It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

North Korea says talks or "a nuclear missile"

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:08 PM
link   
JAck, but those things that "he did" were all legal. You may not like them(I certainly don't) but since they aren't illegal, and he did inform people of his test, and if he is half the threat it is building up to be, he could have hit Japan or SK - He didn't, so either he is incapable of it(Therefore no threat) or he isn't interested in it yet(therefore no threat).

I agree with you completely about not wanting him to sell it to "bad people", but I think that worry is sadly too late. Not that increasing the risk is a good idea, but with the fall of the soviet union, and Pakistan and india there, I suspect, anyone with the case and lack of ethics/humanity could aquire one.

This is just more FUD IMO.




posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:09 PM
link   
If he is in deed truley nuts.. and hell bent on war.. and doesnt care WHAT we offer him he will prusue nukes and rah rha rah..

then going into meetings will clearly show us this..
and we will be able to face the world and say " Yes he is a badman, a mad man.. and the world NEEEEDS to militarily act NOW "

If we give him this chance, then the world will stand behind us..
because we truley exhausted every possible effort.

We talked before yes, and it failed.
but the rules, and the ball game has DRASTICALLY changed.

The existing concept has gone completely out the window.

Talking and failing.. is much better on every level than simply acting without talking.

Military adventure is NO ANSWER here.
IF we hit nkorea, we will be facing a major 2 front war...
Its too much of an invite for everyone who HATES the use to join in and hit us while we are down.

I emplore people to back away from the hard stance here.

Why would Kim beg for negotiaitioons and talk if he had no intention of wanting to improve relations.

Sanctions..

what exactly is that going to achieve.

if I took a buffet away from you.. what good is also removing the fork later on?
The only option open to the world here, is to entertain this madman and hear him out.

If he makes requests that are sooo stupidly over the top.. well..Your then left with only one option.
But If you have 2 options.. and discount one on your OWN accord.. then your simply leaving yourself open for a very big broad side.



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:15 PM
link   
"Hi, I'm Kim Jung Il, and ya know what, if i can't divide and conquer a nation(s) with brute force or nuclear weapons....hmmm ... what do I do then?

I know...I'll just get them to fight over what's right or wrong about a provocative act amongst themselves...even if I come out with 50% for me 50% against, im already ahead of the game....
"



Look at some of you, willing to beat each other down and there isnt even an ISSUE yet?! No conflict yet?! Meanwhile who do you think is lolling back and laughing?

The American's buttons are so easy to push, and even with that cognizance, you all let it happen anyway.

This is precisely why in the EVENT of some cataclysmic event (like say nuclear release), that I would hope to G-D that quite a few of you are nowhere near me if I were to find a group that IS able to commune together in peace....PEACE .... something a lot of you are touting are exactly the reasons FOR just "bombing the bejesus" out of the North Koreans...what about the people for cryin out loud?? What about them?? G-d help us the day someone gets good and fed up with OUR people....then hear your own cries.


Sheesh.....grow up some of you...PLEASE


AB1



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

Remember when Clinton was Prez? We agreed to one-on-one talks. He (and Albright) negotiated a deal with NK. Aid and lotsa money, and in return, NK would drop their nuclear program.

They took the aid and the money, then continued with their program. Clinton had negotiated in good faith, and Kim screwed us.

That's why Bush wants 6-way talks.

We're not going to play Charlie Brown to Lucy holding the football any longer.


I couldn't of said it better myself. You are so right they took millions of dollers that was meant for food for their people and put it in the military. So yeah I can see why President Bush is not doing one on one. Whats wrong with Kim anyways. Why is he afraid of the 6 party talks? What too many people against him?



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shar

Originally posted by jsobecky

Remember when Clinton was Prez? We agreed to one-on-one talks. He (and Albright) negotiated a deal with NK. Aid and lotsa money, and in return, NK would drop their nuclear program.

They took the aid and the money, then continued with their program. Clinton had negotiated in good faith, and Kim screwed us.

That's why Bush wants 6-way talks.

We're not going to play Charlie Brown to Lucy holding the football any longer.


I couldn't of said it better myself. You are so right they took millions of dollers that was meant for food for their people and put it in the military. So yeah I can see why President Bush is not doing one on one. Whats wrong with Kim anyways. Why is he afraid of the 6 party talks? What too many people against him?


That is a very good point. Why is it that NK wants the meeting with the US alone? Although I suspect it has something to do with that whole axis of evil comment he feels he can get more out of the USA without the other people around? Man, you should just call Rummy, I'm sure he'd hook him up with a fly whip! LOL!



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shar
I couldn't of said it better myself. You are so right they took millions of dollers that was meant for food for their people and put it in the military. So yeah I can see why President Bush is not doing one on one. Whats wrong with Kim anyways. Why is he afraid of the 6 party talks? What too many people against him?

The US has to take some blame for that, why not ship food and grain instead of cash which could be used for anything?



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:40 PM
link   
North Korea says talks or "a nuclear missile"

Can we all say n-u-c-l-e-a-r b-l-a-c-k-m-a-i-l?



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flyer
The US has to take some blame for that, why not ship food and grain instead of cash which could be used for anything?


We've given them tons of grain and fuel, most of which was diverted to their military or to Kim's Communist party officials.



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
North Korea says talks or "a nuclear missile"

Can we all say n-u-c-l-e-a-r b-l-a-c-k-m-a-i-l?


