"Sanctions Mean War " North Korea .

[Quad18star]

North Korea: Sanctions are declaration of war
17/10/2006 7:03:26 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Printer-friendly page



North Korea on Tuesday blasted UN sanctions aimed at punishing the country for its nuclear test, saying the measures amount to a declaration of war.


CTV.ca News Staff

A rocket is fired from a Multiple Launch Rocket System vehicle during U.S. Army 2nd Infantry Division's military exercise in Chulwon, north of Seoul, South Korea on Tuesday. (AP / Yonhap, Sim Un-chul)

The central government in Pyongyang, breaking two days of silence on the sanctions, said North Korea is now a nuclear power and will "deal merciless blows" against any state that violates its sovereignty.

"The DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) had remained unfazed in any storm and stress in the past when it had no nuclear weapons," state media quoted a foreign ministry spokesperson as saying.

"It is quite nonsensical to expect the DPRK to yield to the pressure and threat of someone at this time when it has become a nuclear weapons state."

"The DPRK wants peace but is not afraid of war," the spokesperson added. "It wants dialogue but is always ready for confrontation."

The United States confirmed Monday that North Korea had indeed conducted an underground nuclear explosion on Oct. 9, which brought worldwide condemnation and harsh sanctions against the reclusive state.

The defiant remarks by North Korea come as reports have surfaced of possible new activity at last week's test site. News networks ABC and NBC have reported that spy satellites spotted what may be preparations for another detonation in North Korea.

There was no official confirmation, but a South Korean official told reporters the government was making preparations with the possibility of a second test in mind.

Japanese officials also had "information" about another possible test, Japan's Foreign Minister Taro Aso told reporters, without elaborating.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has warned North Korea that a second nuclear test would be a provocation that would only deepen its isolation. Rice was speaking as she prepared for a tour of Asia to bolster the UN sanctions.

The U.S. nuclear envoy, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, said he couldn't confirm reports that North Korea may be preparing for another test.

But he stressed that the worldwide community should make the North pay a "high price" for its "reckless behavior."

Russia, China, the U.S., South Korea and Japan have all been holding talks with Pyongyang to persuade it to abandon its nuclear weapons program.

Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov said he didn't rule out North Korea's capability to carry out a second test, and warned that Moscow's reaction to such a test would be "negative."

Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov is due in Seoul for talks with his South Korean counterpart.

China, meanwhile, who has long been one of North Korea's few allies, warned Pyongyang against aggravating tensions.

The North should resolve the situation "through dialogue and consultation," said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Liu Jianchao on Tuesday.

China, considered to be crucial to the success of the sanctions which call on nations to inspect all import and export cargo from North Korea, began examining trucks at the North Korean border.

The UN measures call for all countries to inspect cargo to and from North Korea, and ban trade in major weapons and materials that could be used in the North's ballistic missile and weapons of mass destruction programs.

[TGW_400ex]

North Korea needs taken out!

[400grl]

I have a feeling other countries will be handling this little sit-ee-ation before we have to get involved........should be interesting.

[bwamos]

We'll see. The UN generally has an "All Bark, No Bite" policy. aka spineless.

maybe if we didn't get involved in the fiasco known as "iraq" we could actually do something about a country that really has "nukes"....

[troutman561]

How bout we nuke the whole middle east and n.korea, the world would be a better place...

[Aceman]

Originally posted by troutman561
How bout we nuke the whole middle east and n.korea, the world would be a better place...

Lets stick with reality here.....

[Ralph]

Originally posted by troutman561
How bout we nuke the whole middle east and n.korea, the world would be a better place...

so i take it you are 15 years old?

[troutman561]

I know its not possible but it would be the best way...

[Aceman]

Originally posted by troutman561
but it would be the best way...

Who says?

I'm all for ridding the world of terrorists but not if I have to kill millions of innocent people to do it.

[Ralph]

Originally posted by troutman561
I know its not possible but it would be the best way...

once again you are 15 right?

[Castor-426ex]

north koreas leader is on a power trip that needs to be unplugged b4 he gives some of this stuff to terrorist *******s and we have sumthin happen that makes 9-11 look like an everyday crime... I honestly think that the UN needs to set a deadline for NK to disarm and stop pursuing weapons of mass destruction....and if they dont do everything in that manner....its been a while since ive heard of the good old stealth bombers...we know where they have facilities and we could take them out if the need arises without even putting troops on the ground...the risk is though that the North Korea army invades to the south and a massive poop storm insues...but i think that we have the air power and firepower to take out the majority of threats they have


but hey North Korea i got sumthin for ya

[DeerNuts]

I like posting about controversial topics b/c I usually draw a lot of criticism. Which is ok, since it's typically done logically and respectfully.

