North Korea says Sanctions will Accelerate Nuclear programme

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: network dude

what has NK done to the US exactly?

or why, what treaty are they breaking by pursuing a nuclear defense system,
who dictates who can have a missile defense system exactly?
how many countries has NK bombed, or disrupted a government or how many rebels has NK armed or the number of countries invaded in the last 50 years...

Let's put this into perspective. For example: you have a crazy neighbor down the street, that repeatedly said in public, that he was going to burn your house down and kill your family. Later he throws a bomb over your house and into the neighborhood but it didn't go off. How would you handle it?

originally posted by: Nickn3

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: network dude

what has NK done to the US exactly?

or why, what treaty are they breaking by pursuing a nuclear defense system,
who dictates who can have a missile defense system exactly?
how many countries has NK bombed, or disrupted a government or how many rebels has NK armed or the number of countries invaded in the last 50 years...

Let's put this into perspective. For example: you have a crazy neighbor down the street, that repeatedly said in public, that he was going to burn your house down and kill your family. Later he throws a bomb over your house and into the neighborhood but it didn't go off. How would you handle it?

you mean like a crazy neighbor who has military drills near my border, even though they live halfway around the world, or won't allow me to receive things I order via shipping cargo or air cargo?

or a crazy neighbor who is always fighting with someone else or has taken over other people's houses or countries... Hmmm...

yea...

I would definitely build a missile defense system against them.

originally posted by: odzeandennz

originally posted by: Nickn3

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: network dude

what has NK done to the US exactly?

or why, what treaty are they breaking by pursuing a nuclear defense system,
who dictates who can have a missile defense system exactly?
how many countries has NK bombed, or disrupted a government or how many rebels has NK armed or the number of countries invaded in the last 50 years...

Let's put this into perspective. For example: you have a crazy neighbor down the street, that repeatedly said in public, that he was going to burn your house down and kill your family. Later he throws a bomb over your house and into the neighborhood but it didn't go off. How would you handle it?

you mean like a crazy neighbor who has military drills near my border, even though they live halfway around the world, or won't allow me to receive things I order via shipping cargo or air cargo?

or a crazy neighbor who is always fighting with someone else or has taken over other people's houses or countries... Hmmm...

yea...

I would definitely build a missile defense system against them.

The problem being that the entire neighborhood agrees with your crazy neighbor and have already made it very clear, stop building missiles and just get along with the rest without yelling death threats over the fence.

Fact remains that NK already have the "protection" of the Chinese *and* Russians by proximity - neither want US presence there. They dont need a missile defence or nukes to deter the US.

It's a stupid situation that's only gonna get stupider because a certain someone clearly cant see how stupid it is.

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: network dude

what has NK done to the US exactly?

That's a fine question until they -do- do something. And when you are talking nukes (and now threatening EMP), that something will perhaps make us wish we -had- done something before they did that thing. Saying they are not a legitimate threat until they actually toss a nuke at us is ridiculous.

I don't think war is the answer, but also doing nothing is not a great solution either.

what law says no nation can't research nuclear arsenal besides the US and allies?
who dictates this law?
what gives the US the right to dictate what another country does........

so the entire neighborhood agrees person X is crazy yet unable to say what country X has done to country Y and Z...
in what court of law will this stand? certainly not in any US court of law... my neighbors decided someone is crazy thus we acted against him? ffs...

... think for yourself for once, don't silence that little voice of logic and reason

Well, Perhaps if the big mean monster...the USA, actually wanted to be Friends with the North Koreans, not be aggressive towards the North Koreans, didn't continue a rhetoric against the North Korean people and system, then maybe the North Korean people might start to question "why do we hate America, again"

Sanctions are a stupid, childish means in trying to "Control" a country....it has Never worked in the past.

All it does is affect the ordinary citizens of that country, and they continue to Hate the aggressors who imposed the sanctions, even more.
The Elite and Govt. Officials still continue on in their excess ways......It the PEOPLE who are affected.
All sanctions do is play into the hands of their Dear Leaders, as evidence that the West is bad....as it always is.

If the USA and friends want to clean this up, it would be far easier to actually, open North Korea up for business.
Invite trade missions and North Korea's fledgling industry, to World Events.

Perhaps send a Peace Mission of a gift of free food and World Products, for the ordinary citizen to partake of.

If this is rejected by the Govt, perhaps the citizens will realise that it is their Regime, not the West that is holding them back.

Stress a United Korean Peninsula, for the benefit of All Koreans.

Aggression is Always met with Aggression, it is the Human way.

To an Outsider, its the USA and its lapdogs that are continuing the aggression against NK, FORCING them into stupid military defence measures, and childish shows of strength....like launching missiles over Japan.

the USA has shown aggression to NK for 50 Years.....How about doing a flip and showing some Love and understanding.?

