country.  You and others here can think of me as a redneck if you like, couldn't possibly care less, but redneck or no, in this part of flyover country we LOVE our nation.  Faults and all.  And a man that speaks out for an enemy that is killing Americans, IN America, isn't going to like the responses he'll receive.  Maybe it's different in your little part of heaven.  I'd bet that's not nearly as true as you expect, though.

I actually live in a quite right wing town. I love my nation as much as the next guy , im just not willing to put nationalism over humanity. 

Edited by Farmer77
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The irony practically rings the bells of freedom o'er there ...

~

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, and then said:

 You have bought in totally to the idea that America is the root cause of all evil in the world

Wow, talk about taking things to the extreme. I don't think anyone here is saying this. Why do your types always take things to the extreme and not focus on what is actually being said and actually, you know, THINK about things instead of knee jerk emotional reactionary rhetoric?

 

2 hours ago, and then said:

we're guilty ENOUGH that we don't even have a right to self -defense

Nobody is saying we do not have a right to self-defense. Nobody with a brain was against America going after the Al Qaeda after what they did to us on 9/11. However, Saddam was not threatening the US, yet we went after him and invaded Iraq and in the process lost our moral standing in the world and WE DO share blame for the chaos that is happening over there now. The best defense is a good offense, I get it, but the military should be the option of last resort, not the first option we use. Farmer is right, if we bomb them indiscriminately and kill masses of civilians as collateral damage we are no longer defending ourselves, we are hurting ourselves, we are like he said proving to them that they are right about us and to them, attacking us is them defending themselves against us further attacking them. This is a perfect example of 'an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind". We are fools if we think the current approach is going to solve any of the problems, and indeed make them worse!

 

2 hours ago, and then said:

dren" begin blowing up buses or church services or shopping malls, will you be as protective of their motivations?

I sure would not be 'protective of their motivations', they are the ones who CHOOSE to act destructively, but what you are saying here is that an impoverished people who have been exploited and trampled on decades by dictators and brainwashed by religious extremists should just keep being bombed and bombed and bombed indefinitely by us, because somehow that is going to magically change everything? No, you are just afraid to do what really needs to be done, it is easier to just drop bombs then do what really needs to be done and that is educate them, destroy the extremism ideology from the roots of it up. We are just burning the leaves on the tree with our bombs brother, the tree still stands, the roots run deep. We are at war with an ideology, with an idea, and bombs alone are not going to eliminate that. Indeed, we see it already, this extremist ideology spreading like a cancer to Europe, to the West, all over the world. What are you going to do? Bomb everyone? You see every problem as a nail and think that the only way to solve anything is with a hammer. Oh how wrong you are.

2 hours ago, and then said:

Maybe it's different in your little part of heaven.  I'd bet that's not nearly as true as you expect, though.

Ghandi ended the British rule of India without firing a single shot. Force is NOT always the answer and indeed violence only begets more violence. But you are too small minded to understand that, clearly.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

North Korea IMO will never attack any country. The rhetoric is for the consumption of internal audience and to keep the regime legit in citizens and military eyes. The major concern is the proliferation of this technology to other states or on black market. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully we'll get some insight into the future after todays meeting at the White House :

Entire US Senate to descend on White House for N. Korea briefing

The Trump administration has asked every member of the US Senate to meet at the White House on Wednesday for a briefing on North Korea, in a rare and unusual move, amid mounting tensions with Pyongyang.

All 100 senators have been asked to attend the Wednesday briefing, which will be conducted by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Joseph Dunford, White House spokesman Sean Spicer said on Monday.

The briefing will take place at 3:00pm local time on Wednesday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

I actually live in a quite right wing town. I love my nation as much as the next guy , im just not willing to put nationalism over humanity. 

Whoa, hold up here. 

How is one forced to make a choice like that? :o

 

Humanity, meaning the Human Race, right? This Nation is made up of Humans too, called Americans, and I can tell you in all seriousness, if we don't look out for our own interests, let alone our lives, nobody else will. 

Not nobody.

North Korea may not have missiles that can reach the lower 48 states, but Hawaii is in range and upwards of a million Americans live there. If I were one of them, I would be scratching my head about this debate, bigtime. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AnchorSteam said:

Whoa, hold up here. 

How is one forced to make a choice like that? :o

 

Humanity, meaning the Human Race, right? This Nation is made up of Humans too, called Americans, and I can tell you in all seriousness, if we don't look out for our own interests, let alone our lives, nobody else will. 

Not nobody.

North Korea may not have missiles that can reach the lower 48 states, but Hawaii is in range and upwards of a million Americans live there. If I were one of them, I would be scratching my head about this debate, bigtime. 

Well that post kinda covered the US's actions overseas in general. Most of my family lives in AK which would most likely fall within the range of kims nukes as well, hell im not far from California either which of course would be the next step technologically. 

Im not saying dont defend ourselves, i just dont see the case for self defense against Korea or Syria at this point. Again Koreas rhetoric has all been about their response should the west attack, its been defensive, not offensive. 

