[sakuragi]

Why did NK start the nuclear test?
What did NK want?
Do NK want to stop all the sanctions?
If NK agree to stop the nuclear test in exchange of cancelling all the sanctions, would you make that deal?
What did NK do in the past which trigger all the sanctions?
Other than nuclear test what NK offend the rest of the world today?

I did not care too much about politics and probably asked some naive questions....

[Bermy]

hrothgar, on 2017-September-03, 16:00, said:

I'm sure that your drug addled ramblings are of enormous comfort to the Chinese government

Think about it. If nuclear war started in that area, how could China not get caught in the fallout? Please all you Chinese people out there, don't get caught napping on this one.

[Bermy]

A wasp just flew over my head and I wondered.

Imagine if I were God with a can of insect repellent in front of the full nest. Imagine if a little wasp came out and said please leave us alone we won't harm you, promise.

Would I

1) Risk Taking them to another place?

2) Kill them all?

3) Leave them alone?

[diana_eva]

Bermy, on 2017-September-06, 11:57, said:

A wasp just flew over my head and I wondered.

Imagine if I were God with a can of insect repellent in front of the full nest. Imagine if a little wasp came out and said please leave us alone we won't harm you, promise.

Would I

1) Risk Taking them to another place?

2) Kill them all?

3) Leave them alone?

You must be one very undecided God. Why did you create the wasps, or any insects as a matter of fact if you were gonna even consider killing them with insect repellent?

[Winstonm]

Bermy, on 2017-September-06, 11:57, said:

A wasp just flew over my head and I wondered.

Imagine if I were God with a can of insect repellent in front of the full nest. Imagine if a little wasp came out and said please leave us alone we won't harm you, promise.

Would I

1) Risk Taking them to another place?

2) Kill them all?

3) Leave them alone?

If I were god, I would be an imaginary creation of someone's mind so my choice would be irrelevant. The truly scary idea, though, is that this person in whose mind I exist believes that I know something that he doesn't and he should follow my lead.

[RedSpawn]

The_Badger, on 2017-September-06, 02:03, said:

Today, Wednesday, North Korea is sabre-rattling again this time at the UN. Let's forget the rhetoric for a while.

What concerns me now is that North Korea might continue to fire missiles and weapons for practice, not aiming at any particular target, just for provocation, in the same way they conducted their hydrogen bomb test.

Given that many of these weapons have disintegrated while being used, and North Korean technology is nowhere near as sophisticated as in the West, what happens when one of these 'tests' lands near or on Japanese, South Korean or USA (Guam, for example) soil? What then? North Korea says sorry, this wasn't meant to happen?

That for me is the frightening scenario, a mistake or accident. But how is the UN and the international community going stop him testing all weapons, not just the nuclear ones? Kim Jong-un is a complete law unto himself. This situation is going to continue for years and years if no resolutions can be enforced by the (gutless - in my view) UN.

I tend to agree with Vladimir Putin - surprisingly - that further sanctions will hurt not just North Korea but the North Korean people generally. That, in itself, isn't an option. I fail to see any possible solution to the North Korean problem generally.

Yup. Good prediction.
https://www.msn.com/...arns/ar-AArt92y

[fromageGB]

Am I unusual in thinking that the USA is the problem not North Korea? Why can't countries just let other countries do what they themselves have already done - build and test nuclear weapons? Let NK have them. No problem. If they launch against anyone, then other nuclear countries will obliterate them, and therefore they won't. That's what a nuclear deterrent means. Peace of mind.

[RedSpawn]

fromageGB, on 2017-September-08, 09:57, said:

Am I unusual in thinking that the USA is the problem not North Korea? Why can't countries just let other countries do what they themselves have already done - build and test nuclear weapons? Let NK have them. No problem. If they launch against anyone, then other nuclear countries will obliterate them, and therefore they won't. That's what a nuclear deterrent means. Peace of mind.

Quote

The Korean Armistice Agreement is the armistice which serves to ensure a complete cessation of hostilities of the Korean War. It was signed by U.S. Army Lieutenant General William Harrison, Jr. representing the United Nations Command (UNC), North Korean General Nam Il representing the Korean People's Army (KPA), and the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army (PVA).[1] The armistice was signed on July 27, 1953, and was designed to "insure a complete cessation of hostilities and of all acts of armed force in Korea until a final peaceful settlement is achieved."[2] No "final peaceful settlement" has been achieved. The signed armistice established the Korean Demilitarized Zone (de facto a new border between the two nations), put into force a cease-fire, and finalized repatriation of prisoners of war. The Demilitarized Zone runs not far from the 38th parallel, which separated North and South Korea before the Korean War.

