Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

sexiest_hero wrote:Sigh, flame shield up. As a long time U.S. airman and war vet, who comes from a long time military familiy, I'd like to add my two cents.

(Warning long read)

First. I yelled as loud as I could something should have been done about North Korea and not Iraq. They were close to having nukes then, and we all knew Iraq didn't. They have been giving nuke info to Iran ever since, and now they do have at least 2-3 nukes...at least. Yes It would have been been messy, but America was still at the hight of it's power then and China still depended on our imports, and Russia wasn't yet the glass tiger it is today. Yes I was the only bleeding heart Dem crying for war with N.Korea instead of Iraq, I still belive it was the right thing to do.

One of the big issues with the attack on Iraq was leaving the US less capable in other regions, true. However, you're talking about it being either North Korea or Iraq, and are discounting the option to not invade anyone.

Noth korea would fall quickly and alone, with only one or two south Korean cities damaged.

The US has a very, very powerful military. North Korea has an utterly disfunctional, third world military. But North Korea also has an immense concentration of artillery pieces within striking distance of Seoul. Your idea that only one or two South Korean cities would be damaged is true, but it would also be millions of lives. And for what? At this point there is some sabre rattling and nothing else, yet people are talking about invasions and nuclear strikes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:Who the cares what the rest of the country thinks? They are irrelevant.

They're people. It's a good thing to not kill people. I didn't just make that up, most religions agree with me. Because it is a good thing to not kill people, not killing North Koreans becomes a consideration. Therefore your statement above is wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:All thats irrelevant if they shoot off a nuke, or threaten to shoot off a nuke.

Ignore them like you would a child throwing a fit. If SK wants, sell them a surplus boomer. Same for Japan. Lets make this a profit making venture baby.

But if NK fires one missile that goes over US territory, even "accidentally," even just a non-nuke test, mirv them with 200 warheads. Then send the satellite pics to Iran with a hand written note "threaten us and you're next, hugs and kisses, Obama."

No more of this 'send a message' crap.

Dude, settle down. The North Koreans can't control a missile aimed at Japan. Unless you think the calesthenics program has gotten skilled enough to throw a nuke at LA, it isn't a possibility. So take a step back, count to five and start talking about real world possibilities.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:Whilst I am a liberal, I do sometimes wonder how far certain nations of the middle east and far east assume they can push the west before the indulgent parent finally loses it's temper with the abusing teen and strikes back. Posturing like this isn't it. But if a nuke was unleashed on an american city, the US would not be satiated until a very much larger returning fire was dropped all over NK, maybe not nukes but it would be monumental and would wipe clean most areas of population of that nation.

That thing where you talk about one group of countries as mature, responsible adults, and the other group as immature teens... that's the kind of mindset that produces the messed up relations we have. The parent is more powerful and therefore assumes it must be more sensible. The child acting up to gain a measure of control over itself. It's a pretty analogy, albeit perhaps not as you intended.

Meanwhile, no, a nuke cannot be unleashed on a US city. It's a non-option, and doesn't need to be discussed.

Sebbie, what I am referring to is if they launch stuff at the US.

Thats an attack. An attack should be met with no mercy.

And how do we know they can't throw a nuke? They have a nuke, they have missiles as they are continuously launching.

Frankly if they don't have the capacity we should hit them right now, this very second, before they can.

OOH Hiroshima mayor is displeased with North Korea. Now NK will likely declare war on Hiroshima itself, shortly after announcing that the new designated Dear Leader in fact was the one who invented the internet.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.f2acd17e4d1a4dffa33ba0d23e5b9c74.1f1&show_article=1

sebster wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:Whilst I am a liberal, I do sometimes wonder how far certain nations of the middle east and far east assume they can push the west before the indulgent parent finally loses it's temper with the abusing teen and strikes back. Posturing like this isn't it. But if a nuke was unleashed on an american city, the US would not be satiated until a very much larger returning fire was dropped all over NK, maybe not nukes but it would be monumental and would wipe clean most areas of population of that nation.

That thing where you talk about one group of countries as mature, responsible adults, and the other group as immature teens... that's the kind of mindset that produces the messed up relations we have. The parent is more powerful and therefore assumes it must be more sensible. The child acting up to gain a measure of control over itself. It's a pretty analogy, albeit perhaps not as you intended.

We, according to our understanding of human rights and freedoms afforded the individual, technological advancement and our tolerance of those who would not tolerate us, frankly we are the adult nations. You cannot take a dictator, who liquidates thousands of people on a whim or ruthlessly puts down opposition, who's country is economically poor and militarily overgunned as it's very populace starve, as an equal at the table.

