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.

 

Ron Paul, "North Korea is not a threat."

page: 2
18
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I agree they "want to be." But they're not.




posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by xbranscombex
A few counterpoints on his arguments:

1) The idea that NK has a right to launch satellites

Satellites are fired into space, not at other nations...
They don't have a "right". They lost that right about 5 years ago.

2) The idea that N Korean technology is too primitive to be a threat

a. They have already done nuclear tests
b. They are an unstable military dictatorship, there's always the chance they'll try something stupid

3) Polititians are talking about going to war

Actually, the US has yet to release an official statement and I haven't heard talk from any polititians besides the president. Paul seems to be more alarmist now then any other polititians with his talk of 'bombing NK'.

4) The North Koreans aren't going to attack us

No one said they were. The concern is that they'll attack S Korea or Japan, liberal democracies and allies that are greatly beneficial to the United States for both strategic and economic purposes. An it should be noted that those countries are pretty pissed right now- check out the protests going on. The situation with NK isn't just a case of the US pulling the strings, these people who are directly affected have a say and the world should take that into account.

5) If America wasn't there, North and South Korea would be a united, free country

NK started the war and its citizens are deeply embroiled in a cult of personality and isolation from the rest of the world the likes of which weren't seen even in the USSR. To say that they would have given up and stopped fighting is absurd.

6) Sanctions don't work

He then says that we should cut off money. Sounds like sanctions.

7) Communism fails

Damn right it fails, but that doesn't mean it does so peacefully. Fascism didn't fall peacefully either.



1. Paranoid. No one loses his right to use space peacefully, whatever they did 5 years ago

2. If you really try to suppress every country that develops weapons, you will fail

3. I'm sure if your congress man says there were politicians who talked about war, it's true

4. Yes they did. Even in german media they speculated about that tapedong missiles can reach the US-coast

5. US interventions really helped a lot. You can clearly see that in iraq and afghanistan. Both are now peaceful, democratic societies.

6. the term "sanctions" refer to to a multitude of methods, that have different effects. Some may have bad, some less bad effects

7. You really compare fascism and NK? You must have lost your mind.

[edit on 7-4-2009 by Wachstum]



posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Hello everyone,

I do not mean to sidetrack this discussion and if this is out of line please accept my apologies up front.

I have been thinking about the way the world is and how society is in general and there are some very strong similarities. North Korea, Iran and any other country developing nukes or suspected of such are chastised and punished by the UN. At the same time, the US, China, Russia, Pakistan, India, Israel, and others have a nuclear arsenal and nothing is done. I am not condoning nuclear weapons so please don't take it that way; however, this is in perfect alignment with the structure of society.

There are basically only two groups of people in the world; the haves, and the have nots. This is the way it has been for centuries and I suppose it will be this way til the bitter end. In society the haves will do everything in their power to ensure that the have nots will never become part of their group. This same principle applies to North Korea, Iran...etc.

Why?

Why can you have a balloon and I can't? Is it because I am too young and I might pop the balloon and startle my little sister? Who are you to tell me what I can and cannot have?

The only way those in power stay in power is because we the people submit to their power. There can be no power on this planet without submission to such power. The reason governments survive is because people allow them to survive through their submission to them.

As history has shown us a thousand times over, when the people refuse to submit to those whom wish to control them, the controllers lose their power. Its really just that simple. Do you think the United States could survive for one single year without the submission of their people? It does not take violence to overthrow a government, it takes only a lack of submission by its people. As governments become more and more powerful they understand that more and more people will refuse to submit to them, thus they make these things called laws. Laws are a way to force the people into submission through fear (the fear of incarceration or worse). They use the guise of public good for these laws and that may very well be true (in many cases it is); however the law itself is just another form of control.

