Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
North Korea Biggest Problem WW3  
User currently offlineFlymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7240 posts, RR: 6
Posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1232 times:

North Korea is the big problem right now. Accroding to U.S. resources they have 2 nukes and are making more. CNN reported that the Nuckes could Strike Tokyo in Minutes. Tokyo being destoryed would be terrible for the whole World. Not saying it would Happen . But it's not like North Korea would win in any war. it Would be US UK Isreal, and probly Japan Canada, France, one are side as well, So if North Korea tries to do anything there would be no more North Korea on the Map. And i am Serious. Bush better think of somthing to make sure N Korea dose not use any of there power. N Korea power would only be good for a few strikes. And i think Honolulu better be carefull. Closet Major U.S. city to N Korea. But i belive that nothing will happen. But if Suddam or N Korea did anything they would both be taken off the map by atleast 5 countries. i think


"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineUal747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1220 times:

N. Korea would be out of its mind to give the first strike. This would be agression on their part and upset even their allies. While I think N. Korea is a problem, I don't think they will use their nukes. They are in too desperate need for resources to endanger any aid that they are receiving. N. Korea will not strike first in my opinion. The forces against them would blow them away making south korea an island. Don't worry about doomsday, cause it ain't gonna start with N. Korea.

UAL747


User currently offlineRai From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1213 times:

A big concern about North Korea’s weapons program is that they have a past history of selling weapons to just about anyone who asks for them, terrorists included. They’re also responsible for a number for terrorist incidents themselves, but mostly against South Koreans.

I would agree with the assessment that the North Koreans are unlikely to strike first in most circumstances, but who is to say that others won’t with the technology and know-how they obtain from the DPRK? Pakistan is said to have gotten their nuclear expertise from North Korea. That is the main concern with them.

Yes, they are desperate, they are destitute and I get the feeling that Dear Leader’s regime is in a lot of trouble within his nation, however they wouldn’t be crazy enough to strike first…yet. But then, desperate people do desperate thing, so you never know.


User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8337 posts, RR: 23
Reply 3, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1204 times:

If anyone, anywhere nukes a US interest, NORAD'll fire every bird we have at them and blast them off the earth. Do they really want to risk it?


This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineILOVEA340 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 2100 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1190 times:

I'm personaly more worried about Bush using some of his little gismo's...

User currently offlineTWAL1011 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 206 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1189 times:

I'm personaly more worried about Bush using some of his little gismo's...


Like what? His Death Ray.

Get over the Bush beating already.


User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 6, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1171 times:

North Korea is a big problem right now, with all of its military flexing. Oh, and flyMIA, work a little on your grammar and such, I almost had a migraine after reading your post.


NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineBigo747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 1165 times:

North Korea is actually NOT the biggest problem. Yes, the country has the ability for "mass destruction", but I believe the country is in verbal threat stage.

North Korea still needs China and Russia. N. Korea can't afford to lose their communist allies (or ex-communist allies) if they did something like a major attack.

Also, Bush will not launch military action against North Korea, because N. Korea don't have oil. US will not launch military action against a country that has nothing profitable to offer.


User currently offlineHkgspotter1 From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 1164 times:

TWAL1011,

Now thats an American reply If ever I've heard one !!

The problem is BUSH, now you get over that. This guy is going to get us all into WW3 before long.

Why is it that you guys just can't accept that he does anything wrong ? Just look how he's trying to back out of the mess he made.

For once a country is now telling the USA to do it there way or forget it, strange how its always OK for America to use this way but not for any other country.



User currently offlineAC320 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 1160 times:

Erm, the North Korea way should in no way, shape, or form be a remotely good way to get your point across, or even considered fodder for an argument like this despite some hard-on's for the bashing of certain nations. If this even crosses your mind for 1/4 of a second you frighten me. Nations like North Korea are going to cause WW3 long before Bush gets even close.

User currently offlineRai From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 1157 times:

Why is it that you guys just can't accept that he does anything wrong ? Just look how he's trying to back out of the mess he made.