Here's my take: 1. N. Korea has said before that sanctions or any behavior denouncing their behavior is tantamount to a declaration of war. They blow a lot of smoke. 2. Their leader is definitely unstable if not irrational (I would lean toward irrational).

Here's why: The world is aware they are now a nuclear power. Ok. They are indeed, but only by definition. I think it's helpful if you compare the stockpiles of major nuclear powers with that of N. Korea. The country is in it's nuclear infancy, and who knows, the whole weapons program may prove to be stillborn at this point. The point is this: any other of the 7 (or 8, if one counts Israel) nuclear countries could easily eliminate N. Korea, or at least reduce their arms stock to nothing.

So now, compare past threats to future. At this point, nothing's changed really. Unless, of course, the program is far more advanced than nation's suspect. Who knows? But you would have to lean to the fact that they have little at this point. So what are they doing? Blowing smoke, still.

N. Korea does not have first-strike capability. Nor are they in a position to enter into mutual-assured destruction. (The country cannot simply fire one round and eliminate any nuclear threat). The leader knows this, but if he is irrational, would he still strike? That's maybe why the country isn't blowing smoke. If a nation's economy is lagging, the leader doesnt care about his survival, then what is the downside to 1. attacking and 2. thereby assuring your own destruction, which you arent opposed to?

This is why it's a confounding situation, because no one knows how the country will act. The main problem is that the world has had it's collective attention focused elsewhere (Iraq, etc...) while they have been amassing the technology to build a nuclear weapon.

Another wildcard: what happens if we eventually pull out of Iraq. What if by then Iran is a nuclear power? What if Iran collaborates to take over Iraq, since they would now have the upper hand over an unstable and unthreating infant democracy in a powder-keg nation.

I wont propose a solution, because there is no right solution. Diplomacy is better than attacks, because look at the results of a nuclear war. Unimaginable destruction. But is there a way to defuse the situation?

There's to many uncontrollable factors, so how this plays out, and our response to it, will be very interesting.

[Rastus]

N. Korea is definately a smoke blower, although I don't know if he'd actually strike. He wants his nation to be one of the big dogs, and if that means building some bombs them he'll do it.


Thankfully the U.N. is on top of the situation, although if you think a single party talk would work I think you are mistaken. N.K. gets most of their aid from China.

China needs to smack their baby. :)

[sandmanblue]

"Diplomacy is better than attacks" - at this point, you are correct. However, once a regime attains enough military strength and the will to use it, the consequences of not acting to disarm them are far worse than the preventative measures needed to stop them in the first place.


How many lives would have been saved if we were able to effectively stop fanatics like Hitler before they acquired their military might? Same goes for Saddam - like it or not. He is out, and the threat to Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and other nations in the area is eliminated. These nations don't just supply oil - they affect the worlds economy. N. Korea doesn't produce anything though... They don't affect the worlds economy. There is no benefit to attacking them.

NO one wants war. But if it requires the US to defend our allies and ourselves, then war is needed.

N. Korea is frustrated because they want to be a big shot (like Hugo Chavez) in a world that sees them for what they really are... little countries with little influence in the world's future.

For now, we either need to pony up and enforce sanctions WITH the rest of the UN members - or we simply allow N. Korea to self destruct. Kim Jung Il might be an idiot, but I don't think he would attempt to face the world all by himself. Without any more outside economic help, the country will fall apart.

What is more of a concern is that they would be willing to sell nukes to whoever has a lot of money. It's not far fetched to see them sell a nuke device to Islamic scumbag terrorists. N. Korea wouldn't give a damn if these scumbags killed millions of civilians. THAT'S the real problem here.

three things...

why now does diplomacy all of a sudden such a great idea? bush and his cronies couldn't invade iraq fast enough! where was the sanctions and diplomacy then? and iraq "supposedly" had nukes...just the way korea is being handled now flat out tells me that this administration knows iraq never had anything that's why they went in, because they knew there was no one to fight back! we wipe everything out in the first gulf war!

two; just out of curiosity what gives america the right to say who gets to have and who doesn't get to have nukes?....i mean how can we say that another country can't have something because of what they may or may not do with it? now i can see this question may tempt some really "unrealistic" responses..so please keep them "real"...

three; what is it with america(mostly white america) that makes us think that only we weep for are losses. all i hear about is the 29?? killed on 9/11, which i understand and agree was a terrible thing, or the 2700 americans killed in iraq, but i never hear a word about the 30,000 innocent iraqi citizens(conservative estimates) killed so far. its like when they lose a husband,son,or friend that no one cares or cries over their graves like we do? where do we get our ingnorance/arrogance? how are our lives more important? what because they are a different color/religion?

just my two cents...

