saint lard Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 I would be a tad worried if i resided in South Korea..... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8069457.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMike Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 I would be a tad worried if i resided in South Korea..... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8069457.stm yes quite but id also think that if North Korea carry on with their "testing" then they'd be more than a tad worried when the rest of the world turn up waiving their guns at them. Either way, unless the North Koreans stop its going to get messy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsdinho Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 Id be a tad worried if I lived anywhere within their missile range.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burger Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 yes quite but id also think that if North Korea carry on with their "testing" then they'd be more than a tad worried when the rest of the world turn up waiving their guns at them. Either way, unless the North Koreans stop its going to get messy the rest of world including or excluding China? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 the rest of world including or excluding China? China have historically been North Korea's closest ally, but even their relationship has always been, how shall we say - a little frosty. While I am concerned about the goings on (and the fact that Pyongyang have today declared that they are no longer bound by the terms of the 1953 ceasefire with South Korea is particularly alarming as it seems they could be preparing to attack) I do find it incredibly hypocritical for all of the world's nuclear-armed states (UK included) to be dicatating to North Korea that they must not develop nukes. I know that the USA considers them part of the 'axis of evil' and that they are generally regarded as a rogue state throughtout the world, but why shouldn't they be allowed to develop their own nuclear technology? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 As I say people, 21/12/12, Nuclear War is soon upon us, the prophecies are coming true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedAndWhite91 Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 I honestly reckon that this, amongst other things, such as Iran's nuclear program, could potentially lead to the Cold War Mk II. If North Korea don't stop then they will get threatened with military/nuclear action and there will no doubt be a tense stand-off. It could echo the Cuban Missile Crisis, albeit a different scenario. Then again, North Korea is only doing what the USA and the Soviet Union did in the 40's onwards. I'm not condoning it but it is essentially the same thing. As I say people, 21/12/12, Nuclear War is soon upon us, the prophecies are coming true. Just like when it was 06/06/06? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 Just like when it was 06/06/06? That was the start date, the birth of the ginger one (non factual as far as i'm aware). I go more by the Mayan Calendar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 China have historically been North Korea's closest ally, but even their relationship has always been, how shall we say - a little frosty. While I am concerned about the goings on (and the fact that Pyongyang have today declared that they are no longer bound by the terms of the 1953 ceasefire with South Korea is particularly alarming as it seems they could be preparing to attack) I do find it incredibly hypocritical for all of the world's nuclear-armed states (UK included) to be dicatating to North Korea that they must not develop nukes. I know that the USA considers them part of the 'axis of evil' and that they are generally regarded as a rogue state throughtout the world, but why shouldn't they be allowed to develop their own nuclear technology? This puzzles me too. Israel can develop nuclear weapons, India can, the Western world has them / has access to them but Iran, N Korea can't have them. How hypocritical is that? BTW I don't think ANY country should develop / store nuclear weapons but you'd expect that of me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedAndWhite91 Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 That was the start date, the birth of the ginger one (non factual as far as i'm aware). I go more by the Mayan Calendar. Ahhh I understand, sort of. Right, I'll let you get back to your prophetic predictions then and not bother you anymore, oh great one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 Ahhh I understand, sort of. Right, I'll let you get back to your prophetic predictions then and not bother you anymore, oh great one. Thank you, you may be one I save. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedAndWhite91 Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 Thank you, you may be one I save. Hallelujah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shandy_Top_89 Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 This puzzles me too. Israel can develop nuclear weapons, India can, the Western world has them / has access to them but Iran, N Korea can't have them. How hypocritical is that? BTW I don't think ANY country should develop / store nuclear weapons but you'd expect that of me Whilst i see your point, the possession of nuclear weapons is part of a fine balancing act and if all countries were to discard their weapons and then one sneaked away and built their own stock pile, then it would be another tricky cold war sitution where potentially the world could end at any time. Added to the fact N.Korea and Iran clearly have more active motives for developing nuclear weapons than the USA, UK and others that possess them more for brinksmanship reasons. However if N.Korea were to attack the south i am pretty sure the country would immediately be flattened and resemble a scene from Fallout 3, heres hoping not though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 China have historically been North Korea's closest ally, but even their relationship has always been, how shall we say - a little frosty. While I am concerned about the goings on (and the fact that Pyongyang have today declared that they are no longer bound by the terms of the 1953 ceasefire with South Korea is particularly alarming as it seems they could be preparing to attack) I do find it incredibly hypocritical for all of the world's nuclear-armed states (UK included) to be dicatating to North Korea that they must not develop nukes. I know that the USA considers them part of the 'axis of evil' and that they are generally regarded as a rogue state throughtout the world, but why shouldn't they be allowed to develop their own nuclear technology? This puzzles me too. Israel can develop nuclear weapons, India can, the Western world has them / has access to them but Iran, N Korea can't have them. How hypocritical is that? BTW I don't think ANY country should develop / store nuclear weapons but you'd expect that of me There's a bit more too it than, "mummy, why does he get the cool toys and I don't." The main point being that the US, UK, France, India etc. aren't unstable dictatorships run by a war mongering nutcase. They are also only used as a deterent and none have been detonated in anger since Nagasaki. I think Iran and North Korea have slightly more adventurous ideas for their nuclear programmes. It is ironic that the deadliest weapons ever made have probably saved millions of lives. The US bombing of Japan probably saved hundreds of thousands of US soldiers, not to mention the Japs and their citizens. They are also largely responsible for keeping the cold war cold. No matter how strong one side thought it's conventional weapons were in comparison to the enemy, they never dared fire them because of the nuclear deterant. The closest we came was the Cuban Missile crisis, and even then both sides were desperate for a reason to back down without losing face. I cannot say whether NK will go South. I do not think they'd attempt it without a fully functioning nuclear weapon, if and when they get one. If they invaded South Korea without nuclear weapons, the US, UK and China would come down on them like a tonne of bricks. This is one of the reasons they need to be stopped from developing WMDs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 the US, UK,............. aren't ......... run by a war mongering nutcase. Tell that to the Iraqis and the Afghans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 China need the West now for their economy to continue to flourish. They'll drop the North Koreans like a ton of bricks when the time comes to put them in their place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 Tell that to the Iraqis and the Afghans. ... well not anymore. Anyway, if you think the Afghans and Iraqis have it bad, that wont even to come close to the kind of treatment anyone invaded by North Korea could expect. Most of the population lives in poverty whilst their dictator spends the countries cash on arms, f**k knows what Kim Jong Il's got in store for his enemies. Without meaning to sound insensitive, I wager North Korean occupation would make a few thousand Iraqis killed by stray mortars look like a picnic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 North Korea would certainly put up a more vicious fight. Who made the US the World police anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 North Korea would certainly put up a more vicious fight. Who made the US the World police anyway? Something to do with Team America? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 I know that the USA considers them part of the 'axis of evil' and that they are generally regarded as a rogue state throughtout the world, but why shouldn't they be allowed to develop their own nuclear technology? You answered your highlighted question with your quote above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 There's a bit more too it than, "mummy, why does he get the cool toys and I don't." The main point being that the US, UK, France, India etc. aren't unstable dictatorships run by a war mongering nutcase. They are also only used as a deterent and none have been detonated in anger since Nagasaki. I think Iran and North Korea have slightly more adventurous ideas for their nuclear programmes. It is ironic that the deadliest weapons ever made have probably saved millions of lives. The US bombing of Japan probably saved hundreds of thousands of US soldiers, not to mention the Japs and their citizens. They are also largely responsible for keeping the cold war cold. No matter how strong one side thought it's conventional weapons were in comparison to the enemy, they never dared fire them because of the nuclear deterant. The closest we came was the Cuban Missile crisis, and even then both sides were desperate for a reason to back down without losing face. I cannot say whether NK will go South. I do not think they'd attempt it without a fully