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 pre-emptive strikes on "key sites" in United States

page: 2
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by clay2 baraka
 

[cut by poster]
Back on point; the propaganda is heating up on both sides and all it takes is a very slight change of wording to make a threat appear to be far more than it is. There are many powerful people out there that are looking for any opportunity to inflame this situation to meet their political ends.

Very dangerous. .

[edit on 6/15/2009 by clay2 baraka]




posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by stevcolx
 


What an abnormal response, NK isn't the USA or France or Russia or China... it's a genuinely totalitarian state run by One man alone with no oversights...

In essence like letting a "guy" have his own personal nukes

I'd never suggest allowing Any one nation, not my own or another have a monopoly on Nukes, but they have deterred allot more death and war than they have ever caused...

It's okay for Russia to have Nukes or China or America

These Civilizations have what to loose...

Men... Individual men sometimes commit suicide and allowing this would be suicide, it's a genuinely grave situation



Now in fairness, sometimes I wish there were no Nukes..

But come on, to say some dude with really big hair, platform shoes... that allows his people one radio station, no contact with the outside world and kid naps Japanese actresses for sex... should be allowed to have Nukes because... and forget the USA ...lets say China does is ridiculous



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by total newbie
 


Not a bad idea, I have said the same thing... regardless of the leader, why make them starve what the heck did the bulk of North Koreans do, some of the sanctions are indeed unfair and too extreme



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by whoshotJR
 



How are you going to negotiate with people that don't hold up their end of the bargain? How are you going to negotiate when they wont meet with you? How do you get food to the people that are starving when lil Kim doesn't want them to have it?


Well those are all valid questions, and I think they hold the key to all that ails us!

N. Korea is a small starving country with a ranting tyrannical leader. It should not be that hard to get food and propaganda into the country. We love to "liberate" people. Broadcast radio signals, and TV signals into the country. Air drop food and literature about how how much the U. S. wants to help. Attack from the populace up to the leader. Cut his legs out. Some Snicker's bars and Coca Cola would go further than Nukes I bet!



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 


I will see if I can find it but it was awhile ago that I read it so I probably wont be able to.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Here is an example of a report on how the leaders live with pools and palaces yet the people starve though.



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by stevcolx
 


We do, way too much so... too many places, too much to handle effectively...

The real reason we are there, is Japan

An arrangement that goes back 2/3 of a century now by which we defend them...

If Japan took a Nuke, right now or SK the world economy would be at game over instantly...

Lot of leverage the lil Kim actually has at the moment

But

It's high time Japan be allowed to re-arm

It is unfair to the Japanese and their safety and we can no longer handle the job as well as we should too many enemies...



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:05 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by clay2 baraka
 


Oh Lordy.
What, am I talking with kindergarden students here? Can't you read?

There is a clear distinction in the statement I quoted. Let's go over this again:

“Our armed forces will cause the powerful strikes on key installations in the United States,....

This part of the statement clearly mentions IN THE US.

... and destroy all imperialist aggressor forces in any point of the globe they may be”, - stressed the Deputy Defense Minister North_

And this part of the statement distinctly aparts itself from that, to include OTHER sites around the world.

What is so hard to understand? Or are you as delusional as NK themselves thinking anyone is going to buy into to stupid talk that they can put a nuke on Washington, DC? How about let's start denying some ignorance here?



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by stevcolx
I don't get all this bullpoo. Was America threatened when it did all it's Nuclear Weapon Testing? Was France threatened when it did it's testing? And the many other countries for theirs? NO!!!

Why in the hell is America threatening NK for testing out their capabilties for Nuclear Weapon construction when America is the biggest threat in the world for a Nuclear War?

Ok I guess the answer is because they think they run the world. NOT!!



Is it too much to ask of you to educate yourself on this issue before ranting against the US? Please do some research on the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

www.armscontrol.org...

Treaties are binding.



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by stevcolx
Thing is how did all this start? Did NK invade anyone? Did they threaten anyone while the were testing their atomic power? (Not weapons)

Are NK allowed to have a Nuclear weapon arsenal to defend themselves? Or is it only US and their allies that are allowed?

U see I'm a bit mesmerised by the US's involvement in all this. They seem to have a lot of fingers in other people's pies. And not for the good of the people of the world.

See what I'm getting at?


Actually, as I understand it, NK has received huge amounts of oil, and other "aid" in return for NOT pursuing nuclear arms. When you receive aid in this fashion in return for your compliance you need to follow the rules you agreed to in the first place. Since they have essentially defrauded the countries that supplied the aid, they should be penalized to some degree.
Since I'm not American, I don't really care either way, but with the rhetoric that Kim Jong has been uttering I'd suggest he get stocked up on some serious sunblock.
..Ex



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyingCupPlate



You should really STFU in my opinion and stop spreading bull sh|t around the internet.
You haven't been to North Korea, you never met one. So how the hell would you know what is in there silo's?

Typical internet know it all and politician in one.



Perhaps you should take your own advice.

There have been many, many reports from inside North Korea (many by people who have left NK) about how the people are treated. You don't have to have been to North Korea in order to have an understanding of what a repressive government has done to it's people.

By the way, have you ever been to North Korea? If not, then, by your own logic, you are not qualified to comment.

[edit on 15-6-2009 by Night Watchman]



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by v3_exceed
 


And don't forget who gave them the nuclear information in the first place.

*Looks in Bill Clintons direction and winks*....




posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:14 PM
link   
It would be pretty easy to put a nuke on a boat, fly the wrong flag, and sail into some big, or small, US port and then light it off.