[PeeWee21]

Ah....wars and rumors of wars.....it's been told and now it's coming to pass....;)

[Ralph]

I think the only upside to this is that it would be a war where we would be fighting soldiers in uniforms, unlike iraq where we are fighting deadly soldiers dressed like the general public.

Ofcourse i would never want nukes going off anywhere. 1 because its alsmost like shooting ourselves in the foot. We destroy the enviorment and put all those toxins in the enviorment that will probably make their way right back over to us and ends up killing way more in forms of cancer and whatever else is wrong with the world today.

I dont understand wars like this anyway. Why does any nation want nukes and a strong army? for self defense and/or to advance into other nations and grow bigger.

So i think N. Korea knows were not gonna try to take over their country. Its been semi peacefull for now and as far as i know they've just lived inside their own walls doing their own thing. Is there any reason we would try to invade N. Korea, besides the nukes which shouldnt be considered a problem if they are just used for self defense? (You know, If you dont give them anything to defend themselves from then they cant use them)

So unless anyone invades n. korea then we shouldnt have anything to worry about right? UNLESS ofcourse they decide to invade other countries which i think they wouldnt have much luck with so whats gonna happen?

REMEMBER I AM JUST AN 18 YEAR OLD UNEDUCATED KID BUT IM JUST TRYING TO MAKE MY OWN SENSE OF THINGS.

QUESTION: Does North Korea have it out for us? Do they hate us and have a religous need to take us out? What would they gain out of nuking anybody?

[Quad18star]

Is North Korea really blowing smoke up the world's rear ? Personally I don't think so .

Looking at the facts , you can see that they aren't just blowing smoke .

First off , their leader is a wack job ... no if's and's or but's about it , the guy is off his rocker .

North Korea has the 5th largest military in the world with the largest percentage of enlisted citizens . They have approx. 1.08 million military personnel ( 49.03% active troops per 1000 citizens). These people don't have a choice ... they are prisoners within their own country .

They have talked for years that they were developing and had nuclear weapons , while most of the world shrugged it off with a " Ya right !!!" .

They have tested long range missles .... most did not have great success , but could still hit neighbouring countries .

They have now tested a nuclear weapon . Most of the world took it as though they were "blowing smoke " .... but air tests have proven that they did infact test a nuke.

Sanctions brought upon their country by other countries have killed their economy . They are mainly pissed off at the USA because of these sanctions ( The USA has a very powerful grasp on the world economy) .

Having a nuclear weapon opens the door to many terrorist organizations . North Korea only stands to gain from it if they decide to sell off , which would most likely happen if more sanctions are brought upon them.

So what does North Korea have to lose ?? Nothing really . But by being a nuclear weapons power in this world , they have a tighter hold on the world and can use threats to bargain . They want to be recognized in the world , they want their country to strive after 30 some odd years of a stagnant economy .

Will China " slap their baby" ?? Quite possibly .... they have warned North Korea that any further testing will only darken their relations .

One can hope that The Six-Party talks will help bring a peaceful resolution to this situation ... but I wouldn't hold my breath to it .

Oh and North Korea said that the only way they would disarm of nuclear weapons , is if the rest of the nuclear countries got rid of theirs . So like I said ... don't hold your breath .

So is North Korea blowing smoke ?? I don't think so !!!!

[Quad18star]

Originally posted by Ralph


QUESTION: Does North Korea have it out for us? Do they hate us and have a religous need to take us out? What would they gain out of nuking anybody?


We posted basically at the same time , well atleast I didn't see your post when I started writting mine 25 minutes ago . LOL

N.Korea has it out mainly for the USA and any country that has sanctions put against them . Like I had mentioned , their economy has been dead for over 30 years , basically because of sanctions that are in place right now . Any further sanctions is like cutting off whatever little supply from the outter world that they receive right now .

The global economy is "run" mostly by a few of the larger countries ... the United Sates being probably the #1 . Imports and exports into and from the USA make up a LARGE portion of the world economy . If The USA , Japan , Russia , China and UK all close off anything going into or out of N.Korea , then the people of the country have nothing ( 3 out of the 5 already do no business with them) .

