By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Would you agree on a pre-emptive strike against North Korea?

 

A pre-emptive strike against North Korea?

Avoid loss of human lives at all costs! 128 28.64%
 
NK will never use those w... 147 32.89%
 
We should stop them befor... 71 15.88%
 
We should stop NK before NK causes a tragedy. 101 22.60%
 
Total:447
Stellar_Fungk on 04 September 2017
AbbathTheGrim said:
Stellar_Fungk said:

My philosophy is like this: Just because Japan is an ally (forced because they were nuked) doesn't mean that its people mean more to me than Norrh Korea's. Civilians are civilians. They should not be judged by how their regime behave. You can call me naive but that's what I think.

It's a pity the people there hasn't overthrown this leader themselves like other countries have done throughout history. This could have solved the problem with that country by now.

Give them time. North Korea is not a loose controlled dictatorship to overthrow just like that. The people would get slaughtered by the military. They have no weapons, they're goddamn farmers. North Korea has firm grip of it's people, what they do and what they work with.



I am a Nintendo fanatic.

Around the Network
Stellar_Fungk on 04 September 2017
AbbathTheGrim said:
Stellar_Fungk said:

What? Whatever. Bye!

What if NK drops bombs on US citizens or other countries, would you change your mind?

We were talking about its civilians. CaptainExplode wants us to kill everyone in North Korea. If North Korea nukes US, the civilians should never be held accountable.



I am a Nintendo fanatic.

jason1637 on 04 September 2017
CaptainExplosion said:
jason1637 said:

Firing Missiles above Japan is no action. They were testing missiles which lots of countries do.

Most countries, as far as I know, don't testfire atomic weaponry at other countries. You're acting like the United States is constantly doing the same thing to Mexico.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_weapon_test_locations

Its not uncommon for countries to test nukes outside their borders.



DonFerrari on 04 September 2017
Wyrdness said:
DonFerrari said:

Last I heard Saddam was guillotined even though he didn't had the weapons he were supposed to have. And UK have given internal judgment you say right? Have UN sanctiioned USA for the invasion or the wrong doings? Have USA president or any official gone to Genebra?

Nope I'm comparing the afterwards of war and you were unable to say what Genebra trials judged the crimes on Kosovo, Irak and other wars.

Saddam was tried by his enemies who were already in the state long before the war not the western forces he fought and he was handed over long before the west years later admitted the wasn't any WMDs found, the western forces may not have had sanctions but we got a far more serious problem in the militants Saddam was dealing with who have carried out attack after attack against us which has lead to those involved being villains because they never had a recovery plan for Iraq and the war in the end was deemed illegal. US sure as hell doesn't have a recovery plan for any country or itself being nuked as callateral as a result.

Your point was about being judged and how history is written by the winners blah blah and Iraq proved it otherwise now you've moved goalposts to try and add sanctions into the equation and either way the corruption in western politics doesn't overule the hard fact of the perception of those involve in Iraq, it's also spelt Geneva by the way. Tbh you don't really have any point here to begin with so I don't get why you're arguing other than you wanting a pre-emptive strike and don't like people not agreeing.

SO I'm moving the goal post because you didn't even understood my point? gotcha.

jason1637 said:
CaptainExplosion said:

You call firing missiles at Japan "no action"?

Firing Missiles above Japan is no action. They were testing missiles which lots of countries do.

It isn't the usual route to do test with nuclear weaponry passing over the country.

Lucas-Rio said:
Absolutely not. The people who voted yes are both ignorant and dangerous.

They have to be americans, not valuing the life of other peoples, and having already dropped nuclear bombs on civilians targets.

North Korea developped a nuclear arsenal only to protect themselves from the US, who is the main source of wars in the world.

It's time the USA turn their eyes toward the ground and submit to reality. They won't control North Korea , never. Admit it and deal with your own country instead of building military bases all around the world. North Korea and its nuclears weapons escaped american "peace" and "nation building" game.

Deal with it american hawks.

Am I right to suppose you are a brazilian left wing?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Wyrdness on 04 September 2017
AbbathTheGrim said:
Stellar_Fungk said:

My philosophy is like this: Just because Japan is an ally (forced because they were nuked) doesn't mean that its people mean more to me than Norrh Korea's. Civilians are civilians. They should not be judged by how their regime behave. You can call me naive but that's what I think.

It's a pity the people there hasn't overthrown this leader themselves like other countries have done throughout history. This could have solved the problem with that country by now.

Overthrowing a Government is extremely hard and more countries fail than succeeded an example is the UK itself when other countries in Europe were having a revolution people over here tried it and the Government just shot everyone on site, Syria is the most recent example of an uprising gone bad. Civilians don't fair too well against armies.