The signed armistice established a “complete cessation of all hostilities in Korea by all armed force”[2] that was to be enforced by the commanders of both sides. Essentially a complete cease-fire was put into force. The armistice is however only a cease-fire between military forces, rather than an agreement between governments.[28] No peace treaty was signed which means that the Korean War has not officially ended

.
The Korean War never officially ended so acts of provocation between North and South Korea matter. And since the United States has labeled North Korea an axis of evil, it is on our radar since we must protect South Korea who provides a lot of our imported goods. ALWAYS FOLLOW THE $$$$.

Quote

South Korea is the 5th largest export economy in the world and the 3rd most complex economy according to the Economic Complexity Index (ECI). In 2015, South Korea exported $537B and imported $422B, resulting in a positive trade balance of $115B. In 2015 the GDP of South Korea was $1.38T and its GDP per capita was $34.6k.

Trade. South Korea imported about $25 billion in agricultural goods in 2013, 4.8 percent of all its imports. Agricultural exports were $4 billion. The United States is the chief exporter to Korea, supplying a range of products, with corn, meat, hides, soybeans, milling wheat, and cotton among the major items. (bold and ital mine)

The top exports of South Korea are Integrated Circuits ($63.8B), Cars ($41.9B), Refined Petroleum ($29.5B), Passenger and Cargo Ships ($21B) and Vehicle Parts ($20.4B), using the 1992 revision of the HS (Harmonized System) classification. Its top imports are Crude Petroleum ($50.6B), Integrated Circuits ($31B), Petroleum Gas ($20.5B), Refined Petroleum ($14.6B) and Cars ($9.8B).

(bold mine) See http://atlas.media.m...le/country/kor/

[hrothgar]

fromageGB, on 2017-September-08, 09:57, said:

Am I unusual in thinking that the USA is the problem not North Korea? Why can't countries just let other countries do what they themselves have already done - build and test nuclear weapons? Let NK have them. No problem. If they launch against anyone, then other nuclear countries will obliterate them, and therefore they won't. That's what a nuclear deterrent means. Peace of mind.

I think that most people would agree that I am more than happy to criticize the US government.

With this said and done, this is one of those cases where I believe that the US is unequivocally in the right and the North Koreas are in the wrong.
Moreover, I think that the overwhelming majority of the world would agree that North Korea is a particularly bad country to join the nuclear club.

1. The more countries that have nuclear weapons, the more likely it is that something is going to go wrong. I'd be much happier if the number of countries that had nukes was decreasing rather than increasing.
2. The North Korean leadership is desperate for hard currency and has a history of selling weapon's systems to third parties
3. The North Korean leadership lashes out militarily in an attempt to get attention

The US has a long standing history of military interventionism.
At the same time, we've had nukes for a long time and (thankfully) we've exercised restraint with respect to using them.

(Please note: I am scared shitless that Trump will do something stupid, but that is hardly an argument in favor of giving the North Korean nukes)

[cherdano]

fromageGB, on 2017-September-08, 09:57, said:

Am I unusual in thinking that the USA is the problem not North Korea?

Unusual? No.
A bit dumb, yes. Or would you feel safer in a world where North Korea had nuclear weapons? And Lybia? And Ukraine? And South Korea? And India? And Iran?
Oh, you would? That would be even dumber...

[The_Badger]

What's going on here? These channels are nothing like the brutal ones for ISIS propaganda and provide valuable intelligence to the International Community as per the comments in the article.

http://www.msn.com/e...ocid=spartandhp

Today, is North Korean Independence Day - 9th September. South Korea believes that another show of military force by the North will happen today.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist but the timing is so coincidental.

[Bermy]

If you couldn't containium the Uranium from the Iranian
You said You must herd the mustard from the custard
You didn’t stop the career of the carrier to Korea
If you fail again armegeddon out of here

[The_Badger]

Just led the latest: Second missile fired over Japan island of Hokkaido. What now? I read what Noam Chomsky says about North Korea. I read what he says about the USA. I try to look at what is happening in North Korea from a different perspective. But facts are facts, and talking is talking: firing not just one missile but two is aggravated provocation. At what missile number do we actually say 'enough is enough'?