[MXracer16]

Originally posted by dlerch

three; what is it with america(mostly white america) that makes us think that only we weep for are losses. all i hear about is the 29?? killed on 9/11, which i understand and agree was a terrible thing, or the 2700 americans killed in iraq, but i never hear a word about the 30,000 innocent iraqi citizens(conservative estimates) killed so far. its like when they lose a husband,son,or friend that no one cares or cries over their graves like we do? where do we get our ingnorance/arrogance? how are our lives more important? what because they are a different color/religion?

just my two cents...

The reason most people dont greave over Iraqis that were killed is because we dont know them. I bet there aren't many people in Iraq who would really be depressed because they found out an American soldier died like we would. Our lives aren't more important, but they are OUR lives, so ofcourse we will care more about them.

The only thing making this conflict worse is the media.

[fandl450r]

Originally posted by dlerch
three things...

why now does diplomacy all of a sudden such a great idea? bush and his cronies couldn't invade iraq fast enough! where was the sanctions and diplomacy then? and iraq "supposedly" had nukes...just the way korea is being handled now flat out tells me that this administration knows iraq never had anything that's why they went in, because they knew there was no one to fight back! we wipe everything out in the first gulf war!

two; just out of curiosity what gives america the right to say who gets to have and who doesn't get to have nukes?....i mean how can we say that another country can't have something because of what they may or may not do with it? now i can see this question may tempt some really "unrealistic" responses..so please keep them "real"...

three; what is it with america(mostly white america) that makes us think that only we weep for are losses. all i hear about is the 29?? killed on 9/11, which i understand and agree was a terrible thing, or the 2700 americans killed in iraq, but i never hear a word about the 30,000 innocent iraqi citizens(conservative estimates) killed so far. its like when they lose a husband,son,or friend that no one cares or cries over their graves like we do? where do we get our ingnorance/arrogance? how are our lives more important? what because they are a different color/religion?

just my two cents...

Diplomacy has always been the way of American life. Maybe not in this sense as much, but just think about it.

For your second question. Because we, along with other countries are among the most powerful in the world, can. Along with being the most level headed and rational countries, our decision making process is a little better than wishing a jihad on someone. Also because we do not have a communist leader in power, with the attention span of a 2 year old.

For your third question. Why should we grieve over the Iraqi citizens? When they could care less about another American life lost. I mean for christ sake 5 year olds are taking live bombs up to soldiers and detonating them. Arrogance I can see as well as Ignorance, but you have to expect it. Plain and simple the general public sees things through the eyes of the media. They have no other basis to make a decision. Who said that "our" lives are more important? We may have different customs on how we grieve for loved ones, but in such an impoverished area, deathe I'm sure it's somehting you learn to expect regardless. A human life is a human life, and the way I see it as an eye for an eye.

I for one say that the way you act is treason in every sense. You may not like what our government does, but guess what you can't do a damn thing about it, and whining about how ignorant and arrogant American's are isn't going to help. What's your vested interest in this? It seems as though everything the government does, to you is wrong.

[Rastus]

I agree with MrMan, the media makes things like this much harder. Anything you get from them can be second hand information, with opinions of the people writing the story.


dlerch, have you actually seen a warzone? Been to Iraq, Afghanistan, or any other country currently occupied? Have you asked them how they feel about the US? If you haven't then you're going on information that has been passed, just as all of us are.
Also, everyone on this board knows that all you really want to be around here is a **** stirrer, getting everyone fired up. I respect your right to think differently, even though it's not the same as mine, but stop trying to shove your opinion of Iraq on everyone else. Please. :)



I just can't see N. Korea being much of a threat in the long run militarily if sanctions are imposed, they can't even feed their current population with all the aid others give them because they use it for their military. They see it as a declaration of war because it is their lifeline, without it they can't mobilize/maintain/equip an army of that size and feed the population. If the U.N. cut them off totally it would not be long before they wouldn't have enough food/gas/ammo to make war, and by then their population would be completely starved. (They would use this later for propaganda, and say how America and its allies starved them. :rolleyes: )
Deep down their planners know this, we and our allies know this, which is why they're using the nuke to get them to the bargain table. If they'll use it just as an instrument to exert pressure, or actually use it militarily is very hard to guess. :scary:

Originally posted by fandl450r
Diplomacy has always been the way of American life. Maybe not in this sense as much, but just think about it.

For your second question. Because we, along with other countries are among the most powerful in the world, can. Along with being the most level headed and rational countries, our decision making process is a little better than wishing a jihad on someone. Also because we do not have a communist leader in power, with the attention span of a 2 year old.

