What would acceptance of a nuclear North Korea look like?
-
NATO and the UN are paid for by an agreed formula. They add up the entire economy of the member states and each state pays their portion of that. That is how it's supposed to be, but reality shows that the US pays for everything
To me, that makes the other countries' voices meaningless since they refuse to pay their fair share.
Also, the US is expected to be the world's police when it suits the other countries.
-
The wold, but especially the US, panders to NK with cash and other things every time NK starts threatening the world with nukes.
The world needs to stop pandering to these ass clowns and deal with them harshly.
A rarely mentioned aspect of North Korea is that the handful of leaders are oppressing over 25 million people. The people suffering the most from Kim Dung Pu are the people of North Korea.
So are you saying that the US has the role of world police and therefore the authority (or obligation) to overthrow Kim?
There is another problem there, because a couple of months ago, China said that they would not allow Kum to be removed from power now will they won't allow regime change. Kim is a fun guy.. he not only executes his own friends and family with artillery cannons, he also uses flame throwers and dogs to tear them apart. I wonder if Kim ate the dogs that ate his enemies?
-
The wold, but especially the US, panders to NK with cash and other things every time NK starts threatening the world with nukes.
The world needs to stop pandering to these ass clowns and deal with them harshly.
A rarely mentioned aspect of North Korea is that the handful of leaders are oppressing over 25 million people. The people suffering the most from Kim Dung Pu are the people of North Korea.
So are you saying that the US has the role of world police and therefore the authority (or obligation) to overthrow Kim?
There is another problem there, because a couple of months ago, China said that they would not allow Kum to be removed from power now will they won't allow regime change. Kim is a fun guy.. he not only executes his own friends and family with artillery cannons, he also uses flame throwers and dogs to tear them apart. I wonder if Kim ate the dogs that ate his enemies?
If that's actually true then that pushes the conversation back towards the main topic: What would a world with a nuclear-capable NK look like? Baring war it seems more like the option no one is talking about.
-
The wold, but especially the US, panders to NK with cash and other things every time NK starts threatening the world with nukes.
The world needs to stop pandering to these ass clowns and deal with them harshly.
A rarely mentioned aspect of North Korea is that the handful of leaders are oppressing over 25 million people. The people suffering the most from Kim Dung Pu are the people of North Korea.
So are you saying that the US has the role of world police and therefore the authority (or obligation) to overthrow Kim?
There is another problem there, because a couple of months ago, China said that they would not allow Kum to be removed from power now will they won't allow regime change. Kim is a fun guy.. he not only executes his own friends and family with artillery cannons, he also uses flame throwers and dogs to tear them apart. I wonder if Kim ate the dogs that ate his enemies?
If that's actually true then that pushes the conversation back towards the main topic: What would a world with a nuclear-capable NK look like? Baring war it seems more like the option no one is talking about.
I'm not sure what you meant by "Baring". I'm guessing "Bearing"? in other words.. accepting an ongoing state of having a nuclear conflict at any moment with no warning?
-
The verb bar, as in exclude.
So I wanted to ask what the solution would be excluding war. At present, it seems that accepting a nuclear NK is the only option as everything else has failed up to this point. Further sanctions will not solve this, or will they? They haven't yet.
-
The verb bar, as in exclude.
So I wanted to ask what the solution would be excluding war. At present, it seems that accepting a nuclear NK is the only option as everything else has failed up to this point. Further sanctions will not solve this, or will they? They haven't yet.
OH! I should have caught that. You said "baring" missing one R. Should be "barring"
Baring would mean exposing..
Barring is excluding.My brain was not functioning earlier today.
-
The verb bar, as in exclude.
So I wanted to ask what the solution would be excluding war. At present, it seems that accepting a nuclear NK is the only option as everything else has failed up to this point. Further sanctions will not solve this, or will they? They haven't yet.
I have been asking swampi the same question several times.
Why would sanctions work now when they haven't for the past 50 years with NK?What options are there?
Mad Maxine Waters solution is to just give NK everyhting they want. She must have taken lessons from Obama.
If it were up to Waters, every country in the world and Al Queda and ISIS would be permitted to have their own ICBMs with nosecones filled with multiple hydrogen bomb warheads.Meanwhile.. Trump has repeatedly said that he would like to see nuclear weapons abolished completely.
It's very easy. Even wars have rules. Break them and one is designated a war criminal.
Make nuclear weapons illegal including even threatening to use nuclear weapons. If some county uses a nuke, the rest of the world should shun them - no trade - no travel - nothing. I can't think of any country in the past 10 years that has threatened to use nukes other than North Korea and Iran.. and they technically don't even have them yet. -
This is from Ron Paul today. What do you all think?
"Here’s how to solve the seven-decade old crisis: pull all US troops out of South Korea; end all military exercises on the North Korean border; encourage direct talks between the North and South and offer to host or observe them with an international delegation including the Russians and Chinese, which are after all Korea’s neighbors."
-
This is from Ron Paul today. What do you all think?
"Here’s how to solve the seven-decade old crisis: pull all US troops out of South Korea; end all military exercises on the North Korean border; encourage direct talks between the North and South and offer to host or observe them with an international delegation including the Russians and Chinese, which are after all Korea’s neighbors."