Nobody has said Bush is perfect, but North Korea is hardly the angel you purport them to be. North Korea has been making these weapons long before Bush came into power. This situation was always a "mess". Of course, this is excatly how you folks in China want it to be...until it got way out of control even for your own good. The last thing China wants to see in a united Korea.


User currently offlineBen88 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1093 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1152 times:

What I find amusing is the fact that Bush said that the U.S. "will not be blackmailed" then offered N. Korea aid if they stopped their nuclear program.

User currently offlineCx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6625 posts, RR: 55
Reply 12, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1150 times:

Well, the US has nuclear weapons, but it's not ok for other countries to have them. I know the arguement, that the US was always considered a 'responsible' nation, whereas countries like North Korea are not. However a couple of months ago, Bush said that he could NOT rule out using nuclear weapons in Iraq. Now that doesn't sound very responsible at all, especially towards a country that has not shown any aggression towards the US in many years. Why doesn't Bush go and nuke China, there's been more attrition there in recent years. Oh isn't the EU got something about subsidies and steel tariffs? Why not nuke Europe while he's at it! He's pissed everyone off already, why not a few more countries? Responsible, pah!

User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1134 times:

What I find amusing is the fact that Bush said that the U.S. "will not be blackmailed" then offered N. Korea aid if they stopped their nuclear program.

That's a distortion. What Bush said was that the U.S. is willing to extend aid to North Korea, as it would to any country in serious trouble, but only if NK stops it's nuclear program.

This is a promise to treat NK as a normal country, if it acts like a normal country.

Charles


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1134 times:

Well, the US has nuclear weapons, but it's not ok for other countries to have them. I know the argument, that the US was always considered a 'responsible' nation, whereas countries like North Korea are not. However a couple of months ago, Bush said that he could NOT rule out using nuclear weapons in Iraq. Now that doesn't sound very responsible at all, especially towards a country that has not shown any aggression towards the US in many years.

It's very simple. If Saddam indeed does have WMDs of any kind, and in a pinch uses them (or a trigger-happy Iraqi officer fires one off) the only appropriate response available are nukes. Bush is responsibly clarifying to Saddam that if he uses WMDs, he will be destroyed. Butter to say so, than leave Saddam with the hope of being able to frighten Bush off with the threat of WMD use.

However, it is out of the question that the US is the first nation to use a WMD. You can rest assured that that is the last thing that Bush will want to order.

As far as "responsible" and "irresponsible" nations, I think we can lay on a pretty good definition. A responsible nation will have
- A democratically elected government that reflects the will of its population.
- Well established safeguards and failsafe mechanisms for the use of force or specific weapons systems

for an example of such safeguards, the US president cannot launch a nuclear strike on his own - several people have to agree that the order is valid, according to a number of rules which they have memorized, such as whether the president appears to be in control of his faculties, is he being coerced, or is in some way acting contrary to the interests of the nation. This is different from North Korea or Iraq, where a dictator has absolute power, and nobody can deny his orders (if they do they will be shot).

Therefore, any country which is a dictatorship, with one-man rule, should be considered as not being responsible enough to own such weapons, as the international community cannot feel comfortable that safeguards prevent their easy use.

There is a middle ground as well. China and the former USSR are non-democratic and authoritarian, but have a sufficiently complex cammand-and-control structure to assure a reasonable safeguard. Leonid Brehznev or Deng Xhou-peng (sp?) could not single handedly order a launch (although Stalin and Mao might have had that power).

Charles


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1118 times:

Nice post Charles.

Hkgspotter1,

"The problem is BUSH, now you get over that."

This is a typical European, holier-than-thou statement. The US can do no good in your jaundiced, hyper-cynical mind.

Lets be clear. The problem is and has always been the Kim dynasty and Saddam, now you get over that.

Kim Jong Il is perhaps is the most wicked ruler in power and you condemn Bush for not giving into his blackmail. In fact, you seem heartened by the DPRK's intransigence. I see that you subscribe to the Neville Chamberlain School of Diplomacy.

