War with Korea

[GoldSaiyan]

In short, America tries to be a police man and tells countries what to do, what to eat, what to wear, etc etc.
By the way, Bush is forcing Europe to eat gen produced food.
Now how more crazy can he get, now he's gonna try and influence everything with war, culture and infrastructure.

Oh and another thing, launching a nuke against China ain't a wise thing to do.
America will get numerous of enemies, even European nations could pose a threat to America and nukes may be on his way to America if they ever attack a nation without warning with a nuke.

China is always a MIGHTY country, but their people never truly united like Germany.
Germany posed a real threat when the people united.
And China can now pose a threat since they're united as well.
They do have the largest population in the world, you know.

Anyways, it's none of Bush's business what Korea does.
If they blow up S.Korea with a nuclear bomb, then so be it.
S.Korea is their enemy, not America's enemy.
And everybody says the Iraqi people are happy because Saddam is gone, but that's because the Media only shows the happy faces of the Iraqi people, not the angry ones.

Iraq is getting a regime with the same worseness as Saddam.
They will become a Puppet, controlled by American politics and Iraq would be just a base of operations and a cheap source of oil.

 

[Morrone]

War against Korea will be the end of the world. They've got nukes and arent afraid to use them.

 

[Skiwan]

"defied the UN by forging evidence" there is no evidence to prove that it is forged.... "then attacking even though the entire world opposed the action" it was an unanamous vote for the war in 4 previous UN resolutions just because 1 of the resolutions was vito'd by the french doesnt mean the world was against it, and the reason the USA didnt say the french vito was valid was because the french had a 50 billion dollar deal with Iraq for all the oil, plus in the past the french sold Iraq a load of centrifuges (equipment needed to make nukes)

 

[Orz]

An internal investigation by US authorities has already proven that the uranium document presented as evidence was a forgery. China, Russia, Germany, and France were all against the war in Iraq - China alone has more population than all of the USA, and combined with the other three nations has easily more population than the 'Coalition of the Willing'. They apparently represented the interests of their people in this matter, so yes, I would say the vast majority of the world was against the war. Even those countries who supported it suffered protests on a scale not seen since Vietnam.

 

[DiebytheSword]

Yes, but china is piss poor, and not all of those soldeirs have guns made this half century, let alone this decade. We will not go to war with China. It would be the ugliest war America has ever faught, if both contries didn't resort to nuclear arms. China only wants to be left alone.

N.Korea on the other hand, is even poorer. At least China has national recources. Now N.Korea has nukes, and they might sell them instead of use them.

I think diplomacy is the answer in N.Korea . . . Iraq was harboring terrorists, al qaeda terrorists, so it needed a bomb up it ass, WMD or no WMD. It was an enemy of the US that threatened us by association with our greatest enemy.

If we do fight N.Korea, expect it to be over soon. The Iraqis and Koreans have similar millitaries. Our advanced technology prooved that 1960's vintage russian hardware (also china's largest era of equip) does not stand a chance against american troops. Man power will be their only advantage.

As a final note, the US will never use it's own weapons of mass destruction unless those weapons are used against us. Period.

 

[Phatslugga]

Very well put Cuc. I couldn't agree more with you, People don't understand that Iraq was a real threat to america, and if there was no cooperation to stop any other attacks possible then they would suffer. I hate war, but we can't just keep threatening to defend ourselves without backing it up. We need to show some muscle and inform other countries that we won't be pushed around. How could you not expect us to do something after 9/11? Even if that wasn't the entire reason why we went to war with iraq, it played a giant role.

 

[RaVe]

Yes, but china is piss poor, and not all of those soldeirs have guns made this half century, let alone this decade. We will not go to war with China. It would be the ugliest war America has ever faught, if both contries didn't resort to nuclear arms. China only wants to be left alone.

N.Korea on the other hand, is even poorer. At least China has national recources. Now N.Korea has nukes, and they might sell them instead of use them.

