Page 2 of 4

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Tue May 25, 2010 11:00 pm
by Juliette
MEZZANINE wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia_pacific/10129703.stm

North Korea has short range Nukes, so what can or will anyone do ?

Also what happens when North Korea gets longer range nukes, will they be allowed to bully and attack anyone they want without retaliation ?
Why not? Isn't that what we (as in the International Community) are allowing the USA to do the past decades? And since Northern Korea would hardly present a threat to the balance of power in the world.. (What, five nuclear warheads means you have an arsenal now? I've got bigger stuff in my government-subsidised backyard.) what does it matter? Why would they be special from the USA, Israel, or the Netherlands? Let's all proliferate in peace, and not get our knickers in a twist if the gun we bought shoots us in the face. It happens. Hazards of international diplomacy, nothing for the general public to worry their pretty little heads about. Not like the plebs would understand the ramifications and origins of this situation anyway.

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Tue May 25, 2010 11:13 pm
by [KMA]Avenger
Thriller wrote:LOL avenger's posts read like a crappy dan brown novel,

Secrete pacts;
Missinformation
LOL North Korean warhead found in Alaska....

OMg can't stop laughing.


We hear at the NWO have some questions for you avenger.

1; Why would the US give arms to Northkorea? (plz read about the korean war)
Following up your explanation; what would they gain by doing so?

question 1 deserves special treatment :-D

for most of my adult life i grew up respecting Hitler, not his actions during the war and leading upto its outbreak, but what he achieved as a statesman. i mean, the man took a bankrupt and broken nation and built a nation that took on the world...until, i found out that the west had funded and built Nazi Germany and all her glorious roads, public buildings, parks and of course...her factory's.
so, what did the west gain by spending billions to build Nazi Germany while the west was in the middle of the great depression? its the same thing here, is it not??


2; Who was Kim's father and what were his public policies?

3; What happened to Korea after ww2?

4; Where did Khan go to school and in Region to did he grow up?

NOW answer ze questions or we put a bullet in Alex Jones fat round head.



actually, i haven't listened to an AJ broadcast in over 3 months, and don't plan on listening to any more of his broadcasts!

http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/index.html? ... id=1648385

[spoiler]NK Missile Warhead Found in Alaska
By Ryu Jin - Staff Reporter - South Korea Times

The warhead of a long-range missile test-fired by North Korea was found in the U.S. state of Alaska, a report to the National Assembly revealed yesterday.

According to a U.S. document, the last piece of a missile warhead fired by North Korea was found in Alaska, former Japanese foreign minister Taro Nakayama was quoted as saying in the report. Washington, as well as Tokyo, has so far underrated Pyongyang's missile capabilities.

The report was the culmination of monthlong activities of the Assembly's overseas delegation to five countries over the North Korean nuclear crisis. The Assembly dispatched groups of lawmakers to the United States, Japan, China, Russia and European Union last month to collect information and opinions on the international issue.

The team sent to Japan, headed by Rep. Kim Hak-won of the United Liberal Democrats, reported, Nakayama said Washington has come to put more emphasis on trilateral cooperation between South Korea, Japan and the United States since it recognized that the three countries are within the range of North Korean missiles.

According to the group dispatched to the U.S., American politicians had a wide range of opinions over the resolution of the nuclear issue, from a peaceful resolution to military response.

Doves, such as Rep. Edward J. Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat and co-chairman of the Bipartisan Task Force on Nonproliferation, called for a peaceful settlement of the current confrontation, by offering food, energy and other humanitarian aid to the poverty-stricken country, while urging the North to give up its nuclear ambitions.

Rep. Markey also said the North should return to the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the U.S. should make a nonaggression pact with the communist North.

Hardliners, however, warned that the Norths possession of nuclear weapons will instigate a nuclear race in the region, provoking Japan to also acquire nuclear weapons. Rep. Mark Steven Kirk, an Illinois Republican, said the U.S. might have to bomb the Yongbyon nuclear complex should the North try to export its nuclear material to other countries.