These tyrants need to be dealt with and Bush is doing it. Even if imperfect, his actions are the only serious alternative than any world leader has put forth. Everyone else seems to think if you ignore a problem, it will just go away.


User currently offlinePROSA From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5644 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1113 times:

War with North Korea? What a laugh! If war ever did start, I am 100% convinced that it would be one of the quickest and most one-sided wars in history, making the 1990 Gulf War look like the Battle of Stalingrad in comparison. North Korea's "million man" army would surrender without a fight at the outbreak of hostilities. Kim Jong Il would be overthrown and executed, that is if the US didn't reach Pyongyang first.
I believe that the entire course of the war, from the first shots to North Korea's capitulation, would be shorter than the 1967 Six-Day War.



"Let me think about it" = the coward's way of saying "no"
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1110 times:

PROSA,

I think your confidence is misplaced. I think a war would be very bloody. Even if some of his forces surrendered, it would only take a handful of loyalists to lob a few shells and chemical tipped missles into Seoul. It's a quick trip from the DMZ.


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1103 times:

I am glad Bush is not putting up with DPRK.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/859191.asp


User currently offlinePilothica737 From United States of America, joined May 2001, 297 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1100 times:


This is the way I see things:
All of these little countries that are messing with the U.S are going to pay dearly for their actions. I'm not worried about war at all. If N. Korea were to wage any type of "military" action against the U.S, it would be like hamering the nails of their own coffin.
I might not know all the details, and I may have just made myself look really stupid, but that's how I look at it. Then again, I'm a pacifist, so maybe my ideas are being clouded by my feelings about war. Anyhoo take care everyone
Jacqueline


User currently offlineOO-AOG From Switzerland, joined Dec 2000, 1426 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1086 times:

These tyrants need to be dealt with and Bush is doing it. Even if imperfect, his actions are the only serious alternative than any world leader has put forth. Everyone else seems to think if you ignore a problem, it will just go away.

As far as Bush is RESPECTING international laws and conventions to achieve his quest for a better world. He needs to comply, like anybody else, with any UN resolution and he has no right to have an unlimited power on the international scene. The only serious alternative is and will remain the United Nations, not the United States.



Falcon....like a limo but with wings
User currently offlineFlyinIllini From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 59 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1086 times:

It is all rhetoric guys (and gals Jacq  Big grin ) N. Korea is trying to embarass the US and Bush on a worldwide stage at a very volatile point in world politics. They did the EXACT same thing to Clinton. It has been going on for years. They suddenly back away from treaties and talk war. Please...do you really think they would risk their very being to challenge the US? Only because the US is focused on the middle east. It would be complete lunacy for them to back out of the treaties and refuse aid. They are running their mouths and thumping their chests to embarass the US and distract everyones attention away from the fact that the N. Korean government finances, harbors and provides transportation to known terrorist groups. Bush will stay tough, and they will eventually shut up.

Dubya


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1084 times:

OO-AOG,

You make it sound like it is the US that is flouting the UN. Iraq has been flouting the UN resolution for 11 years (132 months) and now Bush wants to do something. If it were not for Bush, there would be zero inspections going on today. None. Blix and the others would be in Vienna. Bush put Saddam on notice, if that if all 15 members of the UN security council dither on a decision to enforce their very own resoultions, he will do it for them instead. Saddam needs to understand that there is a tangible consequence for non-compliance.

I hope:

a. Saddam disarms unilaterally and the US ends deployment (most desireable)
b. If Saddam remains intransigent, the UN approves military action

I hope that this does not happen:

c. US goes it alone.
d. The world gets cold feet and leaves Saddam to build his nukes

If the UN gets cold feet, we have no choice but c. or the world will pay the price later.

Finally, the DPRK kicked out the IAEA and withdrew from NPT and again, and the whole thing is blamed on Bush because he took a stand. Kim was building nukes for years before Bush got elected in violation of their own agreements.



