Renzatic on 30/3/2013 at 17:22
Quote Posted by Thief13x
Hmm, I hear lots of pundits say this, but as a 'buy American first' guy, I find it pretty difficult to find anything at all (electronics and tools wise at least) that is built in the U.S., regardless of what brand it is. China's economy is also on-pace to out perform the U.S.'s economy and Europe's within the new 2 decades. Call me cynical, but I don't believe China's dependence on the U.S. is a sure thing...at least not for much longer.
Manufactured in China, contracted by US companies. If they issue sanctions against us, they'll be harming a great deal of their business interests.
Ulukai on 30/3/2013 at 20:14
Quote Posted by Thief13x
I find it a interesting that so many Americans seem to be beating the war drum because NK wants nukes yet the U.S. has over 5,000 nukes and is the only country in history to have actually used them against another country.
Yes, largely in retaliation to a pre-emptive act of war by Japan. There is no act of war here. NK should be concentrating on (
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/north-korean-cannibalism-fears-amid-claims-starving-people-forced-to-desperate-measures-8468781.html) feeding its people. That's it. When thousands of people in your country die from starvation each year,
that's your number one obligation as a government. A second point of action should be getting sanctions lifted and repairing the economy so they can feed themselves. Is anyone threatening to invade North Korea? No.
And yadda-yadda, so the west (USA, France, UK ) have nukes, but we're relatively sane as regimes go. I don't recall us threatening to launch them the last time our politicians spat their dummy out over something. Much as we might hate our leaders sometimes, we resolve problems with open dialogue as far as possible. When the Russians decided to fly planes a little too close to Scotland did the UK point at its missile deterrent? No, we invited the Russians to discuss it over a nice cup of tea. Because we're civilised people and not lunatics.
NK are bat-shit crazy cold war dinosaurs. (
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/9961077/North-Koreans-stage-mass-rally-in-support-of-Kim-Jong-uns-call-to-arms.html) Kwon Yong Choi makes a speech about killing every last one of their adversaries to the point where there is no-one left to sign the surrender agreement. Fucking crazy, they're almost a parody of themselves. The regime needs taking out from the inside so those poor bastards who live there can finally enter the 21st century.
Yakoob on 30/3/2013 at 20:16
Quote Posted by Dia
"North Korea said on Saturday it was entering a "state of war" with South Korea"Errr is that just fancy talk for "declaring war" or is it actually a different politically-recognize state?
But then again, it is North Korea, so I don't think traditional rules of politics or common sense apply.
Ulukai on 30/3/2013 at 20:20
Pyongyang has declared the 1953 armistice between the North and the South nullified, so technically - the North and South are now in a state of war again. Effectively, that war never ended.
heywood on 31/3/2013 at 00:56
Quote Posted by Dia
"North Korea said on Saturday it was entering a "state of war" with South Korea"Okay. I'm wondering if Un is backing himself into a corner wherein he'll be forced to either put up or shut up? Surely he
has to realize that we've got stealth bombers in South Korea, and our anti-missile ships (at least a half dozen) are all in the vicinity, aimed & ready to go (I'm assuming they're all pretty much aimed in the general direction of N. Korea by now); Japan has also readied its own anti-missiles as well. Is Kim Jong-un THAT much out of touch with reality that he actually believes he could win a war against the U.S./Japan?! I don't think our ploy of issuing sanctions is working very well - this little chubby madman seems to be skipping blithely ahead with his threats to wage actual war on the U.S., Japan, etc. It feels like everyone's kind of holding their breath to see what Un will actually do; if he'll really start launching nukes at every free country within striking distance or find a way to save face in front of his people and return to the bargaining table. I'm kinda wondering myself. Unfortunately, I'm beginning to think that the tiny fatman has a serious death wish.
(
http://news.yahoo.com/north-korea-says-enter-state-war-against-south-001304441.html)
Nobody is going to nuke anybody. It's all a bluff aimed at testing China and South Korea's new President. They have to make you believe that they are actually crazy enough to attack, otherwise everyone will ignore them. North Korea is hoping that either China or South Korea will get scared and fold. If China relents, it will break the latest sanctions. If South Korea folds it will signal that the new government is conciliatory and may return to the "sunshine" policy. The Kim Il-Sung and Kim Jong-Il governments successfully used the same brinksmanship tactics. It's what they know to work.
The best thing for everybody to do is be calm, steady, patient, and militarily prepared. The next step may be a test to see if South Korea responds to minor attacks like the sinking of a patrol ship in 2010 and shelling of one of their islands. The previous South Korean government of Lee Myung-bak said it would retaliate militarily if there were another North Korean attack. North Korea never tested that claim, but they are sexist enough to think that Park Geun-hye will be weaker.
Yakoob on 31/3/2013 at 19:14
I kinda agree, and see it more scare tactic than anything. Sure Kim Jong is crazy, but I don't think he's actually crazy enough to start a war against a country backed up multiple superpowers that could eradicate his whole country in span of hours (seven, to be precise, if the combine decide to get involved). Especially since all dictators usually have some sort of cabinet of advisors to make those kind of strategic decisions, so it's not just one crazy kook doing whatever he pleases.
reelyanoob on 1/4/2013 at 09:24
Quote Posted by Queue
Did North Korea finally get their copies of the documentary 'Red Dawn'?