These nations are conducting genocide, brutalising their own populace, that's the sort of thing we were doing in the dark ages, we grew up, they have not, indeed in the case of the countries of the middle east, many nations under Islam seem to be actively regressing into medieval witchhunting, ignorant persecutions and the denial of basic human freedoms.

We are more sensible than NK or Somalia or Chechnya or the many nations under extreme islamic law. We are more advanced and civilised. We are constantly threatened with things that if the roles were reversed, their culture or government would have nuked us long ago or just enslaved us.

So, how long do we reframe from serious response? I wonder that if the very hypothetical topic we are discussing here were to come to pass, that unwillingness to really attack these less morally advanced governments would evaporate and whilst I do try to maintain my willingness to embrace other cultures and seek to understand when I encounter what I do not agree with, if it does come down to the 'them or us' situation, I would not hesitate to condone unparralleled aggressive action.

sexiest_hero wrote:

Why do you all care about the impoverished North Korean "innocents?" Does their existence actually matter to you? Personally, I don't think the world would miss 23 million people. It is a rounding error in the world population

You sir, are an black hearted, inhuman monster. You represent the mindset that Islamic terrorist claim all westerners have. "Your life doesn't matter because you are poor and far away." Too many others in our past have said that about one people or another, they were all well known monsters, and you deserve your place right alongside them.

You can believe that if you want, I call it something else: Being a realist. I don't give a flying rat feth about those people. They have ZERO influence on my existence. I have no reason to care about them. THey don't care about me, I don't care about them. They DO NOT MATTER in my life. AT ALL.

There are what, 6.3 BILLION people in this world? More? I care about less than a hundredth of a percent of those people. Why? BEcause they don't matter to me. It isn't because I hate them, it is because they DON'T matter to me. They do not influence me. THey do not interact with me. Why waste my time and energy caring about people who do not know or care about me?

Seriously, most people need to drop the pretense that "everyone matters." No one actually believes that, do they? It is just something people say to "say the right thing." I don't fall in that category. I say what I mean, not some panty-waste pandering to the too easily offended populace of the world.

Aaaaaaand the thread is now about idiot warmonger hawks shouting at other idiot warmonger hawks about a country whose capabilities and intentions they know little about.


Nice to know fraz and deadshane don't care about asian peoples lives.

And what happens to the 23 million+ innocent civilians?

Gone...and I wont lose a wink of sleep.

And you wonder why people the world over hate us. Hint: It's you.

Oh I care. I care about South Korea, and Japan, and every other democracy in the world. I have great concern. I also am not espousing war with them nor attacking them in any way.

Unless they attack us.

Good to see you don't care about all those lives Shuma-wait weren't you the one espousing full-on invasion of North Korea? Pick a side dude.

Why yes, I do believe Shuma is actively calling for the invasion of North Korea. I guess Shuma doesn't care about all those civilians who would be killed when the capitalist dog Americans invade.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/120/241809.page

ShumaGorath wrote:
The fact that we have not intervened in North Korea before simply shows the U.S. populace (it's government only represents it) as an uncaring and cowardly lot, too obsessed with gays and mexicans to do anything productive for the world anymore.

and this:

Invade North Korea. China will back off. They will put everything they have on high alert and after we keep on punching the korean military in the face they will back off. China doesn't give a damn about Korea. They only care about national sovereignty, and even then not enough to do anything about it. The moment they isolate themselves from their only economic market their own populace will burn their country down.

and this:

Iran has nukes because of weak willed idiots in washington patting bush on the back. Pakistan is a serious problem. However their human rights situation is far from dire, and they have enough restraint not to use them. Having nukes doesn't mean you need to be invaded. The only country on the list of "needs to be invaded" with nukes is north korea, and thats because you all waited too god damn long.

No nation will go to nuclear war over Sudan or Darfur. No nation will go to war over Korea. No nation will go to war over Iran, and none did for Iraq. The big bad reds in china don't care as long as we keep buying and I'm happy to buy as long as economic revitalization keeps on making them a better country.

Who's the evil warmonger again?

Frazzled wrote:Sebbie, what I am referring to is if they launch stuff at the US.

Thats an attack. An attack should be met with no mercy.

But they haven't actually done it. They can't do it. You're talking about how awesomely devestating you'd be if North Korea did something they have no capability of doing.

And how do we know they can't throw a nuke? They have a nuke, they have missiles as they are continuously launching.

North Korea has the craziest leader in the world. I say we take him out, whether with nukes or green berets or something. Hell, lets just send Rambo into the country to kill him.