I think the bush doctrine has made America and the world less safe. To continue to follow it is simply folly IMO

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I think the bush doctrine has made America and the world less safe. To continue to follow it is simply folly IMO

 

On THAT we can agree.

Keep using that term if you want Trump to do something different, he ain't no fan of that clan! :lol:

And no, I don't think Alaska is a target. Half a million people spread over a landmass that is simply gigantic.... no, not unless they could target a pipeline or something equally tiny. 

Something the size of Oahu, on the other hand.... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AnchorSteam said:

On THAT we can agree.

Keep using that term if you want Trump to do something different, he ain't no fan of that clan! :lol:

And no, I don't think Alaska is a target. Half a million people spread over a landmass that is simply gigantic.... no, not unless they could target a pipeline or something equally tiny. 

Something the size of Oahu, on the other hand.... 

My thinking of AK as a target is just that its size makes it easily hittable, you're probably right though Oahu would have a much bigger impact.

Now big picture, if NK was working in concert with someone like China or Russia than hitting the bases in central AK would be a great way to prepare for an invasion. AK is extremely strategically located as it relates to over the pole operations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2017-04-23 at 3:30 PM, Merc14 said:

How long until he nukes S. Korea?  Are you willing to allow that to happen?  If we don't back up S. Korea and Japan then teh Chinese wioll simply allow Kim to solve their problem fro them.  And just what problems are so serious in the US that we should ignore a probable catastrophe 

I never said not to back up SK. China has put 150 thousand soldiers on the NK border to keep them in check.  Personaly I don`t think Kim what ever could open a can of pepsi. However he does make for a good boogie man.   Oh and if you havn`t noticed the US to the rest of the world looks like it`s on the verge of civil war.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Silver Thong said:

 China has put 150 thousand soldiers on the NK border to keep them in check.  

Thats one trump friendly interpretation. The other (and the one being reported from S. Korea) is that they're largely medical personnel preparing for 20 something million refugees to come flooding their borders. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Farmer77 said:

Thats one trump friendly interpretation. The other (and the one being reported from S. Korea) is that they're largely medical personnel preparing for 20 something million refugees to come flooding their borders. 

look around the world, protecting borders needs to happen. Hell Canada is now being invaded by so called migrants, refuges, immigrants ect from the U.S. Im all in for keeping our homeland safe but to provoke an attack is stupid.   Im not a nice guy so I will say I would shoot any illegal crossing the border, ok maybe not but emmmmm

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Silver Thong said:

look around the world, protecting borders needs to happen. Hell Canada is now being invaded by so called migrants, refuges, immigrants ect from the U.S. Im all in for keeping our homeland safe but to provoke an attack is stupid.   Im not a nice guy so I will say I would shoot any illegal crossing the border, ok maybe not but emmmmm

My personal interpretation is that Xi left Mara Lago convinced trump is going to do something to spread that same joy to China and decided to put troops in line to contain the inevitable human fallout. 

Edited by Farmer77
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Farmer77 said:

My personal interpretation is that Xi left Mara Lago convinced trump is going to do something and decided to put troops in line to contain the inevitable human fallout. 

 I somewhat agree with that, but the U.S. has a reputation of causing trouble when none is required.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But there actually is a problem...and it would be a big problem with or without the USA.

I refer you to what I said on page #1 of this thread:

To answer the question: Is North Korea really a problem? first answer this question: Is an utter lunatic with nuclear weapons really a problem?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24 April 2017 at 7:35 PM, Merc14 said:

The cold war was one long shitstorm and we survived that.  WWII was the mother of all shitstorms, we came damn close to losing that one because we weren't ready, and we are still here.  The only thing that can defeat us, is us, and poor decisions at the top like allowing criminal countries access tio nuclear weapons just to kick the political can down the road.  The shitstorm you are complaining about started the day Clinton took his foot off Kim Sr's neck and an even bigger one started boiling the day Obama gave Iran $150B and a timeline to nuclear weapons.  

You know what,  I have spent my entire adult life listening to guys like you tell guys like me how our political philosophy will be the end of us all and I have been part of the end of the USSR, Hussein ejected from Kuwait and stopping the genocide in BH.  Every single time I was told that we would lose or suffer tremendous losses and therefore shouldn't challenge the thugs and every single time we won.  You'd think sooner or later you'd start questioning your philosophy, that is batting zero, but nope, same old arguments and same old trembling about the US flexing its muscle.  

Allowing these thugs to fester and metastasize is what is dangerous.   They can not be reasoned with and do not operate logically and they can only be stopped by starving them out or blowing them up.  Let's see what China can do.  Maybe they will get the guy assassinated but I guarantee that China would do nothing if they weren't threatened as well.

BTW, saw the admission of error up there and won't use that one again.  Been there and done that, none of us are perfect. :tu:   

Yes, you should be embarrassed because it was a very stupid post to make.  Factually incorrect in a BIG way.  Even this post is ignorant beyond comprehension and the fact you don't know why embarrasses you further but hey bud, you want to keep making yourself look stupid go right ahead,  I enjoy pointing it out and always stand back when an enemy is defeating himself. 