Remember, only 30 years ago the Chinese were the most hated, with the Russians, to the US.....Now all is lovey dovey, with China, you even have "American" cars made in China and sent back home.

a reply to: gort51

I understand what you are saying, and wish the resolution were that simple. I think most people would prefer it were easily resolved by showing some compassion. Shame that isn't the case.

As for aggression, both sides have shown it over the past decades. Although the North Korean government has the distinction of being the only ones to kill others in the process of their posturing on the peninsula. ( At least in recent memory)

Fact is whether right or wrong, the U.S doesn't wish to permit a nuclear armed North Korea. North Korea, on the other hand isn't going to give up nuclear and missile research. That's the only simple part of this situation, and I don't think that's going to change.

I believe that the U.S, and some others have tried in the past to offer an olive branch of sorts to NK. Clinton tried it at least. Under what was coined the "Agreed Framework" , the U.S. and other countries (Japan, South Korea, and I think Russia among others) would replace NK's plutonium reactor with two light water reactors and the U.S. would also provide 500,000 TONS of heavy fuel oil a year while the reactors were being built. This was supposedly intended to help offset the loss of the plutonium reactor while the new reactors were coming online. Everyone knew it was BS because the reactor NK had was not even hooked up to their power grid. It was solely being used to produce weapons grade material. But Clinton wanted his deal and it was hoped at the time by some that this would stop NK's nuclear ambitions. I mean after all, they were adamant that the facility they had was just for power generation.

All NK had to do was take the free stuff and hand over any weapons grade plutonium they had. But again, as mentioned earlier, that's something they won't do now, and didn't do then. They proved that by breaking the deal they agreed to, and switched to uranium enrichment instead. This was discovered right around the time the U.S was about to kick off the Gulf War. When confronted with the evidence of what they were doing, they basically said, "Yup we are, so what." They knew the U.S wouldn't want to deal with it at the time.

The long winded point I'm making is that both sides are entrenched in their positions unfortunately. I don't see this changing in the near future.

None of the options have really worked thus far... I mean, give them a huge aid package? Ok, how much of that will actually go the the NK people? I doubt little if any. Any that does trickle down will be gifted by their supreme leader and certainly not attributed to anyone from the international community.

Sanctions? Well if sanctions actually put a squeeze on anyone, it will be the common people. Not the regime nor most of the privileged. As the people are already starving and the NK government isn't too bothered as is, I doubt Kim's conscience is keeping him from sleeping well at night. You'll also still have countries that ignore the sanctions anyway. China, Iran, etc.

I'm not saying a military response is the answer either. We know how that's going to go. Honestly I have no clue how this could be resolved successfully if everyone refuses to budge. But at some point patience ends for one side, and all other options run out. Then the only perceived choice will be military action.

I'm hoping that eventually the North Korean people slowly wake up and there is regime change from within. Every day, more information comes into their country and they learn more about the outside world. It's a slow process though. Probably too slow before things boil over.

Just my two cents.

REAL simple ,yet horrible math, here.
You allow the war to continue with the ceasefire broken by enemy nukes or you stop him now.
REAL WORLD will MAKE things cut and dry,"how it feels" won't help you now.
I very much doubt any north Korean unit will get off a third artillery volley.
I wonder how long the air will smell like cordite?

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
REAL simple ,yet horrible math, here.
You allow the war to continue with the ceasefire broken by enemy nukes or you stop him now.
REAL WORLD will MAKE things cut and dry,"how it feels" won't help you now.
I very much doubt any north Korean unit will get off a third artillery volley.
I wonder how long the air will smell like cordite?

Oh cmon now you know better than that, the only reason kim is still there and in control of his country is because he has developed nuclear weapons.

We both know the U.S only prey on weak states that cannot overtly protect themselves, and little KIm knows damn well his only saving grace are those big bad bombs.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I'd also say the close proximity of Seoul doesn't hurt his position either.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

BACK at you...KIMMIE as a MAD adversary?
I worked there once as a divisional LURSD scout, SO YES I DO know better,evidently YOU included ,as I also took down the 4th largest Army on the planet because some OIL barons felt scarred.
You actually think we haven't got that country WIRED by now after THIS long?
YOU are GREATLY overestimating China I guess.
Kims a speed bump with a fan cub thats waning,HOW many will die for him or surrender?
We could decapitate and the Norks could FINALLY surrender..but I think the new sanctions need to stew a bit before he finally looses it.

WHO here can tell me about RUSSIAN COMMANDS after DESERT STORM to enlighten POINDEXTER above?

what law says no nation can't research nuclear arsenal besides the US and allies?
who dictates this law?

NK agreed to not weaponize nukes. The U.S. held up their side of the agreement. NK did not. As far as why it would be a bad idea, well before Kim, NK has threatened to take SK. When I served there in the mid 80s, I remember their at the time sick leader promising that he would be buried in South Korea when he died. It's not like their threats are new.

