|
quiver
freedrug


Registered: 10/25/05
Posts: 8,047
|
NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US
#6167273 - 10/13/06 09:42 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
all thats needed is a cargo ship
theyre sneaky fuckers
making everyone focus on how they can't possibly deliver a nuke from the air via missiles and even having failed attempts televised/announced is throwing people of the scent imo
my idea is to sink any NK heroin smuggling cargo ships we can find in international waters 
id fucking love to see my west provoke something for once instead of being reactionaries
--------------------
|
RosettaStoned
Stranger

Registered: 05/29/06
Posts: 540
Loc: North America
Last seen: 16 years, 2 months
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: quiver]
#6167354 - 10/13/06 10:18 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
What would they gain by nuking us? Seeing their own cities reduced to dust? Wow I can totally understand such motivations
Paranoid delusional comes to mind.
-------------------- "Government big enough to provide you with all you need is also big enough to take everything you have." ~ Thomas Jefferson "Without stupid, faggy potheads we wouldn't have wars." - Zappa
|
quiver
freedrug


Registered: 10/25/05
Posts: 8,047
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: RosettaStoned]
#6167384 - 10/13/06 10:31 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
hey fool,im not the one making threats NK is
what did alqueda gain from 911? a dust storm
if you cant see what type of nasty people nkoreans are(they love their leaders)you are an idiot
i hope people like you are fished out and hunted down too
--------------------
|
barfightlard
tales of theinexpressible



Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 8,670
Loc: Canoodia
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: quiver]
#6167385 - 10/13/06 10:32 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
"id fucking love to see my west provoke something for once instead of being reactionaries "
Iraq....
--------------------
"What business is it of yours what I do, read, buy, see, say, think, who I fuck, what I take into my body - as long as I do not harm another human being on this planet?" - Bill Hicks
|
quiver
freedrug


Registered: 10/25/05
Posts: 8,047
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: RosettaStoned]
#6167395 - 10/13/06 10:36 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
oh yeah and i dont consider you an american, a wetback maybe but american no
--------------------
|
quiver
freedrug


Registered: 10/25/05
Posts: 8,047
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: barfightlard]
#6167398 - 10/13/06 10:37 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
reaction...
--------------------
|
niteowl
GrandPaw


Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc:
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: quiver]
#6167491 - 10/13/06 11:04 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Do you really believe that Korea wants to attack America?
-------------------- Live for the moment you are in nowDon't be bogged down by your pastDon't be afraid of what lies in your future
|
quiver
freedrug


Registered: 10/25/05
Posts: 8,047
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: niteowl]
#6167496 - 10/13/06 11:08 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
 nah they love america,they say it all the time
do you think the world should be held to ransom by an insane lunatic?
--------------------
|
niteowl
GrandPaw


Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc:
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: quiver]
#6167517 - 10/13/06 11:16 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Who is being held for ransom?
I don't recall any ransom being mentioned by anyone.
-------------------- Live for the moment you are in nowDon't be bogged down by your pastDon't be afraid of what lies in your future
|
quiver
freedrug


Registered: 10/25/05
Posts: 8,047
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: niteowl]
#6167547 - 10/13/06 11:23 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
 "let our ships into your ports and trade with us or we will burn you"~nth korea
i cant be bothered proving something with links if you cant read between the lines of the last 5 years events dealing with NK
if someone held a gun to your head and said,"buy my goods or sell me some or else" you wouldnt think that was a threat?
if you cant see that thats holding the world to ransom as a threatof war then youre a bigger moron than that rosetta idiot
--------------------
|
niteowl
GrandPaw


Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc:
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: quiver]
#6167650 - 10/14/06 12:16 AM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
quiver said:
 "let our ships into your ports and trade with us or we will burn you"~nth korea
i cant be bothered proving something with links if you cant read between the lines of the last 5 years events dealing with NK
You are right, providing a link and expecting someone to "read between the lines" and jump to the same conclusion you did is futile. Reading between the lines is not always accurate.......kinda like assuming something.
If you are going to take a stance on an issue, you need to be able to back up your position rather than get all defensive about it when your idea is challenged.
Quote:
if someone held a gun to your head and said,"buy my goods or sell me some or else" you wouldnt think that was a threat?
When did Korea ever do that?
Didn't America threaten Korea first when they called them an "axis of evil" along with Iraq and Iran. Then they invaded Iraq.
Wouldn't a good leader make an effort to protect his country? That is what Kim did, made an effort to prevent America from invading his country.
Quote:
if you cant see that thats holding the world to ransom as a threatof war then youre a bigger moron than that rosetta idiot
Way to go. You can't provide any valid argument for your point of view so you start flaming people.
I fully understand your inability to rationally debate this subject. The idea of Korea attacking the U.S. is a media driven concept......and you have been watching too much TV. Your opinion was fed to you thru a television signal. You blindly accept it and believe it "because I saw it on TV".
You cant rationally back up your media fed beliefs because you yourself don't truly understand why you believe it.
N. Korea testing a nuke was a show of power to the U.S. They felt threatened by an American invasion.
Interesting how the media spins the issue 180 degrees to make it look like they are going to attack America 
Stop believing this entertainment driven "news" and think about what and why something is placed on TV.
-------------------- Live for the moment you are in nowDon't be bogged down by your pastDon't be afraid of what lies in your future
Edited by niteowl (10/14/06 12:17 AM)
|
quiver
freedrug


Registered: 10/25/05
Posts: 8,047
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: niteowl]
#6167944 - 10/14/06 02:07 AM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
 you work at the north korean embassy or something?
thats the only thing i can think of why people like you dont understand when someone hates and wants to kill you,your ways.your culture and expect to be thanked for it
so its ok for NK to 'flex their muscle' and threaten war on the world unless we feed them (we dont need nothin from them so who needs who really?)but we should all hold hands and sing 'give peace a chance' when we get threatened?
dont think so sunnyboy
links wouldnt matter with people like you
you'd spit in the truths face anyway
--------------------
|
niteowl
GrandPaw


Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc:
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: quiver]
#6168039 - 10/14/06 02:58 AM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
When did N Korea ever threaten America or any one else for that matter?
You truly do live in your own little fantasy world dont ya.
-------------------- Live for the moment you are in nowDon't be bogged down by your pastDon't be afraid of what lies in your future
|
Diploid
Cuban


Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: quiver]
#6168305 - 10/14/06 08:55 AM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
quiver,
Personalisms, insults, and name calling are irrelevant to the debate and against the rules of this forum. Debate the points presented and leave the person making the point out of the discussion.
Thanks for understanding.
-------------------- Republican Values: 1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you. 2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child. 3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer. 4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
|
barfightlard
tales of theinexpressible



Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 8,670
Loc: Canoodia
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: quiver]
#6168452 - 10/14/06 10:03 AM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
quiver said: reaction...
wrong, Iraq never threatend the US. Thats an aggressor move.
--------------------
"What business is it of yours what I do, read, buy, see, say, think, who I fuck, what I take into my body - as long as I do not harm another human being on this planet?" - Bill Hicks
|
niteowl
GrandPaw


Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc:
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: barfightlard]
#6168488 - 10/14/06 10:19 AM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
True. Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq ever threatened the U.S., neither has Korea.
America is the only nation running around threatening, and invading, nations.
And people actually wonder why Korea developed a nuke of their own.
-------------------- Live for the moment you are in nowDon't be bogged down by your pastDon't be afraid of what lies in your future
|
Phred
Fred's son


Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: niteowl]
#6168813 - 10/14/06 11:54 AM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq ever threatened the U.S...
You remember, do you not, how Afganistan had been taken over by theocratic thugs -- i.e. the Taliban. You must also remember there were just three -- that's right, count 'em, three -- governments in the entire world (out of 191) who recognized the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afganistan.
When the United Nations authorized (you do remember that the invasion of Afghanistan is a United Nations operation, don't you?) action in Afghanistan by a coalition of UN member nations, it was not Afghanistan who was being attacked, but the rogue theocratic group who had hijacked Afganistan. The current democratically elected government of Afghanistan is a legitimately recognized government.
As for the Taliban "threatening" the US while they still held the reigns of power, it was not that the Taliban per se represented a threat, but that the terrorist organization they were protecting did. You do remember, don't you, that not only did the Taliban refuse to turn over Al Qaeda for justice, not only did they refuse to even just step aside and not interfere with the coalition forces going after Al Qaeda within Afghanistan's borders, they trumpeted to the world they would launch a terrible jihad against not just those forces who set foot in Afghanistan, but also against any and every country neighboring Afghanistan who had allowed those forces passage.
Surely you are not arguing at this late date that the UN-sponsored action in Afghanistan was illegitimate, are you? If so, I'd be very interested in hearing why you think so.
As for Iraq never having threatened the US, does sending a hitman after the president of the United States not count as a threatening action in your eyes? How about firing on US (and UK) overflights of the No-Fly Zone on a regular basis? You of course remember these overflights were (once again) authorized by the United Nations. How about harboring terrorists who had carried out operations against the US (as in the WTC 1993 bombing)?
Phred
--------------------
|
nakors_junk_bag
Lobster Bisque