User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1079 times:

Iraq has been flouting the UN resolution for 11 years (132 months) and now Bush wants to do something

How long had Israel been flouting the UN resolution for.....?


User currently offlineOO-AOG From Switzerland, joined Dec 2000, 1426 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1071 times:

You make it sound like it is the US that is flouting the UN. Iraq has been flouting the UN resolution for 11 years

The only thing I say N79969 is that the USA should respect the UN and the international laws whatever does Iraq. As the ''leader of democracy'' and president of the "Land of Free", I can't imagine Bush taking unilateral decisions and invading a country without UN approval.
The inspections have restarted, thanks to the US... agreed, but as far as I know no WMD have been dicovered so far, so lets wait till the end of the inspections before making any conclusions.



Falcon....like a limo but with wings
25 N79969 : They just found chemical warheads. More to come. President Bush and PM Blair have been vindicated. The threat of UN action is no threat at all to Sadd
26 Swissgabe : The DPRK and Kim know exactly that they couldn't afford any attack (WMD's or conventional) to ANY country. Kim knows that if he would do that, his clo
27 N79969 : Swissgabe, In 1991, Kim Il Sung contemplated an attack on the South in spite of the risk of annihilation. The real danger of the DPRK is that one of t
28 Swissgabe : Two possibilities: 1. Kim doesn't know what he is talking about (similar to Bush) 2. Kim only plays with Japan, ROK and the US In my opinion the only
29 Tbird : Greetings: I see a silver lining in this cloud of possible war with Iraq and N. Korea. If you look at the countries of the world today only Iraq and N
30 N79969 : "In my opinion the only think which makes the DPRK dangerous is, that Kim couldn't have the control over his military and his generals. Hardliners in
31 747-451 : HKGSpotter: "For once a country is now telling the USA to do it there way or forget it, strange how its always OK for America to use this way but not
32 Post contains images 747-451 : OO-AOG: "As far as Bush is RESPECTING international laws and conventions to achieve his quest for a better world. He needs to comply, like anybody els
33 Arsenal@LHR : I have never understood why small nations like North Korea are trying to act tough with the US. If they want to play ball with US, the US could wipe o
34 Ual747 : Well, I'm not trying to stereotype, but when I was in Japan and China, (lived in Beijing for 2 months), I did notice that both the Chinese and Japanes
35 Post contains images Ual747 : Also, everyone hears our rhetoric more because we speak loudly in the US, and even louder in foreign countries! Also, no one can miss us with our cowb
36 Bigo747 : Well, I'm not trying to stereotype, but when I was in Japan and China, (lived in Beijing for 2 months), I did notice that both the Chinese and Japanes
37 Lehpron : "It's Asian culture. That's why sometimes I hate it. Hey, It's called ORIENTAL culture, you cannot automatically assume every Asian from Israel to Sin
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
US Citizen Going To North Korea? posted Fri Apr 10 2009 00:28:40 by AA7295
North Korea Test Fires Missile posted Sat Apr 4 2009 20:54:33 by Falcon84
Japan Defenses Readying For North Korea Missile posted Thu Mar 26 2009 18:40:35 by Aaron747
North Korea Regime Change-Imminent Announcement? posted Sun Oct 19 2008 22:05:09 by StasisLAX
North Korea ‘uses Doubles To Hide Death Of Kim’ posted Mon Sep 8 2008 05:37:16 by Mortyman
North Korea Shuts Down Reactor posted Sun Jul 15 2007 01:33:24 by Allstarflyer
North Korea Agrees To Halt Nuke Work posted Tue Feb 13 2007 14:27:05 by ANCFlyer
Royal Navy Feared "Too Weak" Re: North Korea posted Mon Oct 16 2006 07:37:34 by AerospaceFan
John Kerry Plays Politics With North Korea posted Sun Oct 15 2006 17:09:28 by AerospaceFan
North Korea: Can Sanctions Work? posted Sat Oct 14 2006 23:21:30 by 9V