North Korea threatens war on US over Kim Jong-un movie

I wonder if he has seen the ax body wash commercial?
We would already been boomed.

a reply to: EnigmaAgent

A act of war?

Last time I checked the US and North Korea were still at war

originally posted by: Ophiuchus 13
Maybe Hollywood should atleast consider name / movie plot changing altering...

And you open the door to every other nutjob makeing demands.

You don't negotiate.

USA has freedom of speech. Little kim should SHTF and get over it.

a reply to: oblvion

I've not seen that one either and it made me LOL. Funniest one yet. I'm sending that out to everyone I know.

Must be a cake shortage in NK.

I understand cake withdrawals can be pretty nasty...

North Korea has spent the past 60 years teaching their citizens from kindergarten to demonize the entire American population, has an American war atrocity museum built upon conjecture and hearsay, and continues to gloat about how they gloriously-captured an American spy ship in 1968 by making it a mandatory tourist attraction in Pyongyang to tell all who visit how evil Americans are.

And they get offended (this time) over a movie? I'll grant you using a current world leader's name and likeness is pretty ballsy, but in all honesty North Korea can go pound sand. All they ever respond with is vitriol and toothless threats, so in other words things are as they always are. Now if they had put in a serious, but sincere and wisely-worded complaint instead, I might be more apt to consider what they had to say and how they felt about the film. But that temper tantrum, like all the others? Pfft!

I hope this movie plays in my local theater. I want to see it now.

To take a more empathetic stance on this, I can understand WHY he would be offended. Like others previously stated, movies haven't used "politicians" real name WHILE they were in office and especially in this particular context that THIS movie is using (assassination), however, this is definitely not an act of war and that's where he is getting carried away - in fact, the way he is behaving over this causes me to have zero sympathy for the nark in any way, shape, or form.

~Sovereign

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: EnigmaAgent

A act of war?

Last time I checked the US and North Korea were still at war

Technically, that's actually true, isn't i? That just hit me. Officially, the war still hasn't ended.

Perhaps that's something the 'peacemakers' can see to after so many decades. You'd think agreeing that a war isn't currently in progress would be a modest enough goal.

Then, perhaps not. It is the DPRK, huh?

originally posted by: Ophiuchus 13
Its observed that not many movie plots show attacks on land mass leaders and perhaps he wants the same respect? Will it be a actual cause of war not sure future rippling effects maybe. But never underestimate your potential counter for who knows what has been designed in those chem/bio labs that don't exist that could harm many. Maybe Hollywood should atleast consider name / movie plot changing altering...

Please tell me you are joking?


Why is Un doing this? N. Korea is currently facing its worst drought in years. The military is being used to try and distribute water while protecting areas where the crops are growing.

This tantrum by Un is a means to distract the N. Korean people.

Its only a matter of time before the North Korean government collapses.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I wish I was Xcathdra, it doesn't seem logical to taunt somebody who is constantly making threats to attack for deep within who knows what's driving he internally.

Also who knows what NK has to actually make one of those threats active within the hidden chem/bio labs. When facing potential global opponents is considered...

a reply to: Ophiuchus 13


So you figure we should curtail the freedoms of our citizens to express themselves in domestic projects...because some thin skinned tyrant half a world away might get his feelings hurt?

Perhaps North Korea needs a national leader with thicker skin..but we shouldn't be sending any messages that our freedoms are subject to the P.C. nonsense of the global opinion.

Kim will get over it...or he'll finally go too far and be buried from it. Either way at this stage. Either works for me.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000

So you figure we should curtail the freedoms of our citizens to express themselves in domestic projects...because some thin skinned tyrant half a world away might get his feelings hurt?

No what I do curtail is that the AMERICANAZ has a lot of hate and eventually some may takes steps to displaying it so why add more wood to the fire? The hope is that if there are things in the NK bio/chem labs that can offset an entire species those in the need to know bases know and are not assuming there is nothing to consider.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000

Kim will get over it...or he'll finally go too far and be buried from it. Either way at this stage. Either works for me.

Yes the will but if he goes too far and feels there is nothing to lose how do you think that will play out on a global theater not to mention the level of danger the oppressed of NK are already exposed too?

I think some are mistaking the compassion 1 has for this species with oking some of Un or NK activity and that is far from the TRUTH. What 1 is expressing is to taunt a energy already with potential unstable behaviors is illogical, that is all.

a reply to: Ophiuchus 13

ok...

What if during his next Tantrum he demands the South surrender. Should we give in to Un in order to avoid a war? What if Un demands hundreds of millions of dollars from countries in exchange for not selling nuclear weapons / weapon info to rogue nations?

