Those who support war in Iraq

[RoboTripper]

Should N. Korea be the next target?
1) They have a cruel and brutal regime in charge that makes Saddam look tame in comparison,
2) they have WoMD
3) they are developing nuclear capabilities all the while telling the US about it,
3) they have long-range missiles (the ones that we even know about are capable of hitting the West Coast),
4) they have as much of a motive to attack us as Iraq does considering military histories,
5) they are clearly violating a non-proliferation treaty while Iraq might be violating a UN resolution
6) they have a much more highly advanced and dangerous military force (or is that why the US won't do anything?)
7) more on motives - they were being very cooperative until Bush called them part of the axis of evil and then cut off oil supplies which were part of the non-proliferation agreement

I don't support war in the Middle East or against N. Korea, but if it happens I just want to know where it stops

[JMHX]

We aren't moving nearly as fast with Korea due to the simple fact that they have nuclear weapons. We can't push them around. Bush doesn't know what to do now that he has someone that he can't pick on because he knows they can fight back. Nukes pointed at Seattle, even if they've never been flight tested, are enough of a bargaining point to arouse our caution. Funny how Iraq is going to get bombs for having no nukes, while Korea demands aid money to avoid bombing the United States. Sounds like blackmail to me.

[Sweden-Forever]

well.. we're fucked eh?

[TheEvilOne]

SOMETHING must be done about North Korea. The difference between them and Iraq is that while Iraq seeks to acquire nuclear weapons, North Korea already has them. However, I don't think North Korea would nuke us--not if they know what's good for them. If they fired one nuke at us, you can be sure that we would completely decimate their country. I say we call their bluff, and make a show of force. I'll bet they would back down.

[karasz]

At 2/18/03 01:01 AM, TheEvilOne wrote: However, I don't think North Korea would nuke us--not if they know what's good for them.

what would kim jong il have to lose by nuking LA? obviously if he knows he's done then why wouldn't he jsut say fuck the US, if im dieing im going out in style...

:If they fired one nuke at us, you can be sure that we would completely decimate their country. I say we call their bluff, and make a show of force. I'll bet they would back down.

but how do u risk it? this situation is worse than the IRAQ situation...

perhaps a trade is in order... we give teh country food and energy, and oil along with them giving us their nukes and let inspectors back in...

personally i dont see how this would make the US seem weak, and BUSH could say I put the AMERICAN people in front of pride, because they are most important...

[EvilGovernmentAgents]

Kim IS a bigger threat than Saddam, but we've gotta be more careful with the bastard, because of his (untested, short range, outdated) nukes. And we're just too setimental about our cities to let one go to waste. Face it, there's going to be a showdown soon

[Ted-Easton]

Again, we have no right to influence NK. THey may very well have, or be developing nuclear weapons, but so does numerous other countries, and it is not the place of the US to say what they can have in their armouries.
They may be breaking prolification treaties, but that is nowhere near enough to invade/attack.
The US backed out/is considering backing out of the ABM treaty with Russia, but do you think they even consider an attack? Even if they were stronger?
No. Only someone looking for an excuse for war would try to use breaking a treaty as excuse for assault.

[JMHX]

Again, we have no right to influence NK.

But you have to admit, they're a problem that's growing faster than Saddam and his phantom weapons. As I say, Pre-Emptive war is terrorism. But this is truly a sticky situation.

[Sweden-Forever]

i do but korea is totally different. they're taking the offensive

[TheEvilOne]

I'm not suggesting that we rush in and attack North Korea. I just think we should just start readying forces in the region, just to let them know that we are serious. Kim Jong Il may be a crazy bastard, but I doubt even he is crazy enough to take out LA or Seattle and go down in a blaze of glory. He has the same mentality as any other dictator--his main goal is to maintain power. He can't maintain power if he is dead and his country is in ashes. I think he would back off.

[JMHX]

See? I agree with that. Like I've said, I'm not anti-war. I'm anti pre-emptive without a good reason war. This strategy seems decent enough, without any radical stuff. We could just play the bluffing game and see how it turns out. We still don't know if the missile could launch to LA - it's never been tested in flight.