I sincerely hope that NK doesn't really consider this as an option.

I also hope that China talks with little kimmy and sets him on a better path.



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   
You can blame the US for a lot of things...but the situation with North Korea is not one of them.

The only reason the US is involved at all is because of our agreement with South Korea. Period.

Further, I'm sure if you took a vote amongst the American people as to whether or not we want OUR troops, OUR family, OUR children involved in a war with North Korea -- the answer would unequivicably be no.

I, for one, think ALL US troops should return HOME. Forget protecting Japan, forget South Korea, forget Iraq, forget Afganistan -- just BRING THEM HOME.

But to say that the US created and is encouraging the situation with North Korea is naive at best.



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by mopusvindictus
reply to post by stevcolx
 


We do, way too much so... too many places, too much to handle effectively...

The real reason we are there, is Japan

An arrangement that goes back 2/3 of a century now by which we defend them...

If Japan took a Nuke, right now or SK the world economy would be at game over instantly...

Lot of leverage the lil Kim actually has at the moment

But

It's high time Japan be allowed to re-arm

It is unfair to the Japanese and their safety and we can no longer handle the job as well as we should too many enemies...





interesting perspective



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by lpowell0627
 



You can blame the US for a lot of things...but the situation with North Korea is not one of them...


Sure I can blame them. From day one.



But to say that the US created and is encouraging the situation with North Korea is naive at best.


Oh really?
Now who sounds naive?


It is easy to see how this situation in North Korea is an engineered crisis much like Iraq was.

If the Clinton administration hadn’t facilitated a deal to provide them with modern nuclear technology in the mid-1990s, it is likely that the North Koreans would still be trying to figure out how to build nuclear weapons.

The fact that Bill Clinton’s wife and now U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is condemning North Korea due to their nuclear weapons tests and continued pursuit of nuclear weapons is an absolute joke considering her husband helped them along in the process by giving them access to modern nuclear technology.

This is just another scenario showing how the U.S. creates artificial crises as part of the problem – reaction – solution paradigm that is used over and over again to push us closer to world government.


link


[edit on 15-6-2009 by silo13]



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   
Forgive me if I am ignorant on this subject, but if I am not mistaken, the US is at war with NK. We never finished the korean war in the first place, there was never any resolution to the war, only walls that went up and a dead zone between the north and south.

This is partly why we still have lots of troops in south korea, because hostilities could return at any moment.

I don't know if its all part of some bigger plot or plan by China and or Russia to let us duke it out with NK, but I suspect they are watching, hoping we mess up and rekindle a war.

And it is almost looking like that is what is starting to happen. There is no easy solution to this problem, just like Iran, diplomacy is not going to work in the long run.

So whats left?
The dragon could very well be unleashed again like it was at the end of WWII.



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by silo13

Sure I can blame them. From day one.



Sure you could but it makes you seem completely uneducated on the situation. That is your right, of course.




Oh really?
Now who sounds naive?



Actually, you still seem extremely naive if you are going to try to offer a link to some unknown website in support of your claims.

Very weak, my friend, very weak.

[edit on 15-6-2009 by Night Watchman]



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   
How difficult would it actually be to blow some things up in the US?

I mean anyone can build a bomb with stuff from the local hardware store, not to mention I am sure there is quite a market for arms available in the US. You can pretty much buy anything and I am sure NK/Kim would be able toss some money around if it really wanted to.

I bet there are even "groups" available for hire. Or maybe that is just hollywood.



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Night Watchman
 


It does not matter where the information came from, if it's fact.

I’ve supplied facts - you’ve supplied personal attacks and hysterics.

I might add your last post adds nothing to the topic of this thread.
Please stop trolling.


PRESIDENT Bill Clinton hailed the nuclear agreement signed in Geneva with North Korea yesterday as 'a good deal for the United States'. Sceptics, however, saw the deal as having been done on North Korean terms.

Under the terms of the deal, North Korea will freeze its nuclear programme, thought to be aimed at developing nuclear weapons, and dismantle its existing reactors, which produce high quantities of weapons-grade plutonium.

In return Pyongyang will receive modern light-water reactors, whose dollars 4bn ( pounds 2.7bn) cost will be borne mainly by South Korea and Japan.

These reactors will be reliant on imported fuel, and will produce far less plutonium. Until they come into service in about 2003, the international community will pay for North Korea's oil imports, with the US contributing dollars 5m for next year's bill.




Donald Rumsfeld who visited Saddam Hussein in 1983 as part of the Reagan administration’s special envoy to the Middle East played a key role in helping provide chemical weapons to Iraq. These weapons provided to Iraq by the U.S. would be used against the Iranians during the Iran-Iraq war as well as against their own domestic population. The use of chemical weapons by Hussein was one of the reasons the Bush 41 and Bush 43 administrations used as an excuse to engage in military operations against Iraq. This is despite the fact that the U.S. provided the chemical weapons to Iraq to begin with.

Rumsfeld was also linked to the North Korean nuclear agreement. Rumsfeld sat on the board of ASEA Brown Boveri or ABB the Swiss Engineering firm that was contracted by the U.S. to provide the two nuclear reactors to the North Koreans from 1990 – 2001. The deal would go through in 2000 while Rumsfeld was still sitting on the company’s board.


Pyongyang wins generous nuclear deal from US

peace

[edit on 15-6-2009 by silo13]




top topics



 
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join