Let them have nukes...so what? |
| Posted by: NothingSacred | | Do all the modern day "Bushies" forget the Cold War? Let North Korea have nukes. What can they do with them?
Nothing that's what. Just tell them straight up, "Set off a nuke, your country's burnt toast the next morning." You see it's called mutual deterrance. Nobody will set them off because it's suicide.
Of course to make it work, you can't have any "bleeding heart" thoughts either. If they ever do launch, you have to KILL their entire country the next day...no mercy. You can't think about the innocent, you can't think about the children...because their future is erased the day they set one off...
So just like the USSR, they won't ever launch. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Caps#1 | | You have a strong point, I believe that you are correct on this situation, but in the case of Iraq we must take action. and you are dead right when you say Kill the entire country, that is the thing, you can't worry about the innocent, its over when they launch a nuke at us. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Dreamzwalker | | The CIA has information about Korea missiles and one could hit Alaska or Ca. Personally, I'll be moving to Ca within the next year and a half ; I do not wish to become a crispy critter. NK may or may not launch, depends is it's leader takes his drugs that day. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: NothingSacred | | You have a warped view of the world, people like Saddam or Jung-Il aren't "Crazy", they may be dictators and they may "gas their own people", like MORON Bush say's, but Self-survival is important to them, they want to stay in power, they're not going to push any button. The only reason they want the weopons is as a threat, so that people will think twice about trying to challenge the way they operate...same reason the U.S. needs them. Except in our case, it's to protect the rights of Corporations to make huge profits in an unfetterred environment, to be able to make huge campaign contributions to the executive and legislative branches of our government, which they own, to perpetuate their earning power. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Marc Flemming | | Yes, NothingSacred is right. Sane people assassinate their opposition, kill their own people and think they are Nebuchadnezzar reincarnated to rule the New Babylon.
Just look it up in the dictionary under "sane".
If self-survival is truly important to them - I'd suggest that one do as he is asked and the other to shut up. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Dreamzwalker | |
| quote: |
Originally posted by NothingSacred
, they may be dictators and they may "gas their own people", like MORON Bush say's, |
Bush didn't say this, the history books prove it and the people that survived. It's dense to believe that Bush made this up, or was the first to quote this.
And you did not understand the Terminology of "Crazy."
Meaning unpredictable etc etc.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Sean Kelly | |
| quote: |
Originally posted by NothingSacred
Do all the modern day "Bushies" forget the Cold War? Let North Korea have nukes. What can they do with them? |
What can they do with them? Hmm, well let's see.. how's this for a hypothetical..
Since NK is obviously harboring terrorists and sympathizes with Saddam Hussein (as evidenced by the offer of assylum from the U.S.), then it stands to reason that, armed with nuclear weapons, there would be nothing to stand in the way of NK, say, SELLING a couple of them to their little buddies. Nuclear warheads and such have quite a price tag on them and their sales could doubtless have a positive impact on the finances of their nation. And so here you have a formula for a twisted egomaniac who could smuggle illegal nuclear arms out of his country and place them into the hands of terrorists who, by the way, hate Americans.
And what happens when they start developing "mini-nukes" that could be readily transported in a variety of forms and potentially brought into the U.S. itself undetected - U.S. customs deals with so much import on a daily basis that it's only able to actually inspect a small percentage of what comes in. It would not be difficult at all to slip in a dangerous weapon like this.
Use your head. Maniacs should not be permitted to have such weaponry.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Dreamzwalker | | Here's the definition I found in the dictionary
sane adj
1. mentally healthy and able to make rational decisions
2. based on sensible, reasonable, or rational thinking
3. in good health
Ie Adolf Hitler - Genocide of the Hebrews
Saddam Hussein - kills his own people and is Nebuchadnezzar reincarnated to rule the New Babylon upon reconstruction.
North Korea - Most free country in the world. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: NothingSacred | | Fine, AFTER they set one off we can COMPLETELY TORCH AND FLATTEN their entire country and KILL ALL of their PEOPLE, including the CHILDREN, ESPECIALY the CHILDREN...no biggie. But after they attack us...preemptive war is illegal, ********** Bush is about to become a war criminal. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Dreamzwalker | | Yeah, let's hope they hit your home first NothingSacred 
preemptive war is not illegal, it provides security for those that could come under attack. It's better to plan ahead, not behind. Didn't school teach you that? History sure does. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Caps#1 | | LOL, I like your idea about NothingSacred hey Dreamzwalker, if you move to CA, dont go to Berkley, or however it is spelled, they will turn you crazy. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Sean Kelly | | Berkeley's actually pretty nice.. beautiful weather, killer sunsets, constant fresh air - just don't go to school there  | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: trustno1atall | |
| quote: |
Originally posted by NothingSacred
Do all the modern day "Bushies" forget the Cold War? Let North Korea have nukes. What can they do with them?
........
So just like the USSR, they won't ever launch. |
Take this example. 300 people. Give 5 of them a gun. Scary huh? The thought that your neighbors have a gun but you don't. Now, lets do this. Give ALL of them each a gun.
Which scenerio is scarier? 5 people having guns or 300 people having guns? Sooner or later, someone's going to use it. Why increase your chances of getting shot?
If a country does not have nukes, it should not be encouraged to acquire nukes. If one country can get away with it, other countries will try the same thing. Don't encourage it. Not stopping it IS encouraging it.
The difference with the Soviet Union was that they were rational leaders who had control. At the time, the Soviet Union was a superpower.
North Korea is not a superpower. Their people are starving and cold. The fear is that North Korea will sell the nuclear weapons off to the highest bidders such as terrorists or terrorist countries. That's the fear.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: NothingSacred | | Rational leaders? The USSR? Why then did "Alzheimer Ronnie" dub them the "Evil Empire"?
Any country that will want to have an alternative culture, like Communism or some fundimentalist religious culture or any culture that doesn't want U.S. corporations to have access or any say in their affairs will need to posses nukes in the future if they want to exist in that form. | | Reply To this Message
|
North Korea Forum: Let them have nukes...so what?
|