Also, all you people saying that its wrong for us to attack NK after they kill hundreds of thousands of American lives are crazy. If they attack us, and the government does nothing, what kind of image would that send to the man that invented the internet? He would attack everyone.

So nuke em, nuke em, nuke em, but only after he attacks us.

But they haven't actually done it. They can't do it. You're talking about how awesomely devestating you'd be if North Korea did something they have no capability of doing.

Then whats the problem Sebbie? You say bloodlust when all I am saying is we ignore their tantrums unless they attack us. Firing a missile into US space is attacking us.
-If they can't do it then there's no issue.
-If they don't do it then there's no issue.

I'm mereley restating the policy of the US, UK, France, China, Russia, India, and Pakistan.

Sebster, as much as I usually agree with you, N.Korea is a different monster. Unlike Iraq, whom most of the known world knew didn't have WMDs. N.Korea has activly boasted about what it was trying to do, and has sold what they know to Iran, activly spreading the threat.

Edit: When I talk about possible damage it's only an honest response. millions would be killed but millions more saved. the south Korean capital has plenty of bunkers, I can only hope for the best.

Bcause they don't matter to me. It isn't because I hate them, it is because they DON'T matter to me. They do not influence me. THey do not interact with me. Why waste my time and energy caring about people who do not know or care about me?

Seriously, most people need to drop the pretense that "everyone matters." No one actually believes that, do they? It is just something people say to "say the right thing." I don't fall in that category. I say what I mean, not some panty-waste pandering to the too easily offended populace of the world.

Yeah tell that to every American soldier who has fought and died on some god-forsaken hell-hole for a people they didn't know. Or faced down russia to feed the people of Berlin. They were heros. The Panty-waste is the person who only cares about himself.

Can't we just, like, send Stephen Segal over there to kill him? Problem solved.

sebster wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:We, according to our understanding of human rights and freedoms afforded the individual, technological advancement and our tolerance of those who would not tolerate us, frankly we are the adult nations. You cannot take a dictator, who liquidates thousands of people on a whim or ruthlessly puts down opposition, who's country is economically poor and militarily overgunned as it's very populace starve, as an equal at the table.

You're assuming the levels of development are unrelated to the relative power positions. They're completely intertwined.

I'm not saying we have to ignore disfunctional, damaging or dangerous behaviour, not at all. But we have to understand why nations take such positions, and the best starting point is power relations. Long term these problems won't get solved by playing big daddy to naughty little middle eastern teenager.

But I was really going on the part of your answer where you mentioned the middle east. If you're just talking about the pariah nations like North Korea then we're probably talking past each other.

I am referring to the rogue nations, where human rights abuses are bread and butter (yes, I know, what about our 'allies' like SA, frankly no love for them either). So, if the levels of development are indeed related to power positions, the more powerful countries of the world, especially the west are the most developed, therefore they hold the goal the other nations should be striving for (again, no, not chronic obesity or teenage drug abuse, but the right to vote freely, receive schooling, crime prevention, the support of the state for those who need it). Instead we are confronted with national governments/dictators/states and regimes who are not only unwilling to deal with us, they want us to die long slow deaths or be subverted and reverted into the primitive state we've just agreed they dwell in.

The idea that we shouldn't 'patronise' them is difficult when they have 'tantrums' and cry out that they are going to nuke us or that we are all damned sinners and disbelievers and we will all drown in our own blood. They are societies that crave violence and are geared around the idea that might makes right. We have more might than they fully comprehend and consistently stay our hand. If the coalition had behaved as a middle eastern tyrant or religious fanatic in the Iraq war (a war I do not condone) then they would have nerve gassed the nation of Iraq and claimed it for oil production, public opinion in the West would never have stood for that, yet if Saddam had sent a large dirty bomb into a major city, if tyrants and extremists push against the west, I think we may find public opinion hardening and the west unleashing it's power somewhat more freely.

No no, Neither Team America nor G.I. Joe can stand against the might of Kim Jong Il's marble-lacking fury.

This is a job for Marbo.

Look at it this way... Sooner or later N korea is going to start a war with somebody and millions are going to die.

I say start it now and get it over with before they develop ICBM with more then a stone throws effective range.

Besides, Nobody is going to miss North Korea. The world could use a International Weapons Testing Area!

Who's the evil warmonger agai

I don't advocate nuking a toothless civilian population after it's expended every weapon of mass destruction it has. I don't advocate the slaughter of "27 million civilians". In fact quite the opposite, the thought sickens me, as does the thought of my countrymen in this "civilized" nation not giving a damn about the fates of the oppressed civilian population of North Korea.


So you guys are the evil warmongers. Not me. I don't advocate genocide.