(Want to know why it is a very dumb post?  Here is a hint, legally, the UN is still at war with N. Korea  and we never bombed Syria until now)

Listen merc. Putting me down makes you look an ahole not a god. Ok It's a dumb post, I'm embarrassed and I look stupid but you say you're not standing back so what's the above? Do you know what you're writing? AND I'm the enemy by all accounts now ffs. Your waffle is annoying but I don't mind. There you go that's my insult back.

You've clearly misjudged me. I don't hate Americans though you're trying to portray me in that light. I was pointing out that America loves a war and that's obvious for all mankind to see. Trump wants to take out N Korea then Iran then what?

And I'll say it again.. How many wars/interventions (paint it how you like) have N Korea been in compared to the good old US of A  in the last 60 years?

You say legally but if no president ever gave authorisation to invade North Korea (which I believe to be the case) what are you talking about? Also, America didn't bomb Syria with the UK back in 2011? They called it the coalition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24 April 2017 at 7:36 PM, Bama13 said:

Are you saying that the US should not have been involved in the Korean War? That the US should only become involved in wars on their doorstep?

Exactly that. If ALL countries only used their weapons for defence then there wouldn't be any wars at all would there?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24 April 2017 at 8:59 PM, F3SS said:

Good thing we have that enormous military budget then!

Yh true but not funny even if it was tongue in cheek. And thinking about it, someone pointed out to Trump how important NATO was & the huge budget it has seeing how he's back peddled some what. Now NATO's great and so is China. 3 months ago China was a rapist & NATO was finished!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SNR said:

Listen merc. Putting me down makes you look an ahole not a god. Ok It's a dumb post, I'm embarrassed and I look stupid but you say you're not standing back so what's the above? Do you know what you're writing? AND I'm the enemy by all accounts now ffs. Your waffle is annoying but I don't mind. There you go that's my insult back.

You've clearly misjudged me. I don't hate Americans though you're trying to portray me in that light. I was pointing out that America loves a war and that's obvious for all mankind to see. Trump wants to take out N Korea then Iran then what?

Can only judge you by your words and they say America is the enemy so.....  

4 minutes ago, SNR said:

And I'll say it again.. How many wars/interventions (paint it how you like) have N Korea been in compared to the good old US of A  in the last 60 years?

They now have nuclear weapons, thanks to thinking like yours, and a madman is in charge and so are a threat to all of the region at the very least.  They have attacked, kidnapped and generally abused the south on countless occasions and kill their own people on an epic level.   Fine, we ave let the hermit kingdom fester for six decades but now he is firing missiles and threatening attacks on a regular basis and guys like you who preach wait and see are always the first to condemn for not doing anything after the tragedy has occurred.  

4 minutes ago, SNR said:

You say legally but if no president ever gave authorisation to invade North Korea (which I believe to be the case) what are you talking about? Also, America didn't bomb Syria with the UK back in 2011? They called it the coalition.

 Once again your ignorance rears its ugly head because the UN invaded the Korean peninsula, with a coalition of many countries, not just the US.  You want to be treated respectfully as you condemn the US while continuously illustrating your lack of knowledge regarding  the region.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lilly said:

To answer the question: Is North Korea really a problem? first answer this question: Is an utter lunatic with nuclear weapons really a problem?

Yes you bumped that one well Lilly.

9 nations have nuclear weapons.. Pakistan & Saudi Arabia (and the other 7) may be stable now but forever, I doubt it.

And it does have to be forever.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

kill their own people on an epic level.

Are we talking about N Korea still?

The Saudi's are barbaric and have a dreadful human rights record AND they have nuclear weapons.. What should America do about that then.. merc?

Its ok to behead women for adultery and sorcerers for what again? Magic. You do sound funny 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry merc the point I'm pushing is..

DOUBLE STANDARDS 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, SNR said:

Yes you bumped that one well Lilly.

9 nations have nuclear weapons.. Pakistan & Saudi Arabia (and the other 7) may be stable now but forever, I doubt it.

And it does have to be forever.

I was attempting to make a point by repeating myself.

 Keep in mind the 9 nations that currently do have nuclear weapons do not have leaders with the mentality of Kim Jung Un. Nor have they threatened to use them to nuke the United States.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, SNR said:

Yes you bumped that one well Lilly.

9 nations have nuclear weapons.. Pakistan & Saudi Arabia (and the other 7) may be stable now but forever, I doubt it.

And it does have to be forever.

Saudi Arabia does not have a nuclear arsenal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2017 at 2:36 PM, Bama13 said:

Are you saying that the US should not have been involved in the Korean War? That the US should only become involved in wars on their doorstep?

There's a big difference between coming to the defense of our friends like we did back then, and what we do today.   If I agree we should have fought in Korea it still doesn't justify anything we do today.    We don't wait for someone else to attack, WE ATTACK THEM FIRST.   

On what planet do we live where aggressors are perceived as good guys?   That's the most twisted logic ever.   Don't let your politics destroy your principle, or else Germany and Japan were the good guys in World War 2, North Korea was the good guy in Korean War 1, Saddam Hussein was the good guy when he invaded Kuwait (and Iran in case anyone didn't know) and so on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.