For your third question. Why should we grieve over the Iraqi citizens? When they could care less about another American life lost. I mean for christ sake 5 year olds are taking live bombs up to soldiers and detonating them. Arrogance I can see as well as Ignorance, but you have to expect it. Plain and simple the general public sees things through the eyes of the media. They have no other basis to make a decision. Who said that "our" lives are more important? We may have different customs on how we grieve for loved ones, but in such an impoverished area, deathe I'm sure it's somehting you learn to expect regardless. A human life is a human life, and the way I see it as an eye for an eye.

I for one say that the way you act is treason in every sense. You may not like what our government does, but guess what you can't do a damn thing about it, and whining about how ignorant and arrogant American's are isn't going to help. What's your vested interest in this? It seems as though everything the government does, to you is wrong.

treason! boy you better look that word up, because you obviosley don't know what it means! disagreeing with a lying administration is not treason! can you explain to me, where not agreeing with an administration that knowingly puts its country's peoples in harms way because of known falsehoods is treasonous? i guess because i think we killed innocent people in iraq i'm unpatriotic huh? boy anyone who thinks on their own or disagrees with this adminstration for one reason or another sure does get that word hurled at them...what a joke! and i'm still asking where was the "diplomacy" in the case of iraq...

powerful countries? what makes india so powerful? because they have a bunch of people that answer the phone when you call dell, or apple, or any one of many outsourced jobs? what power?
and as far as being level headed...pakistan has nukes, and at any second could and would blow india off the map, and vice versa for india...also it is a pretty well known fact that al queida has training camps in pakistan...so i'm not so sure i do feel safe with them having nukes...and i can all but guarantee that musharraf is the only person in pakistan that can actually stomach the u.s., and i can bet that's just because we send him/them a ton of money to be our buddy!

as far as people of iraq grieving for us...why would they look what we've done to them,and their country...i guess you're just another ends justify the means person....

and as far as not being able to do anything about it...watch and learn during mid-terms, i'll be voting(which i've done every time i've legally been able to), along with alot of other people that not by coincidence agree with me, some of these morons out of office....;)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rastus
[B

dlerch, have you actually seen a warzone? Been to Iraq, Afghanistan, or any other country currently occupied? Have you asked them how they feel about the US? If you haven't then you're going on information that has been passed, just as all of us are.
Also, everyone on this board knows that all you really want to be around here is a **** stirrer, getting everyone fired up. I respect your right to think differently, even though it's not the same as mine, but stop trying to shove your opinion of Iraq on everyone else. Please. :)



you don't know anything about me...so i would apprecciate if you wouldn't say that you do..and i don't know if you've noticed, but i share the same opinion as over half of the country...:eek2: and by the way i didn't start this post...so i'm no more guilty of expressing my opinion on here then anyone else....

[Rastus]

Even if the majority switches parties, they're all still a bunch of crooks. We'll see how you feel about who you vote in dlerch after they give themselves a big fat raise along with all their benefits. I don't get a raise and they shouldn't either, regardless of what party they're in.

Originally posted by Rastus
Even if the majority switches parties, they're all still a bunch of crooks. We'll see how you feel about who you vote in dlerch after they give themselves a big fat raise along with all their benefits. I don't get a raise and they shouldn't either, regardless of what party they're in.

well at least we agree on the fact that they are all crooks...but i'm sick of the way things are going the last few years, we(u.s.a.) need a change...and i think if we change it up, and maybe the politicians take notice, and realize they will be held liable for their actions from here on out and actually do good by us. it's the only chance we have to right this ship....it has nothing to do with dems or reps it is a fact we just need a change...i'm going to bed this sh ! t hurts my head....:D

[JOEX]

Originally posted by dlerch
.... and iraq "supposedly" had nukes...
I don't recall Iraq having nukes was the reason for invading, chemical and biological possibly but not nukes.

Did Saddam need to be removed from power? Yes. Did we go about it in the best way? No.

Also Korea has a World/Nuclear power backing (China), Iraq had none. IMO comparing Iraq and Korea is a bit of a stretch.