I think diplomacy is the answer in N.Korea . . . Iraq was harboring terrorists, al qaeda terrorists, so it needed a bomb up it ass, WMD or no WMD. It was an enemy of the US that threatened us by association with our greatest enemy.

If we do fight N.Korea, expect it to be over soon. The Iraqis and Koreans have similar millitaries. Our advanced technology prooved that 1960's vintage russian hardware (also china's largest era of equip) does not stand a chance against american troops. Man power will be their only advantage.

As a final note, the US will never use it's own weapons of mass destruction unless those weapons are used against us. Period.

Somehow Cuc always has the right words to say....:/

Anyway yes China is piss poor,but looking at its coal and oil reserves,it would become a rich country (right....)

But seriously,I think Bush has gone over the line,going to war with Korea is NOT gonna be a good option.

Loot at S. Korea and Japan,their pretty much doing negotiations as to keep it cool.But looking at the situation,I just won't hope US wont fire a Nuke at China,it would wipe me out of this world(HINT : Hong Kong anyone??)

But seriously,I don't think Chinawould stand a chance against the US,but the whole world will :/

BTW,China's military equipment is just slightly more advanced than Iraq's,but they still suck.

 

[Death Biscuit]

I think diplomacy is the answer in N.Korea . . . Iraq was harboring terrorists, al qaeda terrorists, so it needed a bomb up it ass, WMD or no WMD. It was an enemy of the US that threatened us by association with our greatest enemy.

To this date no proven link has been found between Al-Qaeda and the Iraqi government, despite what many people have been (mis)lead to believe. There are many countries in the Middle East (and around the world) that contain terrorist training camps, including US "allies" such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. This has a lot to do with the lax internal security of such states, and the popular support found among many Islamic communities who sympathise with the militants. It is not necessarily indicative of state sponsership for such groups.

If anything, in the case of Iraq, Osama and his organisation were at great odds with Saddam's regieme and all it stood for, because Osama considered him an "infidel" for allowing too many western influences into the country. (Iraq is probably one of the most westernised states in the Arab world, particularly as far its treatment towards women is concerned).

If we do fight N.Korea, expect it to be over soon. The Iraqis and Koreans have similar millitaries. Our advanced technology prooved that 1960's vintage russian hardware (also china's largest era of equip) does not stand a chance against american troops. Man power will be their only advantage.

There is a vast gulf between the Korean situation and Iraq. America currently maintains about 20 000 personnel in South Korea, very few of whom are fighting infantry. It would be extremely difficult for America to maintain an unchallenged build-up in South Korea to extent they were able to in Kuwait. American forces would be fighting desperate struggles to maintain beachheads and key strategic points where they could rapidly reinforce: a costly business as the Korean War proved. You also have to remember that it's one thing to bring massive firepower to bear in the open desert, but it's another thing entirely to fight in dense jungle, as Vietnam so aptly proved. (One US general-I think it was Stormin' Norman-joked after the first Gulf War that, "We don't do jungles anymore - we only do deserts.")

I also don't agree with you that the state of the North Korean military is the same as Iraq's. Prior to the recent conflict we were told that Iraq's army numbered 500 000 men with at least 1500 armoured vehicles remaining from the last war. So where were they all? If anything, this conflict showed us just how little a threat Iraq truly posed, and how Saddam's regieme was obviously hanging on by a needle-thread show of internal force. The coalition forces barely fought against 10 000 organised troops, and probably only killed a few thousand. If the other 400 000+ soldiers ever existed they were certainly smart enough to know who was going to win this war, and promptly melted away into the civilian whole. I wouldn't be surprised if the "happy to be liberated" Iraqis taking potshots at US personnel on a daily basis are comprised of their ilk.