Around the Network
Wyrdness on 04 September 2017
DonFerrari said:

SO I'm moving the goal post because you didn't even understood my point? gotcha.

You never made one to begin with you just claimed history will say otherwise because of eras gone by but unfortunately the past isn't a guarantee of something repeating as eras change drastically, either way you were debunked then began adding more stipulations on what constitute being judged.



Lucas-Rio on 04 September 2017
DonFerrari said:
Wyrdness said:

Saddam was tried by his enemies who were already in the state long before the war not the western forces he fought and he was handed over long before the west years later admitted the wasn't any WMDs found, the western forces may not have had sanctions but we got a far more serious problem in the militants Saddam was dealing with who have carried out attack after attack against us which has lead to those involved being villains because they never had a recovery plan for Iraq and the war in the end was deemed illegal. US sure as hell doesn't have a recovery plan for any country or itself being nuked as callateral as a result.

Your point was about being judged and how history is written by the winners blah blah and Iraq proved it otherwise now you've moved goalposts to try and add sanctions into the equation and either way the corruption in western politics doesn't overule the hard fact of the perception of those involve in Iraq, it's also spelt Geneva by the way. Tbh you don't really have any point here to begin with so I don't get why you're arguing other than you wanting a pre-emptive strike and don't like people not agreeing.

SO I'm moving the goal post because you didn't even understood my point? gotcha.

jason1637 said:

Firing Missiles above Japan is no action. They were testing missiles which lots of countries do.

It isn't the usual route to do test with nuclear weaponry passing over the country.

Lucas-Rio said:
Absolutely not. The people who voted yes are both ignorant and dangerous.

They have to be americans, not valuing the life of other peoples, and having already dropped nuclear bombs on civilians targets.

North Korea developped a nuclear arsenal only to protect themselves from the US, who is the main source of wars in the world.

It's time the USA turn their eyes toward the ground and submit to reality. They won't control North Korea , never. Admit it and deal with your own country instead of building military bases all around the world. North Korea and its nuclears weapons escaped american "peace" and "nation building" game.

Deal with it american hawks.

Am I right to suppose you are a brazilian left wing?

You are completely wrong. First I am from EU and then I am not left wing.

North Korea secures itself from any american intervention. Iraq and Libya gave up their nuclear program and both ended up destroyed by the USA.

Nuclear weapons are from deterrence. The USA won't dare to invade North Korea if North Korea can retaliate strongly. The US bully is made powerless by NK self defense weapons.



Soundwave on 04 September 2017

 

A few things I think some people don't understand. 

 

1.) Seoul is a 40 minute drive from the North Korean border. We're not even talking like 3 hours apart (driving distance) here. North Korea has conventional weapons that would level the city within minutes. 

2.) Even for the "Dumb American" trope person who doesn't care about Korean lives lost ... you do realize there are like 50,000 Americans in in the area right, most living in Seoul. The death toll for American civilians in such an attack could likely be more than 9/11 and Pearl Harbor combined. Think about that for a second. 

3.) Seoul is not just "kind of  big city". It's the 3rd or 4th largest city in the world population wise, it's basically like New York City. Imagine trying to evacuate a city the size of New York in 20-30 minutes. 

 

I don't really see a military solution here, IMO the world community is probably going to have to accept North Korea and offer them incentives to stop being hostile. 

People were so quick to snap at Obama for the Iran-Nuclear deal, but it seems to me like looking at it now that deal was a very, very good one as it prevented a situation as we have in NK now before it got out of control by incentivizing Iran peacefully to cease their nuclear ambitions in exchange for strong economic incentives. 

Yelling at North Korea and trying to intimidate them doesn't work IMO, the only message that sends to them is that they need to accelerate their nuclear plans because they need that to protect the regime. 



NintendoPie on 04 September 2017
VGPolyglot said:

And we're the good guys? When we get satisfied seeing someone decapitated and their head put on dispay?

His sig explains a lot of his aggressive stance.



Soundwave on 04 September 2017

I blame George W. Bush for a lot of this situation.

In January 2002 he goes in front of the world and labels North Korea one of the "axis of evil" alongside Iraq.

Well North Korea ramps up their nuclear weapons program ... you guessed it ... later in 2002. They saw full well what the US did to Saddam Hussein when they just wholesale created a war out of thin air for no reason to topple the regime. The message to North Korea was basically "we could be next, we need deterrant to stop that" 

By 2006, North Korea would test their first nuclear weapon, on Bush's watch. 

This is mainly IMO, at the feet of Bush and the "tough talk" bullshit he sent out then. But hey, for those who want a president who huffs and puffs and talks a big game, I hope you're happy with the situation we find ourselves in now.