Registered: 11/23/04
Posts: 2,415
Loc: ethereality
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: Phred]
#6168863 - 10/14/06 12:08 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
soem people simply can't be reasoned with.
-------------------- Asshole
|
niteowl
GrandPaw


Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc:
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: Phred]
#6168961 - 10/14/06 12:47 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Phred said: You remember, do you not, how Afghanistan had been taken over by theocratic thugs -- i.e. the Taliban. You must also remember there were just three -- that's right, count 'em, three -- governments in the entire world (out of 191) who recognized the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afganistan.
Your point being? The country was still invaded.......regardless who was running the country.
Quote:
When the United Nations authorized (you do remember that the invasion of Afghanistan is a United Nations operation, don't you?) action in Afghanistan by a coalition of UN member nations, it was not Afghanistan who was being attacked,
 Riiiight.....we didn't bomb Afghanistan......innocent civilians weren't killed......just the people running the country.
 If we didn't want to attack Afghanistan and its citizens (only it's ruling party) why not try a diplomatic solution first rather than invade a country, killing innocent people in the process?
Quote:
Surely you are not arguing at this late date that the UN-sponsored action in Afghanistan was illegitimate, are you? If so, I'd be very interested in hearing why you think so.
Just because there were other countries who supported us out of sympathy after 9-11, doesn't mean that invading Afghanistan was the right choice. America would have invaded Afghanistan regardless of UN support or not (see Iraq).
Waving the UN flag and saying that the war was a just one is simply wrong. America HAD to attack someone after 9-11. OBL was reported to be in Afghanistan so that is the country they started with.
The whole point in going to Afghanistan was to get OBL. Remember the posters "Wanted OBL....Dead or Alive"? Where is he now? Oh yea I remember, GWB morphed OBL into Saddam and said that he was not concerned with OBL shortly after the war started.
Quote:
As for Iraq never having threatened the US, does sending a hit-man after the president of the United States not count as a threatening action in your eyes?
Hasn't the U.S. government done the very same thing with leaders it doesn't like? If not directly then indirectly supporting other countries who have done this (hint Israel)
Should those countries then have the right to invade the U.S?
Quote:
How about firing on US (and UK) overflights of the No-Fly Zone on a regular basis? You of course remember these overflights were (once again) authorized by the United Nations. How about harboring terrorists who had carried out operations against the US (as in the WTC 1993 bombing)?
Again how is attempting to protect your country (by attacking an invading army) the same as threatening one?
Iraq never made a direct threat on America. Neither did Afghanistan. Yet we invaded them because they had policies we didn't agree with. Couldn't a diplomatic solution work......Oh wait we didn't try a diplomatic solution.......we just attacked them.
Now.......can you see why I fully understand why N. Korea got themselves a nuke.
I would like your opinion on this thread
-------------------- Live for the moment you are in nowDon't be bogged down by your pastDon't be afraid of what lies in your future
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero


Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: NK doesnt need a missile to hit the US [Re: niteowl]
#6169719 - 10/14/06 06:34 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
> Iraq never made a direct threat on America. Neither did Afghanistan.
I will agree with you on Iraq, but not Afghanistan. The Afghan goverment, at the time, choose to protect a militia that attacked the US. As a result, in my mind, the Afghan government was fair game for retaliation. Had they handed over the militia that attacked the US, rather than protecting them, then I would agree with you instead.
If the roles were swapped and a bunch of mercenaries from the US attacked Russia and destroyed the Kremlin, and if the US decided to protect those mercenaries rather than hand them over to Russia, then I feel that Russia would be justified in retaliating against the US.
Before somebody tosses in the "what about Bob" scenario... I am talking about militias being protected by a state, not individuals.
> Now.......can you see why I fully understand why N. Korea got themselves a nuke.
Nope. I cannot fathom why a country would starve its own people in the pursuit of weapon technology.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
|