North Korea is whole different kettle of fish. You're right that their equipment is outdated, for the most part, but they have many advantages on their side. Pjongyang is stuck in a 1950's timewarp; you'd think Stalin had just paraded through the streets shouting communist propaganda. The people are brainwashed by a totalitarian state, believing almost everything their government tells them. I don't think for a second that the morale of the average N. Korean soldier is as good as a volunteer American, but there is this fanatical devotion to their beliefs almost non-existant in Saddam's dilapidated army. Look at the way they "just kept coming" in the Korean War, millions of men advancing in human waves cut down like wheat, but advancing relentlessly even so. And right now they have time and terrain on their side. . . .

I have no doubt America would win a conflict in Korea, but it would not be the cakewalk many people seem to envisage. Iraq involved two of the world's foremost powers taking on a 3rd-rate military that, as it turned out, didn't want to fight. Korea is not Iraq.

 

[Orz]

Comparing Iraq to North Korea is foolish. Iraq was ruled by a dictator who cared nothing for his country; North Korea is ruled by a dictator to whom his country is everything. Saddam let his regime fall to pieces to satisfy his luxury. Don't expect the same in North Korea. They are highly militant, well organised, and are productively Communist. Not to forget the fact that North Korea definately have WMD while Iraq don't.

Also, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. I'm tired of hearing it used as an excuse for war on Iraq. Osama hated Saddam - just because they are both Islamic does NOT mean they were allies. Saddam likely had nothing to do with 9/11 in any way. Yes, the Middle East such as Iraq harbours terrorists, but there are terrorist cels all over the world. Iraq was a convenient target for the aggression after the USA succesfully destroyed Afghanistan and any hope it may ever have had of being a habitable country.

If you go against North Korea expecting another Iraq then you are commiting a very fatal mistake. Remember that China are still pointing their weapons at Taiwan, North Korea have South Korea and Japan in their sights, and the stakes are very much higher than a small impoverished country in the middle of the desert.

The wealth of China should not matter. That's the sort of elitist thinking that has created this situation in the first place. Forget about your American technological advantage and think about the number of innocent lives at stake here. Even with all your advanced equipment, you will not save the lives of the Japanese and South Koreans who will die under a nuclear holocaust. The environment would never recover. The gases trapped in the upper atmosphere would undoubtedly have an affect on global warming, most likely to speed it up. As it is, the Earth has about 50 years left before all hell breaks loose with our ecosystem.

 

[Death Biscuit]

As it is, the Earth has about 50 years left before all hell breaks loose with our ecosystem.

Fortunately, by the time this happens, I shall safely be on Mars with the piece of land and warp rocket I bought on Ebay.

 

[Orz]

So you're the one who outbid me on those...

 

[Marauder]

in a few words, america is gonna ruin the world.
at the end of it all, in a few yaers, half of the world will be destroyed.
america just HAS to fight everyone,at the end, it will all end with a HUGE nuke war...everyone will throw a nuke on everyone.
it will start with iran throwing one at israel, israel will reply with on herself.after that other nations will see whats going on and they will help there ally, throwing a nuke themselfs...so at the end of it all half of the freakin wrold will be wiped out because america tried to make peace with everyone.

 

[Death Biscuit]

it will start with iran throwing one at israel, israel will reply with on herself.after that other nations will see whats going on and they will help there ally, throwing a nuke themselfs...so at the end of it all half of the freakin wrold will be wiped out because america tried to make peace with everyone.

I think you'll enjoy this movie, Spectre.

 

[SailorAlea]

Wow, Spectre. You're an idiot.

 

[ForeverZero]

Even if America's lust for power forces a world war, I feel that their aggressiveness is the only way, because if America isn't aggressive, another country will be. It's no big secret that people from around the world move here for a better life. It's also no big secret that all of these countries are making nukes just to hit us with them. It seems like aggression, but we're looking out for our own asses. America is defending itself beforehand by dealing with the nukes before they can be launched at us. While other countries feel this is unfair, our government knows if they take no action they will be destroyed anyway.