So what would you suggest?

they havent threatend us, they didnt even state they WOULD do something..

they said they hoped it didnt come down to that resort.

but I am curious as to what you beleive the next course of action should be seeker



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

So what would you suggest?

they havent threatend us, they didnt even state they WOULD do something..

they said they hoped it didnt come down to that resort.

but I am curious as to what you beleive the next course of action should be seeker


Well you didnt ask me but i'm gonna chime up anyhow, next step is sanctions with a naval blockade, until they join us in six party talks. No worries any action other than appeasement will invariably lead to war one way or another, because they will start the war before they allow their government to fall.

I say pull our troops out of south korea, and when the time comes we can lend them close air support and air superiority with a nice bombing campaign.



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:06 PM
link   
All good mate,

so they tell us before we impose sanctions that imposing them and not talking is an act of war...

are you still going to impsoe sanctions without talking?



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
All good mate,

so they tell us before we impose sanctions that imposing them and not talking is an act of war...

are you still going to impsoe sanctions without talking?


We would more than welcome six party talks with north korea, if NK however refuses to talk with us then we will be forced to impose sanctions.

Things will likley play out along these lines anyhow.



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
So what would you suggest?

Umm, lets start with rescinding Executive Order 12333, maybe?




they havent threatend us, they didnt even state they WOULD do something..

Is that your interpretation?
Did not a high-level North Korean official tell a Chinese newspaper that they will next proceed to equip a missile with a small nuclear warhead and launch it at the US? Hmmm, sounds like "something" to me.
North Korea Threatens US

Also, North Korea has not "threatend" the US?
June of 2006: North Korea Threatens To Wipe Out US Forces In South Korea
February 2005: North Korea threatens: U.S. bases 'sea of fire'

And more can be linked.




they said they hoped it didnt come down to that resort.

After issuing the threat....right.
My father, before he spanked me, used to tell me that he did not want to do it and that it was going to hurt him more than me....gotcha.





but I am curious as to what you beleive the next course of action should be seeker

Send Kim a dozen flowers of his non-choosing and an invitation to 6-party talks while enlightning Kim to the factoid that the US also reserves the right to first strike, as Kim has threatened against us. I would substantiate such by sending an F/A-22 to drop a 5,000lb 'can' of crap on his palace.



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:15 PM
link   
NK has tested the waters before - anyone remember the USS Pueblo incident? They attacked the ship, killed a US sailor, took the ship, and tortured most of the crew before they let them go. The ship was in international waters by international standards, but NK apparently believes they are better than the international standard and declares (or did at the time) a 50 NM border. They still possess it, even though they offered it back recently, Bush's stance on not negotiating with them kinda got rid of that chance. NK agents have also kidnapped Japanese, and they have tested the response of the SK soldiers by entering the DMZ or shooting across the border numerous times in the past. Aside from the Pueblo some time ago, every single thing he has done in recent times was just stepping it up more to see how far he could test us. After launching a nuclear missle to somewhere, what will he do next?

And yes, we have given him space, talks, and money, and he just used it against us. I do think Bush should at least try once to talk with him, and hopefully get better results than Clinton, but something tells me those would not go well either.



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Seeker, cut the crap.
Your the president, and you need to make a decision NOW.. right now on what to do

what would you do.

P.s
"North Korean officials warned their nation could fire a nuclear-tipped missile if the US"

Check your glasses too cob.
I like your use of stuff too
ive learnt everything u post needs to be double checked cause u tend to completely mis use stuff.

they didnt THREATEN to do those things
"North Korea on Sunday threatened to "mercilessly wipe out" US forces in case of war"

IN CASE of WAR... or do you not see these words?

Lemme post what it says
''If the enemies''

IF thats the magic word mate..
christ do people need to point all thes things out to you?

your posts..
worldnetdaily and worldatwar speak volumes mate.

BERRRRRRRRRR try again.

[edit on 10-10-2006 by Agit8dChop]



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:19 PM
link   
If the last North Korean test-fire is the extent of their military capability, then this most recent development is a joke.

But, this still isn't a good thing. Demanding "talks" or else missiles is still a threat, even if it seems laughable. Kim's playing hardball, but he's forgetting that in this issue, he's also against Japan, China, South Korea, and Russia, to name a few.

We'll see what happens, but I'm wondering if this just eventually dies down. Kim's military advisors will eventually remind him that even if he launches a nuke at an enemy and hides in a bunker, he'll emerge a few years later the leader of a nuclear wasteland.



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Seeker, cut the crap.
Your the president, and you need to make a decision NOW.. right now on what to do

what would you do.

Dude, you definately do not want me as president, I would make Bush and Abraham Lincoln look terrible.

I would do just what I said intially. I do think that what I said was self-explanitory and evident. The only thing I might would change is perhaps the choice of aircraft sent to drop that 5,000lb waste can of literal stinking crap on his palace: maybe a F-117 or B2. The F/A-22 would be just toooo sexy for such a task....


[edit on 10-10-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
We've given them tons of grain and fuel, most of which was diverted to their military or to Kim's Communist party officials.
Still, grain or fuel is going to do a lot less damage than hard cash that can get the military anything they want.



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Orite, so lemme get this clear.

your going to just simply start the bombs dropping?



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
they didnt THREATEN to do those things


Dictionary definition of 'threaten': www.google.com...

:shk:
You can argue word semantics till you are blue in the face, but what do the articles linked have in common?
North Korea threatens the US.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join