***North Korea vs USA*** Offical Match Thread

[simmo]

Like I say, if you tell me to cite a source I'll do my best to do so for you as above.

Here is a source for you the BBC

BBC News - Charities warn of food shortages in North Korea

Can you please advise how it is morally acceptable for a country to spend billions on trying to make an atomic bomb while it's people regularly suffer famine?

 

[pork pie]

Here is a source for you the BBC

BBC News - Charities warn of food shortages in North Korea

Can you please advise how it is morally acceptable for a country to spend billions on trying to make an atomic bomb while it's people regularly suffer famine?

Not really an appropriate question though is it? You are using a western paradigm, when judging their glorious leader.

 

[Don Quixote]

The USA could probably take on the whole world and win, does anyone honestly believe they will bat an eyelid at North Korea?

 

[Don Quixote]

Here is a source for you the BBC

BBC News - Charities warn of food shortages in North Korea

Can you please advise how it is morally acceptable for a country to spend billions on trying to make an atomic bomb while it's people regularly suffer famine?

Sounds like trident.

 

[pork pie]

If it didn't invest so heavily in its military it would have been destroyed as a state many years ago.

It's terribly unfortunate, but it should not have been put in a position where it has to neglect its poorest people to self preserve.

If the US really cared about the welfare of the North Korean people, it would have made peace with it a long time ago & left it well alone since. US imperialism is the true immorality in this scenario.

Yes, obviously, we should have allowed all of Korea to become a communist state in the 50s. Why, communism has proved itself to be the fairest and most appropriate form of government for every nation... ... ... .... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[beorhthelm]

Here is a source for you the BBC

BBC News - Charities warn of food shortages in North Korea

Can you please advise how it is morally acceptable for a country to spend billions on trying to make an atomic bomb while it's people regularly suffer famine?

silly boy, you're falling for the western imperialist propaganda. anything that portrays the glorious nation of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea in a poor light must be lieing as the nation is so glorious.

 

[El Presidente]

I think Mustafa is feeling So Lonely over this thread.....

 

[simmo]

If it didn't invest so heavily in its military it would have been destroyed as a state many years ago.

It's terribly unfortunate, but it should not have been put in a position where it has to neglect its poorest people to self preserve.

If the US really cared about the welfare of the North Korean people, it would have made peace with it a long time ago & left it well alone since. US imperialism is the true immorality in this scenario.

Why do North Korea feel the need to invest so heavily in it's military. Yet other countries whose people have famine e.g Ethiopia as an example, do not feel the need for an atomic bomb and have other priorities. Shouldn't a country where people starve first priority be to feed its people?

Also in respect of US imperialism etc. etc. it was agreed by the UN (i.e the rest of the World except North Korea) that North Korea attacked South Korea in 1950 and that it was a UN force (not a US only force) that regained the ground in the Korean penninsula where the North and South are now divided.

Do you agree with the UN interpretation of the 1950-53 Korean War?

 

[sydney]

ha ha ha here we go again..........cant we just rent a bouncy castle and let them HAVE IT....... at least we could have a bet and a laugh. porky and mus i mean..

 

[Triggaaar]

here is a link and quote from the US Department of Defense regarding NK's military capabilities that backs up much of what I've been saying:

Defense.gov News Article: North Korean Military 'Very Credible Conventional Force'

""They have the largest submarine force, the largest special operating force and the largest artillery in the world," Army Gen. Leon LaPorte, commander of U.S. forces in South Korea said. He noted that North Korea has 120,000 special operations forces."

"The sheer size of their military makes them a threat, even if their equipment isn't as up to date as it could be. "Much of their equipment is aged, but they have a lot of it," LaPorte said.
Perhaps more importantly, North Korea poses a significant asymmetric threat. The country possesses chemical weapons, and "their doctrine is to use chemical weapons as a standard munition," LaPorte said.
American officials are also concerned about North Korea's weapons of mass destruction, including potential use of its 800 missiles of various ranges. "The missiles themselves are a significant asymmetrical threat," LaPorte said. "But if that was combined with a nuclear capability, now you have a capability that not only threatens the peninsula but threatens the entire region."

It's one thing to have access to information, it's quite another to be able to understand and interpret it. From the US saying that NK has a lot of special forces and weapons, you deduce:

Bollocks, the North Koreans won last time - this time they would win even more convincingly.