A large percentage of governments throughout history has been benign and the laws imposed were for the most part mainly for the good of society, but as we have also seen throughout history, as the government gains strength it increases its control over its population. This I believe is done to ensure its continued existence. But history has also taught us that as the control increases, the public frustration increases concurrently and eventually the people refuse to submit to the control any longer and their is either revolution through violence or appointment of a new government. We have seen this on numerous occasions in our own lifetime with countries such as Iran, Pakistan, and a host of others.

Thomas Jefferson once said "It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own." So that being said, while we sit back and watch ours and other governments try to strip the liberty of other governments around the world, we must remember that this plight will some day become our own and as the present times are showing us, this is happening as we speak.

We are trying to parent our grandparents. It is actually kind of funny looked at through that perspective. A 230 year old country parenting a thousand year old country and in some cases many thousands of years. Who appointed us the world's mother? Did they submit to this? Many have due to our money and through fear of us. So the next question obviously would be, can fear and jealousy maintain this control? If you take a look around the world it seems as though it cannot.

Those with power are never satisfied with the amount of power they have and always seek more power. This is what creates men like Napoleon, Hitler, numerous Roman leaders, Alexander, and hundreds of others throughout history. Hence Lord Acton's famous quote "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Notice anything similar about all of these instances throughout history? They all ended violently and cost hundreds of millions of lives of those whom "submitted" to their control right to the bitter end.

These countries with nuclear weapons are no threat to us, we have defenses for that. It is simply a matter of imposing our control over them. Some like Iran and North Korea refuse to submit to this control; three cheers for their courage. Another quote from Thomas Jefferson I love that applies here is "One man with courage is a majority." Too bad we don't have many "majorities" in our own country isn't it?



posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by DarrylGalasso
 


Hello back, nice read. I'm glad there are some people left with minds and guts. You know what? No man or woman has the right to oppress another one. You hear sentences like this all the time. But i don't say it easily, i am serious.
Kants maxim: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."

What wants everyone to become the universal law for everyone? Easy, everyone wants every other one to do the right out of his own will. People do not dispute about the goal. The goal is clear: freedom, peace, love joy for everyone. People only dispute the way to the goal. And that is the flaw. You can not learn freedom in prison. You must be allowed to commit crimes and sins and flaws. That's why we, as humans, have freedom at all.
So now people say: You can't allow people to murder, to rape, or whatever cruelty you like to mention.

And that's true. But on the other hand, if you steal a mans or womans freedom, you rape and murder the persons freedom.

What is more important: The human body or the freedom? Why do we think of someone as a hero, who rescues another guy and dies because of that? Cause we value freedom over the mortal body. We only forgot this value



posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Amazing that many of you are angry at our country possibly losing it's sovereignty and our Constitutional laws because of international law.

Great to see you have no problem with it happening to other nations.

Hypocritical if you ask me.

We have the weaponry to wipe NK off the face of the earth for eternity and any other nation for that matter.



posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 



Really...honsetly...are you that clueless?

"They are not a threat." Because we have more nukes and they would get removed from the planet they are not a threat.

Wow, what color is the sky in your world?

A suicide bomber is not a threat either. It is just one guy.

Dahmer was not a threat. he only had a knife.

You are working on the assumption that the government of Kim Jung-Il works in reality.

The US, France, Britain, China, Russia spent 60 years developing these weapons and the controls over them. Now a certifiable madman who starves his own people, has a MILLION MAN standing army and nukes developed from plans he bought from AQ Khan, another lunatic who sold his knowledge to the higest bidder took 5 years to put a nuke capable rocket in space. WHO CARES that it could land in KOREA or JAPAN or VIETNAM when he was aiming for Alaska right?

Really, stop talking until the adults are done.



posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 01:57 PM
link   
i Agree that Ron Paul would have made the best President.

i agree that NK is no threat and feel bad for its sheltered people.

Attacking one of Chinas economic interest would only spark a new world war, that be like china nuking Mexico off of the map, it would almost surely cause us to launch a retalitory strike out of sheer fear...



posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   

because I am too young and I might pop the balloon and startle my little sister?
=/= bathing South Korea in nuclear fire.

lulz.