[Winstonm]

The_Badger, on 2017-September-15, 00:22, said:

Just led the latest: Second missile fired over Japan island of Hokkaido. What now? I read what Noam Chomsky says about North Korea. I read what he says about the USA. I try to look at what is happening in North Korea from a different perspective. But facts are facts, and talking is talking: firing not just one missile but two is aggravated provocation. At what missile number do we actually say 'enough is enough'?

And do what?

At this point a functioning and fully-staffed State Department would be nice.

[The_Badger]

Winstonm, on 2017-September-15, 08:16, said:

And do what?

At this point a functioning and fully-staffed State Department would be nice.

Let's put this another way. Today, in London, a terrorist bomb failed to detonate - thankfully - but caused people to be injured. We know (to a certain extent) who the enemy is, and they have done this before, so both Europe and the USA have procedures in place to try to prevent it happening.

North Korea flies potential bombs over Japan. They don't cause injury, but if they had a warhead, and had landed and detonated in a town or city there would be casualties. We know who the perpetrator is, he has done this before, so both Europe and the USA should have procedures in place to try to prevent it happening.

Europe and America try to capture or terminate ISIS members. With North Korea we sit on the fence and allow Kim Jong-in to continue to laugh in our face. Why?

[hrothgar]

The_Badger, on 2017-September-15, 11:42, said:

Europe and America try to capture or terminate ISIS members. With North Korea we sit on the fence and allow Kim Jong-in to continue to laugh in our face. Why?

Because no one is so callous as to condemn a million South Koreans to death because they don't like being laughed at.

There's roughly 25 million people living in Seoul and the North Korean have approximately a 1,000 heavy artillery and multiple launch rocket systems in range of the city.

Its really easy to play tough guy when you aren't the one paying the bill...

[Winstonm]

The_Badger, on 2017-September-15, 11:42, said:

Let's put this another way. Today, in London, a terrorist bomb failed to detonate - thankfully - but caused people to be injured. We know (to a certain extent) who the enemy is, and they have done this before, so both Europe and the USA have procedures in place to try to prevent it happening.

North Korea flies potential bombs over Japan. They don't cause injury, but if they had a warhead, and had landed and detonated in a town or city there would be casualties. We know who the perpetrator is, he has done this before, so both Europe and the USA should have procedures in place to try to prevent it happening.

Europe and America try to capture or terminate ISIS members. With North Korea we sit on the fence and allow Kim Jong-in to continue to laugh in our face. Why?

Again the question can be asked: what do you think can and should be done? Trump and Tillerson have effectively nullified our best options, the State Department and our allies working in concert to bring world pressure to bear on North Korea, Russia, and China. China and Russia do not want anti-missile defense systems around their borders, so our willingness to aid South Korea and Japan with such systems would pressure Russia and China to intervene more strongly with North Korea.

Of course, that's not as much fun as blowing everything up, but at least the world survives this way.

[The_Badger]

hrothgar, on 2017-September-15, 12:15, said:

Because no one is so callous as to condemn a million South Koreans to death because they don't like being laughed at.

There's roughly 25 million people living in Seoul and the North Korean have approximately a 1,000 heavy artillery and multiple launch rocket systems in range of the city.

Its really easy to play tough guy when you aren't the one paying the bill...

I agree. But it's only one guy calling the shots here. And it's really easy for Kim Jong-in to play the tough guy as well as he isn't paying the bill either. And he's now got a nuclear arsenal that he's prepared to use. If he really cared about his countrymen, Koreans in both the North and the South, he wouldn't be goading the US and their allies to attack. He'd be sitting down at the negotiating table and finding a diplomatic solution. And we all know that's not going to ever happen.

[hrothgar]

The_Badger, on 2017-September-16, 04:45, said:

I agree. But it's only one guy calling the shots here. And it's really easy for Kim Jong-in to play the tough guy as well as he isn't paying the bill either. And he's now got a nuclear arsenal that he's prepared to use. If he really cared about his countrymen, Koreans in both the North and the South, he wouldn't be goading the US and their allies to attack. He'd be sitting down at the negotiating table and finding a diplomatic solution. And we all know that's not going to ever happen.

The South Koreans who would die are decided NOT his countrymen

[Cyberyeti]

hrothgar, on 2017-September-16, 05:24, said:

The South Koreans who would die are decided NOT his countrymen

But you don't think if that happened, the North would be a radioactive desert ?