functioning nuclear weapon, if and when they get one. If they invaded South Korea without nuclear weapons, the US, UK and China would come down on them like a tonne of bricks. This is one of the reasons they need to be stopped from developing WMDs. Well put ali, guess the highlighted bit was missed by Bexy and btf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 Something to do with Team America? :cool: Lounge though, MB... tut tut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 North Korea would certainly put up a more vicious fight. Who made the US the World police anyway? I think in the case of N. Korea, I'd rather the US than nobody. We can't, IMO, let N. Korea become the elephant in the room. Just ignoring their arms race, Neville Chamberlain style, will lead to problems later on when an unchecked North Korea has a massive army and a collection of nuclear balistic missiles. Obviously North Korea abandoning its nuclear programme would be the idea scenario, but I just don't see that happening with KJI in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 Who cares, their balistic missile can't reach us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 China have historically been North Korea's closest ally, but even their relationship has always been, how shall we say - a little frosty. While I am concerned about the goings on (and the fact that Pyongyang have today declared that they are no longer bound by the terms of the 1953 ceasefire with South Korea is particularly alarming as it seems they could be preparing to attack) I do find it incredibly hypocritical for all of the world's nuclear-armed states (UK included) to be dicatating to North Korea that they must not develop nukes. I know that the USA considers them part of the 'axis of evil' and that they are generally regarded as a rogue state throughtout the world, but why shouldn't they be allowed to develop their own nuclear technology? I should think that the answer to that is fairly obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 Who cares, their balistic missile can't reach us. Great way to think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 I am surprised that N.korea haven't already declared war....on TSW......as I have it on good authority that 'Rattlehead' recently visited said country! On a serious note though, yes it is all a bit worrying. I, for one, am seriously hoping that China manage to put them back in their box as I don't think they will listen to anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 Great way to think. It is how all nations should think. Millitary action by British forces should only ever be in the interests of Britain and it's citizens. It's not our problem and wth Brown saddling the nation with decades of debt we need to get our priorities right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 The real problem here is China. When the Boxers attacked the foreign embassies the Imperial court could have prevented it and chose not to. This is a repitition of the same tactics only this time we cannot use gunboat diplomacy to win the day, the west needs to threaten trade embargoes and NK will soon be brought into line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 27 May, 2009 Share Posted 27 May, 2009 It is how all nations should think. Millitary action by British forces should only ever be in the interests of Britain and it's citizens. It's not our problem and wth Brown saddling the nation with decades of debt we need to get our priorities right. With that attitude, it would only be a matter of time before something becomes our issue. Then it may be too late? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mynameisthehulk Posted 28 May, 2009 Share Posted 28 May, 2009 ... well not anymore. Anyway, if you think the Afghans and Iraqis have it bad, that wont even to come close to the kind of treatment anyone invaded by North Korea could expect. Most of the population lives in poverty whilst their dictator spends the countries cash on arms, f**k knows what Kim Jong Il's got in store for his enemies. Without meaning to sound insensitive, I wager North Korean occupation would make a few thousand Iraqis killed by stray mortars look like a picnic. I assume you mean Mr Obama? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7886780711843120756 Give that a little watch, I for one, can smell, what Barak, is, cookin.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 28 May, 2009 Share Posted 28 May, 2009 The real problem here is China. When the Boxers attacked the foreign embassies the Imperial court could have prevented it and chose not to. This is a repitition of the same tactics only this time we cannot use gunboat diplomacy to win the day, the west needs to threaten trade embargoes and NK will soon be brought into line. The problem with trade embargos is again, China. N. Korea has very little trade with the west because they are so unpopular, so trade embargoes from us is something of an empty threat. Even if China were to agree and sever their somewhat patchy trading ties, I think the suffering would be passed on to the already suffering citizens of N. Korea, rather than having any effect on the government. Striking similarities with Zimbabwe in that sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Martini Posted 28 May, 2009 Share Posted 28 May, 2009 Besides that trade embargos just hurt the alrady impoverished population. They will suffer because of it and the North Korean leadership couldn't care less about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 