Also, North Korea is an economic interest of China like Zimbabwe would be for us.

Charity =/= Trade

[edit on 7-4-2009 by Iblis]



posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


Wow you have more nukes so you're way of life is better, how do you know that the people in NK aren't happy with their way of life. been listening to the MSM again.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
I agree with RP.

Why do we put up with communist China and Russia, but want to bully Cuba and NK.

Said it in many of similar threads, the US should

1)recognize NK as communist.
2) Pull our troops out of SK.
3)drop all sanctions, renew ties.
4)sign a peace treaty.

Let NK and SK work out their problems.


I agree with all but #2. If we pull out our troops, then we leave the door wide open for a South Korean invasion. It would be nice to have a reunited Korea though. Maybe I'd ease up on the sanctions, but I wouldn't drop them outright.

These things take a little time to heal up.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 08:19 AM
link   
North Korea is a threat, in that, if Kim would starve his own people, who knows what he will do to others. But in the sense of the media portray, no, NK is not a threat, Im sure the US wouldnt have to go for more than a day wiping them out.

I think of them as like a bee, sure you can get stung, but you dont worry about it all the time.

Theyre not something you take your eyes off of but, all the fearmongering doesnt help. You guys are probably right it was just a distraction from the G20.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 08:29 AM
link   
While NK posses no direct threat to the US, they still do pose a threat to several of our allies. NK makes most if its money by building and selling missiles based of soviet SCUDS to anyone who is willing to to fork out the cash.

Basically they are following the United States and Russia's business model of selling weapons to anyone who can pay in order to finance and advance its own military. After all, war is extremely profitable for those who supply them.

As far as nuking NK off the map would be the fastest way to kick start WWIII and turn many of our allies against us. In the time it takes our nukes to impact after launch. Seoul, South Korea would be a smoldering rubble pile causing a global political backlash against whoever attacked NK.

NK is close to having successfully transformed a 50 year old short range missle design into a 4000mile ICBM with limited access to advanced materials and electronics. They will sell these to the likes of Iran and "terrorist" organizations in order to finance their government.

This is where the real threat comes in. Israel desperately wants to attack Iran. The only thing stopping them is US presence in Iraq preventing them access since we refuse to give the codes needed to not be flagged as a threat by our air defense systems. We have also begun fighting in Pakistan who is a nuclear power. We currently have their government on our side but things could easily change and rapidly escalate resulting in black market sales of working nuclear weapons to those who would not hesitate to use one.

NK is like a bastard child. You give them just enough to keep them from burning your neighbors house down but if you physically discipline them they run straight for the authorities and have you locked up. Threats and blackmail is how the government is funded by large part.

They way TPTB have gotten things set up they could kick off WWIII at any time they want by simply letting Isreal have its way with Iran and drop a single bomb on NK. And if TPTB are lucky they can disrupt Pakistan enough to escalate its conflict with India into a full fledged war.
Once the mayhem starts Russia and China being highly opportunistic will take the distraction to invade surrounding countries they have been wanting for some time but the UN has not allowed.

Global war insues, the rich get obscenely more wealthy. 1/3 of the worlds population dies in 2-3 years from war and starvation. The "NWO" steps in as the only way to return peace by installing a global socialist government and the recession ends since 1/2 the worlds population is either dead or left to die.

Looks to me like everything is going as planned.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   
I said this same exact thing when i first heard it .Why would they commit suicide makes no sense what so ever. Just another illusion.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ridhya
North Korea is a threat, in that, if Text, who knows what he will do to others. But in the sense of the media portray, no, NK is not a threat, Im sure the US wouldnt have to go for more than a day wiping them out.

I think of them as like a bee, sure you can get stung, but you dont worry about it all the time.

Theyre not something you take your eyes off of but, all the fearmongering doesnt help. You guys are probably right it was just a distraction from the G20.