Even with the yanks' stealth bombers and jet fighters, I can't see them defeating an army of 25 million ....

You're mad. The US are not going to send soldiers into Korea, with the aim of preserving life, and win. But if NK were to attack the USA, America would **** them up. If attacked, the US would bomb the shit out of NK. If that didn't work (ie, if NK simply shot down all the US aircraft), the US would nuke them if required. And 25 million people wouldn't be able to do much if the US nuked them.

 

[Puppet Master]

Does anyone know what train I need to get?

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

If it didn't invest so heavily in its military it would have been destroyed as a state many years ago.

It's terribly unfortunate, but it should not have been put in a position where it has to neglect its poorest people to self preserve.

If the US really cared about the welfare of the North Korean people, it would have made peace with it a long time ago & left it well alone since. US imperialism is the true immorality in this scenario.

Ballcocks

If North Korea cared about the welfare of its people it would open its economy. They could be a new china with all the cheap labour that they could provide and dramatically raise their standards of living.

The leadership only care about themselves.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

The US has a prolific track record since the Korean war of bombing minor nations and destroying regimes, directly or indirectly, that doesn't share its capitalist ideals or idea of democracy. It continues to this very day, as seen with its involvement in the Middle East.

So like I said, North Korea invests so heavily in its military purely so it can preserve its politics and values. The US has been relentlessly and unashamedly willing for the demise of this regime since the Korean war. There is absolutely no doubt that if it wasn't a military state it would have been destroyed a long time ago - and if it chose to cut back on military spending, the US would have influence in no time and the regime would end - just like so many others have in this world.

And of course the UN interpretation is correct, the war was a crime & inevitable incident of the cold war, but the imperialist act was by the US. Every year the USA builds new overseas military bases in foreign territories - 750 and counting. It gains influence in foreign nations for its own capitalist interests and has little to no involvement with conflicts or corruptions where there is no possible reward. Having North Korea as a capitalist puppet would be especially useful today while China is becoming the global force.

Would you describe South Korea as a Capatalist Puppet?

Thanks

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

I can see the fat lad heading for an early bath!

 

[Triggaaar]

So like I said, North Korea invests so heavily in its military purely so it can preserve its politics and values. The US has been relentlessly and unashamedly willing for the demise of this regime since the Korean war. There is absolutely no doubt that if it wasn't a military state it would have been destroyed a long time ago

Can you give some examples of peaceful nations the US has attacked?

 

[pork pie]

Can you give some examples of peaceful nations the US has attacked?

Grenada.

 

[simmo]

The US has a prolific track record since the Korean war of bombing minor nations and destroying regimes, directly or indirectly, that doesn't share its capitalist ideals or idea of democracy. It continues to this very day, as seen with its involvement in the Middle East.

So like I said, North Korea invests so heavily in its military purely so it can preserve its politics and values. The US has been relentlessly and unashamedly willing for the demise of this regime since the Korean war. There is absolutely no doubt that if it wasn't a military state it would have been destroyed a long time ago - and if it chose to cut back on military spending, the US would have influence in no time and the regime would end - just like so many others have in this world.

And of course the UN interpretation is correct, the war was a crime & inevitable incident of the cold war, but the imperialist act was by the US. Every year the USA builds new overseas military bases in foreign territories - 750 and counting. It gains influence in foreign nations for its own capitalist interests and has little to no involvement with conflicts or corruptions where there is no possible reward. Having North Korea as a capitalist puppet would be especially useful today while China is becoming the global force.

If a country's regime cannot feed its people and the country regularly has famines caused by political mismanagement (i.e the situation is not geographical/climatalogical because S Korea doesn't have famines). Is it correct that regime should continue?

I am asking you this as a moral question and not as geopolitical or hypotetical question about how to topple such a regime. It is a moral question only, also, in your answer please don't use the words America, US or USA.

 

[Jimmy Grimble]

This thread was quite funny until page 5.

 

[Surrey Seagull]

I can see the fat lad heading for an early bath!

I hear NK will bring their own Vicente on at half time to replace captain buzz cut, some bloke called China.

 

[Horton's halftime iceberg]

Can you give some examples of peaceful nations the US has attacked?

Cambodia, with the most terrible consequences, an example of what bombing from a far creates, when will the politicians ever learn.