NK has repeatedly reneged on deals and promises. The mere fact that pretty much EVERYONE else doesn't want them have nukes, is an indicator it would probably not be a good idea. Why do you think they should have nukes? Because they want them? Good enough reason huh?

a reply to: odzeandennz
North Korea has sent commandos to kill south korean president. Made an attempt to kill him again and his wife dies in the attempt. They have bombed a hotel in Burma in another assasination attempt. They have captured and held seamen in prison camps. Sunk south Korean ships. Snuck commandos into south korea by sub. Sunk ships with torpedos.And lets not forget shelling an island owned by south korea. And all this was after an armistace was signed by North Korea.

So they agreed not to buld long range missiles and nuclear weapons yet they chise to ignore the agreements. So what makes you think in there past actions they could be trusted not to nuke their neighbors? Japan believes they are a huge threat as well as south korea. But by your logic we should ignore our allies and just let him intimidate and attack his neighbors. Even China is worried they are building a wall created a new military base on the border and have built nuclear bunkers. If China is worried what do you think Japan and South Korea think?

a reply to: cavtrooper7



I have no doubt the little dictator is as mad as cut snake, I do however have my doubts with the ability for the U.S to continue projecting its force outwards,successfully, I think you are underestimating the enemy, they also have been preparing themselves for some time, ready for a major conflict.


Don't get me wrong if it comes down to it, I am firmly on the side of the U.S, at this point however I would much rather common sense prevail. Its a fact that if at least half of the population of the U.S wants peace, there will not be a war...

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Then what :Hawaiian property will PLUMET, and China will become emboldened and take the whole sea.
Feelings and popularity won't function this time,we can but hope rail gunsand lasers will keep it local as possible .He will touch one off as a terror weapon underground later however.
The peaceniks are after Trump ,not a war,probably because THEY are a target TOO now.

Chronology of U.S.-North Korean Nuclear and Missile Diplomacy

Pretty good list of relations and actions regarding their nuclear program from 1985 up until yesterday, literally.

a reply to: odzeandennz

Youd have to be insane to own nukes to begin with. Therefore they're all nuts. There's more than enough proof of that.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
REAL simple ,yet horrible math, here.
You allow the war to continue with the ceasefire broken by enemy nukes or you stop him now.
REAL WORLD will MAKE things cut and dry,"how it feels" won't help you now.
I very much doubt any north Korean unit will get off a third artillery volley.
I wonder how long the air will smell like cordite?

Oh cmon now you know better than that, the only reason kim is still there and in control of his country is because he has developed nuclear weapons.

We both know the U.S only prey on weak states that cannot overtly protect themselves, and little KIm knows damn well his only saving grace are those big bad bombs.

You have it backwards the reason hes still in control was he was contained. He couldnt threaten his neighbors enough to warrant the casualties that it would cause to remove him. Now hower hes ramping up his threat level with the ability to kill millions on a global scale means hes become to big a threat to to many civilians. Had he not continued down this path he could have continued to rule his kingdom.

originally posted by: fleabit

what law says no nation can't research nuclear arsenal besides the US and allies?
who dictates this law?

NK agreed to not weaponize nukes. The U.S. held up their side of the agreement. NK did not. As far as why it would be a bad idea, well before Kim, NK has threatened to take SK. When I served there in the mid 80s, I remember their at the time sick leader promising that he would be buried in South Korea when he died. It's not like their threats are new.

NK has repeatedly reneged on deals and promises. The mere fact that pretty much EVERYONE else doesn't want them have nukes, is an indicator it would probably not be a good idea. Why do you think they should have nukes? Because they want them? Good enough reason huh?

Why would you trust the word of anyone who had nukes? Wasn't Hiroshima and Nagasaki bad enough?

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
REAL simple ,yet horrible math, here.
You allow the war to continue with the ceasefire broken by enemy nukes or you stop him now.
REAL WORLD will MAKE things cut and dry,"how it feels" won't help you now.
I very much doubt any north Korean unit will get off a third artillery volley.
I wonder how long the air will smell like cordite?

Oh cmon now you know better than that, the only reason kim is still there and in control of his country is because he has developed nuclear weapons.

We both know the U.S only prey on weak states that cannot overtly protect themselves, and little KIm knows damn well his only saving grace are those big bad bombs.

You have it backwards the reason hes still in control was he was contained. He couldnt threaten his neighbors enough to warrant the casualties that it would cause to remove him. Now hower hes ramping up his threat level with the ability to kill millions on a global scale means hes become to big a threat to to many civilians. Had he not continued down this path he could have continued to rule his kingdom.

I disagree, obviously.

Any country that cannot defend itself with WMD is a soft target and have been invaded and raped already. Iran and Nth Korea are the last 2 countries on the list to be invaded and both are nuclear...I see a pattern there....