 

[SailorAlea]

Lust for power? Are you joking? If the US truly lusted for power, and not just economic power, they could easily take over the vast majority of the world.

Mostly, other countries develop/acquire nuclear weapons to ensure that they themselves are not attacked with nuclear weapons.

M.A.D.=Mutually Assured Destruction

If the United States attacks a country with nuclear weapons, and that country is in possession of nuclear weapons, it's likely to respond with them.

So, another country having nuclear weapons is unlikely to be attacked by another country, using them. Understand?

 

[Duece]

Ok seriously ticks me off when a bunch of young people that think they know something about politics open their mouths.... seriously though isn’t this forums like average REAL age like 13 yrs.

Anyhow nothing we are ever fed through the media or news paper is totally true or complete...
I can tell you that a kid murdered his parents. Sounds bad huh?
But I could have left out that those parents where about to kill him; now you view changes doesn’t it? But you can’t call me a liar either.

Well often that’s what happens in the news and media... its all one sided. America is one of the most evil countries out there. But don’t get me wrong I too am American but like other Americans I am not blind to my government’s actions. America, although one of the most evil countries is also one of the best countries out there. But I think our negative side is a lot higher than our positive side. Very little countries actually like us (by that I mean the countries people not its government). I think maybe just Israel since pretty much we put them on the map which I believe led to most of the problems we have with the Arab world.


The American Revolution was bloody, the massacre of natives was bloody, and civil war was bloody; In France, the French revolution was bloody and France also sent a lot of its own people to die in several wars under many different leaders. In Germany there is a history of bad things, concentration camps, ww1, ww2 many German lives lost as well as everyone else’s but the Germans too are leading the world today; Russia had several bloody revolutions millions of people dying in wars including civil wars, China had bloody revolutions throughout time as well and it too was involved in major global conflicts, and all Asian nations have had their bloody revolutions as well..... basically what I’m trying to say is that all these nations including us have done evil things to our own people just as North Korea has done to itself and South Korea and as Iraq’s Saddam Hussein has... but why should we expect them to do any better than us; they’re just making history as we have and we continue doing...

Sure we can put a stop to it but that’s not exactly what were doing, were not putting a government that’s best for the Iraqi people in Iraq, were setting up a government that’s best for us as we did in Palestine.

In North Korea I honestly believe their leaders claim because I mean he came right out with it he said that he did want Nukes BUT he wanted them so that his country could cut their expenses on their conventional weapons (that means that they can have one big bomb instead of a billion little ones, it’s a lot cheaper). They do have the largest standing army right now. But as he claimed that they wanted to divert money from the military to the people’s money. Now the North Koreans aren’t exactly an Iraq where most of the country is uninhabited and the people are years behind the world in basic things. They are a lot more advance than the Iraqis but still they have very little compared to us. We have the strongest Navy in the world no one can get a bomb to our country and if someone does we will know who it is and those people will automatically die… So I don’t understand why Korea is such a threat. There government is just not like ours it’s the total opposite. Not democratic not capitalist; it’s a dictatorship, communist country. So I see where the conflicts arise there…. But other than that I do not under stand why it is so necessary to go to war with Korea.




Also i forgot to add that a country with nuclear weapons cant really be bullied like were bullying iraq and palestine and afghanistan... we can make them our *****, that korean dictator dude doesnt want to be anyones ***** get it?