Over the controversy concerning the withdrawal of U.S. forces stationed here, most American legislators that the parliamentary delegation met said U.S. troops should stay on the peninsula as long as the Korean people want, the report said.[/spoiler]



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-p ... 908571.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4180286.stm

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/ludwig032306.htm

http://www.newstime.co.za/WorldNews/Kim ... lert/5661/


there are a few more links about Obama and SK putting the army on alert but i think those links above are more to the point. besides, we already know they will be on alert.

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Tue May 25, 2010 11:19 pm
by Ashu
Thriller wrote:Why would the US give arms to Northkorea? (plz read about the korean war)
Following up your explanation; what would they gain by doing so?

2 reasons:
1:Arming an enemy that will most likely starve to death, in other words, scape-goat for any future operations.
2:What does a winning part finally wants after the war is over? Control. Which, strategically is best brought by a puppet-government..in this case both North and South Korea.

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm
by Juliette
[KMA]Avenger wrote:[spoiler]NK Missile Warhead Found in Alaska
By Ryu Jin - Staff Reporter - South Korea Times

The warhead of a long-range missile test-fired by North Korea was found in the U.S. state of Alaska, a report to the National Assembly revealed yesterday.

According to a U.S. document, the last piece of a missile warhead fired by North Korea was found in Alaska, former Japanese foreign minister Taro Nakayama was quoted as saying in the report. Washington, as well as Tokyo, has so far underrated Pyongyang's missile capabilities.

The report was the culmination of monthlong activities of the Assembly's overseas delegation to five countries over the North Korean nuclear crisis. The Assembly dispatched groups of lawmakers to the United States, Japan, China, Russia and European Union last month to collect information and opinions on the international issue.

The team sent to Japan, headed by Rep. Kim Hak-won of the United Liberal Democrats, reported, Nakayama said Washington has come to put more emphasis on trilateral cooperation between South Korea, Japan and the United States since it recognized that the three countries are within the range of North Korean missiles.

According to the group dispatched to the U.S., American politicians had a wide range of opinions over the resolution of the nuclear issue, from a peaceful resolution to military response.

Doves, such as Rep. Edward J. Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat and co-chairman of the Bipartisan Task Force on Nonproliferation, called for a peaceful settlement of the current confrontation, by offering food, energy and other humanitarian aid to the poverty-stricken country, while urging the North to give up its nuclear ambitions.

Rep. Markey also said the North should return to the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the U.S. should make a nonaggression pact with the communist North.

Hardliners, however, warned that the Norths possession of nuclear weapons will instigate a nuclear race in the region, provoking Japan to also acquire nuclear weapons. Rep. Mark Steven Kirk, an Illinois Republican, said the U.S. might have to bomb the Yongbyon nuclear complex should the North try to export its nuclear material to other countries.

Over the controversy concerning the withdrawal of U.S. forces stationed here, most American legislators that the parliamentary delegation met said U.S. troops should stay on the peninsula as long as the Korean people want, the report said.[/spoiler]
I would have thought you, of all people, would know that a South Korean newspaper writing about North Korean missiles is always lying to exaggerate the situation. ;)

[KMA]Avenger wrote:there are a few more links about Obama and SK putting the army on alert but i think those links above are more to the point. besides, we already know they will be on alert.
The US Army has not been 'off' alert since 9/11, G. :)

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Tue May 25, 2010 11:30 pm
by [KMA]Avenger
well, i'm going by what i can find...


without sounding conspiratorial in all of this, and believe it or not, i am trying to be as factual as i can be...much of the info is no longer available :?

as for the alert thingy, its in regards to the new threat.