Problem with that is "why are those US troops there to begin with?" It is because North Korea is still in a state of war with South Korea. They are in an armistice. North Korea has consistently threatened to take over South Korea, and would do so if they could get away with it.
Also, that doesn't take into account that North Korea is doing illegal weapons sales, starving it's own people to death, selling it's own citizens into slavery, mass executing and torturing people for no good reason, kidnapping and raping young girls, etc.
-
Problem with that is "why are those US troops there to begin with?" It is because North Korea is still in a state of war with South Korea. They are in an armistice. North Korea has consistently threatened to take over South Korea, and would do so if they could get away with it.
Also, that doesn't take into account that North Korea is doing illegal weapons sales, starving it's own people to death, selling it's own citizens into slavery, mass executing and torturing people for no good reason, kidnapping and raping young girls, etc.
If you take Trump's speech at the UN at it's word, then each nation must be sovereign. (He contradicts himself later by calling out the weakened Cuba, Venezuela, and NK.) But the UN and US leave plenty of countries alone to pursue hateful agendas. Think of the Rwanda; look at how we ignore all that's going on in Saudi Arabia.
Arguably, NK is conducting illegal arms sales because they are barred from trading in the free market. RP's idea puts them back in, potentially.
As for forcibly entering South Korea, there's no direct evidence that they want to forcibly reunite. The two Koreas still trade with each other and have made several attempts over the decades to unify economically, each time failing because NK takes a bellicose stand towards the US.
-
Problem with that is "why are those US troops there to begin with?" It is because North Korea is still in a state of war with South Korea. They are in an armistice. North Korea has consistently threatened to take over South Korea, and would do so if they could get away with it.
Also, that doesn't take into account that North Korea is doing illegal weapons sales, starving it's own people to death, selling it's own citizens into slavery, mass executing and torturing people for no good reason, kidnapping and raping young girls, etc.
If you take Trump's speech at the UN at it's word, then each nation must be sovereign. (He contradicts himself later by calling out the weakened Cuba, Venezuela, and NK.) But the UN and US leave plenty of countries alone to pursue hateful agendas. Think of the Rwanda; look at how we ignore all that's going on in Saudi Arabia.
Arguably, NK is conducting illegal arms sales because they are barred from trading in the free market. RP's idea puts them back in, potentially.
As for forcibly entering South Korea, there's no direct evidence that they want to forcibly reunite. The two Koreas still trade with each other and have made several attempts over the decades to unify economically, each time failing because NK takes a bellicose stand towards the US.
I like Trump, but I wasn't impressed with that UN speech. I could write a better speech than that. Presidents never write their own speeches. They contribute ideas to them, but they don't actually write them. One of the most famous presidential speech writers was Ben Stein (Bueller.. Bueller?) who worked for Nixon.
I think NK has done a horrible job in being a country. Being bellicose to the US is probably not wise, other than being egged on by China.
-
Problem with that is "why are those US troops there to begin with?" It is because North Korea is still in a state of war with South Korea. They are in an armistice. North Korea has consistently threatened to take over South Korea, and would do so if they could get away with it.
Also, that doesn't take into account that North Korea is doing illegal weapons sales, starving it's own people to death, selling it's own citizens into slavery, mass executing and torturing people for no good reason, kidnapping and raping young girls, etc.
If you take Trump's speech at the UN at it's word, then each nation must be sovereign. (He contradicts himself later by calling out the weakened Cuba, Venezuela, and NK.) But the UN and US leave plenty of countries alone to pursue hateful agendas. Think of the Rwanda; look at how we ignore all that's going on in Saudi Arabia.
Arguably, NK is conducting illegal arms sales because they are barred from trading in the free market. RP's idea puts them back in, potentially.
As for forcibly entering South Korea, there's no direct evidence that they want to forcibly reunite. The two Koreas still trade with each other and have made several attempts over the decades to unify economically, each time failing because NK takes a bellicose stand towards the US.
I like Trump, but I wasn't impressed with that UN speech. I could write a better speech than that. Presidents never write their own speeches. They contribute ideas to them, but they don't actually write them. One of the most famous presidential speech writers was Ben Stein (Bueller.. Bueller?) who worked for Nixon.
I think NK has done a horrible job in being a country. Being bellicose to the US is probably not wise, other than being egged on by China.
++1
-
++1
You young whippersnappers and your fancy abbreviations. What does ++1 mean? It sounds like you're inviting Frederick and I to be your plus one at a party. (Which might be fun.)
-
++1
You young whippersnappers and your fancy abbreviations. What does ++1 mean? It sounds like you're inviting Frederick and I to be your plus one at a party. (Which might be fun.)
If I remember right.. ++1 is used in the computer language C++
–---
you keep saying other members here are young whippersnappers.. at 48.. you are probably one of the younger ones! Some of the members of this site attended Lincoln's inauguration! -
++1
You young whippersnappers and your fancy abbreviations. What does ++1 mean? It sounds like you're inviting Frederick and I to be your plus one at a party. (Which might be fun.)
If I remember right.. ++1 is used in the computer language C++
–---
you keep saying other members here are young whippersnappers.. at 48.. you are probably one of the younger ones! Some of the members of this site attended Lincoln's inauguration!:love:
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login