 

[ForeverZero]

I don't like how you call us young. I'm 21 years old and I have my own views on things. I know all about the Koreans. Most of my friends are Korean. They hate us. They feel we are aggressive and that we have no right to force them to disarm. After all, no one ever forced us to disarm, even though no one could. They think America should mind their own business. How come we can be powerful but Korea can't? That's where the arguments come in. America is like the police, telling everyone to put their gun down. Their point is, who ever appointed America that position of authority? Its only our nuclear power, which we are so against, that dictates who can order who around. Korea is not scared of us either. They have other Asian allies who will side with them before they side with the US. The idea that America is invincible is flawed. We cannot possibly stand up to the might of the combined Asian superpowers by ourselves. And you can bet your ass that the Arabs will take that opportunity to terrorize and bomb us too. Could we stop all those countries? Who would back us? Would they all end up dead? Would we survive that? What if we sit back and let them acquire nukes. Then they one day convince everyone that we are evil and need to be destroyed for the good of the world. What happens then? We've seen what kind of evil, sadistic logic Saddam lived by. We know what these dictators portray to their media as opposed to what they are really like. Much UNLIKE America, where we elect many officials that change all the time and are elected by the people. If our government is truly evil, then so are we, since we are the ones electing them. If they put on false airs to get in office, what does that say about our judgement? Maybe we should care more about voting.

 

[SailorAlea]

Deuce, you say..

"Ok seriously ticks me off when a bunch of young people that think they know something about politics open their mouths.... seriously though isn’t this forums like average REAL age like 13 yrs."

Just curious, if you were refering to me, or others. My parents happen to be foreign service officers (commonly called 'Diplomats') for the US Department of State, and I know what I'm talking about-I can't vouch for anybody else.

Next, you say..

"Very little countries actually like us (by that I mean the countries people not its government)."

I've lived in 17 different countries over the course of my life, and the only country I've noticed that the general inhabitants didn't like Americans was Greece.

You say,
"Well often that’s what happens in the news and media... its all one sided."

Yes, news programs are usually one sided. CNN is known for being very liberal, and things like Fox News are known for being very conservative. Most of the news programs pick one side, and they are very one sided, but it in no way prevents you from seeing both sides, if you watch more then one news program.

It boils down to this--never make an opinion based off of one source.

"America is one of the most evil countries out there."

I don't think America is any more evil then most other countries. The primary job of a government is to ensure the best interests of it's populace, and the American government is very efficient at doing just that--except, the American government is generally extremely lenient with it's own citizens, giving them extreme freedom where countless other countries wouldn't even consider it.

It is true that the United States deals harshly with those who oppose them, but there isn't really a reason to oppose them. The terrorists that destroyed the Twin Towers, for instance, were mostly Saudi Arabian, and they wanted America to pay for it's crimes of having troops stationed on their soil.

This group has less legitimacy and authority then the actual Government of Saudi Arabia, which decided that it is in their best interests to have American troops based there. Yes, their country isn't a democracy and their leaders aren't hand picked, so their desires aren't necessarily what the entire country wants, but the Al-Quaida (Excuse me for the spelling) doesn't represent the majority of Saudi people.

Next, you say..

"The American Revolution was bloody, the massacre of natives was bloody, and civil war was bloody."

After saying that, you imply that the United States is just as bad as North Korea and WW2 Germany for committing atrocities.

There's a very large difference here, which you seem to be forgetting.

The American Revolution and the Civil War happened when the country was in relative infancy.. None of these things have happened, even in the past century.

The atrocities of the Soviet Union and North Korea HAVE happened in the last century.


"So I don’t understand why Korea is such a threat."

You seem to have misunderstood our Country's intentions.

The threat of North Korea is not that we're afraid our soil is going to be bombed, the fear is that they will pose a threat to our allies and our interests. Also, a war with Korea isn't very likely to begin with, as they aren't being uncooperative.


In conclusion, you're wrong to assume that everybody gets their information from one source, and totally believes the media. You're also incorrect in assuming everyone on this forum is thireen years old.

Making these assumptions is just as bad as the people who choose to be ignorant in learning about an event with only one source.. It is hypocritical.

 

[ForeverZero]

Which also reminds me... Even if Korea were to remain neutral in all future foreign affairs, if allowed to make nukes, they have no qualms about selling them to the highest bidder. America fears that certain nations would buy them, and that would cause more problems.