28 May, 2009 Share Posted 28 May, 2009 Someone needs to send a small squad in to see off KJI. Maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotonianproud Posted 28 May, 2009 Share Posted 28 May, 2009 This puzzles me too. Israel can develop nuclear weapons, India can, the Western world has them / has access to them but Iran, N Korea can't have them. How hypocritical is that? BTW I don't think ANY country should develop / store nuclear weapons but you'd expect that of me Because Kim jong-il is a lunatic, how can you trust a man who has composed over 6 opera's and musicals and favourite films include Rambo and friday the 13th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rattlehead Posted 31 May, 2009 Share Posted 31 May, 2009 I am surprised that N.korea haven't already declared war....on TSW......as I have it on good authority that 'Rattlehead' recently visited said country! Tis true and it was a fascinating trip to a country with lovely and well-meaning people who are undoubtedly let down, oppressed and misled by the regime. Not sure what I said to create the current situation, possibly because beer was only 30p a litre and our main guide was one of the most beautiful women I have ever seen, but I do apologise. However, it is a beautiful and very interesting country and most Koreans on both sides of the border want peace and to reunite. Politics is in the way and it seems difficult to reconcile the two now extremely polar cultures. It will happen at some stage though, I am sure. Re current world security, I do not believe NK will attack anybody else, not least because Kim Jong Il will do anything to retain power and attacking anyone will inevitably lead to an end of that - he must know this. The only caveat is that he is nearly dead, which adds to the unpredictability. As an aside, the Pyongyang Times is even more hilarious than the Daily Mail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 31 May, 2009 Share Posted 31 May, 2009 This puzzles me too. Israel can develop nuclear weapons, India can, the Western world has them / has access to them but Iran, N Korea can't have them. How hypocritical is that? BTW I don't think ANY country should develop / store nuclear weapons but you'd expect that of me and of course never should have dropped one on Japan to end WWII......right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mack rill Posted 1 June, 2009 Share Posted 1 June, 2009 Just Nuke em simples, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 1 June, 2009 Share Posted 1 June, 2009 KJI is just stirring it up to ensure the country remains (at least thought of as) a threat. It would be a much harder task then afghanistan and iraq from start to finish and the military is so well funded out there (as per % of wealth). The people are treated badly however and i have read in some places resort to eating grass. As per USA being world police, as much as i believe they got Iraq seriously wrong you cannot allow people to live in oppression. You can say what you like about them flexing muscles and britain should only look after our own but it is a very selfish outlook. I would not want anyone suffering anywhere, the main problem is however even with the fall of the taliban and saddam both countries (and pretty much all of middle east) are so fractious and hold many different religions and tribes (wrong word but can't think) that all fight each other, some are glad the regimes are gone others are not, link this with the idealists stirring things up and things get nasty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 1 June, 2009 Share Posted 1 June, 2009 As per USA being world police, as much as i believe they got Iraq seriously wrong you cannot allow people to live in oppression. You can say what you like about them flexing muscles and britain should only look after our own but it is a very selfish outlook. No, no, no, that's not what I'm saying. The rest of the World should intervene in those circumstances though, not just in reaction to a blind charge by the USA, with little thought of the long term consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 1 June, 2009 Share Posted 1 June, 2009 My concern is that he is close to death and literally wants to go out with a bang. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 1 June, 2009 Share Posted 1 June, 2009 No, no, no, that's not what I'm saying. The rest of the World should intervene in those circumstances though, not just in reaction to a blind charge by the USA, with little thought of the long term consequences. Everyone is the same though, just sit around and wait with a thumb up their ass hoping the world will sort itself out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 1 June, 2009 Share Posted 1 June, 2009 Everyone is the same though, just sit around and wait with a thumb up their ass hoping the world will sort itself out. The9 would at this point draw parallels between this and the "fans" at SFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
voteforpedro Posted 1 June, 2009 Share Posted 1 June, 2009 It is how all nations should think. Millitary action by British forces should only ever be in the interests of Britain and it's citizens. It's not our problem and wth Brown saddling the nation with decades of debt we need to get our priorities right. So if it were us being attacked by a larger, more powerful country, you would be happy for the rest of the world to sit back and watch us suffer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now