Look at it this way... Sooner or later N korea is going to start a war with somebody and millions are going to die.

I say start it now and get it over with before they develop ICBM with more then a stone throws effective range.

Besides, Nobody is going to miss North Korea. The world could use a International Weapons Testing Area!

I agreed with you up until you became the tenth genocidal maniac to post in this thread. You were going pretty well up until that third sentence. You people are sick.

Now Now Shuma, Please point out where I said I want to nuke them into oblivion and kill every last man, women, and child?

I didnt. You jumped the gun on this one.

All I said in that third line is that if NK ceased to be (Cause it was taken over) nobody would miss it. And during the "War" the world would lob enough conventional arms at it that it might as well be a testing area.

It was supposed to be funny dude.

**EDIT**
Please note Shuma, im not trying to be rude here. Just pointing it out.

You also didn't mention evacuating N Korea before the "testing started. Talking about using a populated country for weapons testing = not the funneh.

jp400 wrote:Now Now Shuma, Please point out where I said I want to nuke them into oblivion and kill every last man, women, and child?

I didnt. You jumped the gun on this one.

All I said in that third line is that if NK ceased to be (Cause it was taken over) nobody would miss it. And during the "War" the world would lob enough conventional arms at it that it might as well be a testing area.

It was supposed to be funny dude.

In your defense, I found it funny.

mcfly wrote: In your defense, I found it funny.

Thank you Mcfly! At least somebody got it.

lord_sutekh wrote:You also didn't mention evacuating N Korea before the testing started. Talking about using a populated country for weapons testing = not the funneh.

Useing a populated country for weapons testing is called Modern Warfare. Has been that way since at least the 19th Century. Evacuating N Korea is a complete and unrealistic joke at best. It isnt going to happen and if/when war breaks out the general populace will pay the ultimate price for their leaders mistakes. Sad yes but thats the way the cookie crumbles im afraid.

The world we live in isnt perfect. Its time you all start getting used to it.

jp400 wrote:

mcfly wrote: In your defense, I found it funny.

Thank you Mcfly! At least somebody got it.

lord_sutekh wrote:You also didn't mention evacuating N Korea before the testing started. Talking about using a populated country for weapons testing = not the funneh.

Useing a populated country for weapons testing is called Modern Warfare. Has been that way since at least the 19th Century. Evacuating N Korea is a complete and unrealistic joke at best. It isnt going to happen and if/when war breaks out the general populace will pay the ultimate price for their leaders mistakes. Sad yes but thats the way the cookie crumbles im afraid.

The world we live in isnt perfect. Its time you all start getting used to it.

Using it for weapons testing would be pointless because you have plenty of open space in America anyway. Nevada desert maybe?

Besides, you can't judge a country by the faults of one man. Bush was an idiot, but I don't judge Americans based on that. The slaughter of innocent civilians in the name of advancing weapons is sick and wrong. They have every right to live. If you think weapons need to be tested, why don't you go and test them on your own civilians? You wouldn't be too eager to do that, I bet.

The world isn't perfect because barbarians like you encourage more pointless bloodshed. You make me sick. People like you are truly the worst example of humanity. If the power-hungry nations would just stop pointing nukes at each other and boasting how great their military is and how they should be in charge, the world would be better off.

But no, some power-abusing politician has to go and beat a horse that should have died ages ago. War doesn't resolve anything. Humanity needs to stop the warmongering and look at what they're doing with both eyes open.

And the off the deep end to nowhere award goes to...

*Drumroll*

Cheese Elemental! Come on down! From your high horse that is.....

No counter-argument? Pathetic.

How about you climb out of your little hole and try to think about other people for once?

LoL.

Oh please Cheese E. Your name fits your attempts to get me worked up.

Besides, its hard to argue something when your 1st reply is so far off based from what I actually said I cant believe you even said what you did.

If it would help I could break it down to kindy level for you!

It's not far off. You said that using a country for weapons testing is fine. I said it isn't.

You're not even trying to counter my argument now, because you have nothing. You can't justify your views.

Is your greatest argument really 'LoL'? Weak.

Oh I can, I just dont see the point in feeding a troll.



Besides, its fun to watch you spin your wheels.

I'm trying to have a debate here. You hide behind your excuses of me being a troll because you don't know what else to say.

OK, fine. Be a wuss. Don't contribute to the thread.

LoL.

Out of ideas, eh?

LoL. The refuge of the stupid.

And your now reported. Enjoy.

LoL at the two of you.

People like you are truly the worst example of the internet. If the power-hungry forum goers would just stop pointing flames at each other and boasting how great their e-peen is and how they should be in charge, the world would be better off.