I'm not one for "war mongering", but isn't it time we start thinking about BOMBING THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF THEM? Unlike the Iraq invasion/debacle, North Korea actually has Weapons of Mass Destruction (hell, they're damn near flaunting the fact), which they certainly have not been developing for any sort of "defensive purpose", and have clearly stated they'd be more than happy to use nuclear weapons preemptively against...well...anyone who says boo about them having nuclear weapons.
You haven't really paid attention to how the USA does business, have you? never attack anyone who has the slightest chance of fighting back! That's why lots of countries want nuclear weapons as a "deterrent": it actually works! That's also why defensive nukes are a real thing: the stance is more important that the usage. In fact, if any country was to start using the weapons, it removes the value as a deterrent, and you will be counter-nuked into atomic dust within minutes. The Soviets, China have had nukes for decades, and North Korea has had them for long enough. They haven't nuked anyone yet.
Just like Iran is apparently scheming to invade everyone, but just hasn't got around to
actually invading anyone it since the regime came to power 35 years ago. in that time period, how many invasions has the USA launched? And Iran is hardly military-heavy compared to the USA (despite what the propaganda tells you) -Iran spends about 1.9% of GDP on military (~6 billion US per year), compare to USA at about 4.8% of GDP (~600 billion US per year). Conclusion: there's just no concrete evidence of the Iranians gearing up for warfare. They don't even spend 1% of what America does on warfare - they don't even spend anywhere near what America does
proportionally.Some people say that if Iran got nukes they'd fire them off because "they're crazy" and don't care about dying. That's just silly - what's prevented them launching ground invasions for the last 35 years? Maybe the fact that they're not actually crazy enough to start wars they can't win. This shows that they clearly do care about their own survival. US military intelligence states that Iran was working on a nuclear weapon program, but cancelled it in 2003. Why 2003? Because that's when Saddam Hussein was defeated. They wanted to use the nuke as a deterrent against Saddam. That actually makes more sense than the "nuke Israel" theory: they've been invaded by Saddam, so planning for deterrence makes sense, whilst nuking Israel would also mean nuking Muslim holy sites, along with and their allies in Palestine, and the whole point of the Arab / Israeli thing is a land dispute. Making the disputed land uninhabitable isn't a goal that either side wants. Plus firing it off would be suicidal, along with not achieving their political aims of making Shiite Islam stronger.
America's real issue with Iran is about regional influence, not regional military threat. And a non-nuclear Iran removes the need to negotiate.
(
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20100702.htm)
Here's a document from the defense department, that Chomsky cites, i'll cite a (fairly nonsensical and alarmist) passage and then discuss it, to give you an idea how the "spin" works:
(
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=58833)
Quote:
“With sufficient foreign assistance,” the report states, “Iran could probably develop and test an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the United States by 2015.”
Ahh, that's from the opening to a report on the Threat of Iran prepared for congress. It's meant to make it sound like we have to attack the NOW, or they'll be dropping ICBM nukes on Washington and New York by 2015. It's also complete bullshit. Iran's 6 billion dollar defense budget just doesn't stretch to ICBMS: a complete launcher system with nukes might cost 50-100 billion US dollars (UK recently spent 97 billion pounds to upgrade their Trident system). Say, it's 50 billion US, if they diverted half the Iran defense budget just to making the ICBM system, you're looking at about 17 years to pay for a single ICBM system.
But the report has some clever wording in "sufficient foreign assistance", because only 3-4 actual countries have ICBMs, so combined with the fact that Iran can't afford to do it, we can reread the sentence as "if other countries that have ICBMs give Iran free ICBMs then Iran could have ICBMs any day now". But who exactly is lining up to give 50+ billion dollars of free shit to Iran? Nobody? Right. They'd rather have an extra few ICBMs themselves than randomly pass them out like Halloween candy.
Also, "sufficient foreign assistance" is a tautology as with "sufficient foreign assistance" any country can do anything at all.
Haiti could nuke USA by 2015 with "sufficient foreign assistance".
So the sentence as a whole is devoid of content and only there to scare the bejeesus out of the reader who hasn't taken the time to check how feasible it all is. It's ludicrous to even contemplate a country with only $6 billion a year in military spending having intercontinental ballistic missiles only possessed by the top 4 military nations by 2015.
Queue on 1/4/2013 at 13:22
Dear reelyanob,
Thank you for setting me, and the American public, straight.
Luvs and awe,
Q
SubJeff on 1/4/2013 at 22:47
I just wish the North Koreans would come out and say "Epic April Fools, Imperialist Dogs!"
That would literally give them the most respect ever and it'd be the most untoppable April Fools until General Blarg of Beta Gradari Prime gets here to troll us with a doomsday invasion fleet that is really a massive disco armada.