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Tue May 25, 2010 11:37 pm
by Juliette
[KMA]Avenger wrote:well, i'm going by what i can find...

without sounding conspiratorial in all of this, and believe it or not, i am trying to be as factual as i can be...much of the info is no longer available :?
*grin* That's because even newspapers cannot afford to post propaganda and false news once it's been shown to be nonsense.. ;) Just think back to the whole "vaccines cause autism"-question. The guy doing the research was shown to be a bloody fraud too.. but with the current condition of the internet, his false results still circulate as though they are godsent messages of warning. :)
[KMA]Avenger wrote:as for the alert thingy, its in regards to the new threat.
There is nothing new about the threat, nor is there anything threatening about it, but I understand what you meant. :D

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Tue May 25, 2010 11:38 pm
by [KMA]Avenger
:-)

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Wed May 26, 2010 8:23 am
by Thriller
You did not answer Ze questions just post a bunch of news articles trying to confirm what you said.
Now No one will listen to Alex "lard ass" Jones ever again. :smt073

lol at south korean propoganda article.

Do not read news articles with questions in the title either.... especially from the canadian "free" press.

NOw consider your sources anvenger and plz look into my questions.

The US signed a non proliferation agreement with 183 other countries in 1970 against the spread of nuclear weapons. North Korea ratified this agreement on December 12, 1985, and withdrew from it on January 10, 2003 following U.S. allegations that it had started an illegal enriched uranium weapons program. Part of the reason the North Koreans signed the treaty was to establish plutonium based nuclear electric plants. The two plants that exist in NK were funded by the G7 countries (all of them not just the US). As it turned turned out though NK's intenttions were disengenuous.

The US eagerly helped NK in the 80's because of the aftermath of vietnam. The political climate after the korean war was both similar in circumstance and hostillity to that of vietnam and the US did not want the attrocities that occured in the latter to carry over to the former. Eager to quell discontent and save face on the world stage the us eagerly attempted to mend relationships between the koreas be bringing both up to first world standards. One succeeded the other failed. I'll let you guess which (all thanks to Kim's crazy ass father). So the US is partly to blame for the crap only because it got into a fight it had no buisness gettin ginvloved in called the korean war (Canada was there too). China backed the north and the former allies of ww2 backed the south.

your master in the shadows ideakogy is just a paranoid delusion. You ever watch that 23 movie before?

@Ashu; Learn to military strategyz pl0x , k thks bai

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 9:11 am
by Jack
This is cause for war! We need to nuke their asses before it's too late! :mad:

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 9:14 am
by Juliette
Dr. House wrote:This is cause for war! We need to nuke their asses before it's too late! :mad:
Yes, because that would obviously solve the issue in Korea, but wipe out any remaining credit the USA has in the international community. Let's nuke them.

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 9:39 am
by Jack
Wakko wrote:
Juliette wrote:
Dr. House wrote:This is cause for war! We need to nuke their asses before it's too late! :mad:
Yes, because that would obviously solve the issue in Korea, but wipe out any remaining credit the USA has in the international community. Let's nuke them.


Jo's converted to the cause now Jack :D

Woohoo! I just wish that I could be the one the drops the bombs.

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 10:04 am
by Thriller
LOL you won't be saying that after you've seen your first civillian casuality.

DO you REALLY want TOTAL WAR

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 10:30 am
by Jack
Thriller wrote:LOL you won't be saying that after you've seen your first civillian casuality.

That's what you think. :smt047

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 10:49 am
by Thriller
Dr. House wrote:
Thriller wrote:LOL you won't be saying that after you've seen your first civillian casuality.

That's what you think. :smt047


I didn't know you were that psychopathic, they have help for people like you.

I also can't see them putting someone like you in that position, youd be more frontline infantry material.

Re: North Korea sank a South Korean warship

Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 11:41 am
by Jack
Thriller wrote:I didn't know you were that psychopathic, they have help for people like you.

I also can't see them putting someone like you in that position, youd be more frontline infantry material.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with not being a little pansy ass **Filtered**. [-X