We have free speech in the United States and we are not subject to the laws of other nations in the United states. If Un wants to bitch about a movie that accurately portrays the buffoon he can file a diplomatic protest with the US and UN. Once done he should sit down and shut the hell up.

I find it insulting that N. Korea displays the USS Pueblo in Pyongyang. Maybe the US should demand it be removed and if the North refuses, we should finish Un off as the refusal can be considered an act of war.

Appeasement to the aggressor only makes the aggressor more aggressive. What you are suggesting would result in the entire world begin held hostage.

Just to drive the point home about how irrational and dangerous Un is. He is willing to start a war over a movie. Not weapons, not training exercises, but a movie.

a reply to: Ophiuchus 13


America doesn't set it's agenda by the emotional disturbance of others far away or leaders who have the chronic need to shove their own feet down their own throat. (silly statements about a different video and Libya by idiots notwithstanding)

Considering how many are suffering in Kim's labor camp network and languishing under crap like the '3 generations' rule, it might be Mana from Heaven to see him use a Bio or Chem weapon in a small way. *JUST* enough to prove he did it..but not enough to cause any real mass casualties. In the end, the numbers saved by the very quick removal of that tin pot tyrant from the world we live in may FAR outweigh those impacted by his silly temper tantrum.

One like that will, without a doubt, be the last one in his sad little life. I'd almost welcome it, indeed. The world will be a much better place when tin pot tyrants aren't a part of it.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Your logic is understood and accepted Wrabbit2000

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Ophiuchus 13

ok...

What if during his next Tantrum he demands the South surrender. Should we give in to Un in order to avoid a war? What if Un demands hundreds of millions of dollars from countries in exchange for not selling nuclear weapons / weapon info to rogue nations?

We have free speech in the United States and we are not subject to the laws of other nations in the United states. If Un wants to bitch about a movie that accurately portrays the buffoon he can file a diplomatic protest with the US and UN. Once done he should sit down and shut the hell up.

I find it insulting that N. Korea displays the USS Pueblo in Pyongyang. Maybe the US should demand it be removed and if the North refuses, we should finish Un off as the refusal can be considered an act of war.

Appeasement to the aggressor only makes the aggressor more aggressive. What you are suggesting would result in the entire world begin held hostage.

Just to drive the point home about how irrational and dangerous Un is. He is willing to start a war over a movie. Not weapons, not training exercises, but a movie.

If he demands that the South surrenders then there will be sound of loud scoffing. The North Korean armed forces are a joke. They can't win a war and Kim knows it. The problem is that he is locked into a policy of pretending that North Korea is a viable regional force. It's not. It's a pathetic, crippled, dictatorship that only exists now because the Chinese didn't want a border with South Korea.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

ok...

What if during his next Tantrum he demands the South surrender. Should we give in to Un in order to avoid a war?

No not at all this is in response to the assignation movie, Xcathdra .

originally posted by: Xcathdra

What if Un demands hundreds of millions of dollars from countries in exchange for not selling nuclear weapons / weapon info to rogue nations?

Still answer would be no Xcathdra

originally posted by: Xcathdra

We have free speech in the United States and we are not subject to the laws of other nations in the United states. If Un wants to bitch about a movie that accurately portrays the buffoon he can file a diplomatic protest with the US and UN. Once done he should sit down and shut the hell up.

1 can understand your aggressions towards he as well as the Freedom of speech.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

I find it insulting that N. Korea displays the USS Pueblo in Pyongyang. Maybe the US should demand it be removed and if the North refuses, we should finish Un off as the refusal can be considered an act of war.

I think you miss my original point which is its not good to fan an already existent flame...

originally posted by: Xcathdra

Appeasement to the aggressor only makes the aggressor more aggressive. What you are suggesting would result in the entire world begin held hostage.

what 1 is suggesting is not to taunt nothing more Xcathdra

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Just to drive the point home about how irrational and dangerous Un is. He is willing to start a war over a movie. Not weapons, not training exercises, but a movie.

Really don't think he will start war but he may invest into things that can cause one if you understand where I am coming from. So why taunt he?

To conclude 1 is experienced with the imbalanced and how to rebalance them more then it can be explained understood or accepted...

This guy is like way past psychiatry and is ready for a lobotomy.
Hey Kim: Just imagine how truly dangerous you would be to other nations if any of your weapons worked. Or didn't misfire. You might just be a contender for a glove slapping contest. Funny about that, whenever I think of you fighting anyone, I think of the 3 stooges. You going to come after me now too?

Maybe he should put his country on a hunger strike too. That will really get our goat.

Who would give this any more than a glance before filling it in the round can. No one even listens to NK leadership rants, do they?