I would ask you, as a citizen of a country that places sanctions on North Korea, how does this affect the people? Let me tell you. When sanctions are placed on countries "the people" are the major losers. North Korea is not a particularly fertile part of the world. Having lived in South Korea for years I have an experience of the diet. A watermelon can cost up to $20. One of the only fruit grown in South Korea is the apple. All other fruit is imported.

Can you imagine how difficult the food situation would be in North Korea, even without the sanctions.

The situation is similar in Burma. I was there in January and the sanctions are making it very difficult for the people. Tourism is down by 75%. This is how the locals survive.

I don't believe the North Korea is a threat to the United States. It's laughable to suggest this. They quite simply don't have the technology.

It's worth pondering how advanced North Korea would be; if it wasn't for the sanctions.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
I agree with RP.

Why do we put up with communist China and Russia, but want to bully Cuba and NK.

Said it in many of similar threads, the US should

1)recognize NK as communist.
2) Pull our troops out of SK.
3)drop all sanctions, renew ties.
4)sign a peace treaty.

Let NK and SK work out their problems.


Well isn't it easy for you to say what the US "should" do!

Our presence in places like South Korea and around the world IS to deal with Russia and China.

I can confidently say that professionals in the world of foreign policy, American statesmen, etc. are playing a delicate game dealing with the entire planet and countries like NK, Iran etc. I also imagine they have 20 and 30 yr plans and more to make the world a better place.

If they calculate that a threat will emerge from a certain area in the future which would put Americans or other honorable countries people at risk then they had better be dealing with it.

Their skills and wisdom to stay in South Korea and to surround Iran far exceed your ability to understand the reasons as one Internet forum surfer.

Unfortunately for NK, they aren't playing "our" game. There is no other field for them to play on. There is one earth so it seems to be "our way or the fried way" if for nothing else than to continue our way of life and to protect our children.

-edit: spelling

[edit on 8-4-2009 by Wormwood Squirm]



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 05:25 PM
link   
That is exactly what I thought Ron Paul. We just want Kim out of there for some reason...



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by crmanager
reply to post by David9176
 



Really...honsetly...are you that clueless?

"They are not a threat." Because we have more nukes and they would get removed from the planet they are not a threat.

Wow, what color is the sky in your world?

A suicide bomber is not a threat either. It is just one guy.

Dahmer was not a threat. he only had a knife.

You are working on the assumption that the government of Kim Jung-Il works in reality.

The US, France, Britain, China, Russia spent 60 years developing these weapons and the controls over them. Now a certifiable madman who starves his own people, has a MILLION MAN standing army and nukes developed from plans he bought from AQ Khan, another lunatic who sold his knowledge to the higest bidder took 5 years to put a nuke capable rocket in space. WHO CARES that it could land in KOREA or JAPAN or VIETNAM when he was aiming for Alaska right?

Really, stop talking until the adults are done.




Do you really need to insult the man who started the conversation? Instead of trying to stifle his freedom of speech you should instead debate your side with him. You won't prove your point to anyone just by talking down to them and dismissing them so quickly.

Now for my side. The U.S. has become a world police. I used to laugh at that term, thinking it was silly, but it is the truth. We butt in everywhere. When did this come about? When did we turn away from our ideals of sovereignty, personal responsibility, liberty, etc...

Why is it we must dictate to other sovereign nations what they can or can't do? Our system of government was never designed to be a conquest or aggressive state. It goes against everything we stand for. If you want proof, read some biographies of the Founding Fathers.


"Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none."

"Conquest is not in our principles. It is inconsistent with our government."

-Thomas Jefferson



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 07:43 PM
link   
What I got a laugh out of was the trimming of $1.4 billion off of the missile defense budget; announced the day after the NKs test fire another rocket.


Do you taste that? Yeah, it's the irony...



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   
I seem to remember Americans saying that another country was a threat to the United States- Iraq. They "had" weapons of mass destruction", and they were a real threat to the US. 90% of Americans believed that also.
Now here we are 7 years later, and little North Korea is a "threat" to the US.

Haven't we learned anything?

I guess not.




top topics



 
18
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join