Then again I doubt I read as many or the same news reports you do;)

[Quad18star]

Originally posted by Rastus

I just can't see N. Korea being much of a threat in the long run militarily if sanctions are imposed, they can't even feed their current population with all the aid others give them because they use it for their military. They see it as a declaration of war because it is their lifeline, without it they can't mobilize/maintain/equip an army of that size and feed the population. If the U.N. cut them off totally it would not be long before they wouldn't have enough food/gas/ammo to make war, and by then their population would be completely starved. (They would use this later for propaganda, and say how America and its allies starved them. :rolleyes: )
Deep down their planners know this, we and our allies know this, which is why they're using the nuke to get them to the bargain table. If they'll use it just as an instrument to exert pressure, or actually use it militarily is very hard to guess. :scary:

Here's the thing ... if more sanctions are put against North Korea to restrict even further aid , the people of the country will starve ... but if nothing is done , then North Korea can declare " victory" over it's " enemies" .

It's easy to say " Just cut off supplies to them" , but what needs to be remembered is that there are innocent people that are trapped within the country . These people have no choice ... they are told to join the military , they are told they can't leave ... the true doing of a communist country .

Now if all aid get's cut off to this country , the first to starve will be the lower class citizens , those that want out of the country , but can't leave . The majority of the World won't allow innocent people to starve to death ( look at the aid given to 3rd world countries ... although not enough IMO) , atleast not knowingly .

So do you cut off aid and let people starve to death , or do you allow this country to have nuclear weapons as long as they follow strict regulations ? :ermm:

[Rastus]

^^^ Very tough question.., so many lives and peoples' well being in the balance. :( Whether it be us or them, it's still sad.
All because of one man and his quest to make his country a world player.

[Ralph]

Originally posted by Quad18star
Here's the thing ... if more sanctions are put against North Korea to restrict even further aid , the people of the country will starve ... but if nothing is done , then North Korea can declare " victory" over it's " enemies" .

It's easy to say " Just cut off supplies to them" , but what needs to be remembered is that there are innocent people that are trapped within the country . These people have no choice ... they are told to join the military , they are told they can't leave ... the true doing of a communist country .

Now if all aid get's cut off to this country , the first to starve will be the lower class citizens , those that want out of the country , but can't leave . The majority of the World won't allow innocent people to starve to death ( look at the aid given to 3rd world countries ... although not enough IMO) , atleast not knowingly .

So do you cut off aid and let people starve to death , or do you allow this country to have nuclear weapons as long as they follow strict regulations ? :ermm:

Well we let people starve everday in africa, and even turn a shoulder to genocides in africa. But i guess they dont matter cause theres no TV cameras there.

[Quad18star]

Originally posted by Ralph
Well we let people starve everday in africa, and even turn a shoulder to genocides in africa. But i guess they dont matter cause theres no TV cameras there.

I agree that more should be done in Africa ... especially when we know that every 3 seconds another life is taken .... but then again , we haven't really turned a blind eye towards the whole situation in the country ( but we haven't done as much as we could be doing) .

I think the main difference between Africa and North Korea is the population difference of about 725 000 000 people . It's harder to get aid to a population approximately 32.5 times bigger than North Korea .

Africa is over-run with HIV , AIDS and Starvation , but the World is willing to help try and rid them of these effects . Now if aid is cut off to North Korea , that would mean the World is willingly turning a blind eye to the innocent people of the country and allowing them to starve . Correct?

Originally posted by JOEX
I don't recall Iraq having nukes was the reason for invading, chemical and biological possibly but not nukes.

Did Saddam need to be removed from power? Yes. Did we go about it in the best way? No.

Also Korea has a World/Nuclear power backing (China), Iraq had none. IMO comparing Iraq and Korea is a bit of a stretch.

Then again I doubt I read as many or the same news reports you do;)
what was all the crap about enriched uranium from nigeria then? i believe you use that to build something bad correct?
and do you mean the chemical weapons we(u.s. government) gave to him to fight iran? those chemical weapons...

as far as saddam needing to be "removed"...why then didn't bush senior do it? i'll answer for ya...because he didn't want america to be a police country, and realized saddam was a piece of puke, but was the lesser of two evils...and if being a "bad" guy is all you need as a reason to attack a country...well there a bunch in africa let's go....oops sorry that's right haliburton can't make any money rebuilding dirt roads and grass huts!! but maybe if we discover oil in the sudan then we'll help 'em....

and because iraq didn't have any "backing" we should attack them? wrong is wrong last time i checked regardless of who's backing you...

and you're right we don't watch the same news reports...i refuse to watch fox news...:ermm:

[LTZ400rider]

i think japan should explain to n korea what the consequences are if they keep it up.

[Castor-426ex]

yeah japan will send a flock of sumo wrestlers, sushi store owners, and habatchi grill cooks over there....:D

damn now im hungry:huh