North Korea - are we a little bit scared, or not?

[Adrian Bamforth]

It's easy to say this from miles away, but part of me is keen for almost anything to happen now rather than later when the stakes are higher, and while the regime is in a state of fluidity. Almost any change or power struggle within can't exactly make things worse, and I don't think I'm up for another 40 year Cold War.

It's a rare occasion when the tyrant is actually crazier than their Bond movie equivalent (I propose a hovercraft chase). Though their fatal flaw would seem to be the regime's total inability to exist outside of their vacuum-sealed environment, which is why I wonder if the worst thing which could happen to the regime is or the South to simple pack up their things, walk away from the border and go home. Okay, I'm not exactly sure what would happen in the short term, but if they were foolish enough to try and march across the south, how many minutes would the regime hold together in an environment with freedom of information, technology and stocked shelves?

[CheechFU]

If another country wants to have nuclear weapons then who are we to stop them, it's their business and nobody elses. I say that we should just ignore them and get on with our lives and have fun.

You know some countries are out right, off the hook, all up in your grill, batshit insane right?
Those dudes shouldn't have nuclear weapons, man. They shouldn't be allowed forks really.
And even the chill countries are not immune to revolution, and I don't mean the flakey beatles, love-in kind of revolution.
So. nuclear weapons are like a bad deal, bro.

But have fun getting on with your life and having fun while all the right wing extremists, fundamentalist nutjobs and god complex communists take advantage of your beatnik, liberal ideals. Peace, man!

I'm kidding. Or am I? I've seen a lot of weird shit, mostly on the internet. But I've never seen a nuclear war. The rolling media coverage would be a sight to behold. What exactly is the standard international response for a nuclear attack? Does the UN write another strongly worded resolution that China and Russia shrug their shoulders at or does the rest of world just launch an all out assault like in Civilization III:tanks vs pikemen and HADOUKEN! the korean peninsula into the fucking sun like so many batmans.
That does sound wicked fresh.
iuno. korea is crazy

[smilersaltash]

As I live about 3/4 mile away from a massive MOD armaments depot, I am not as keen as you for nutters to start lobbing ordanance around, nuclear or conventional, just to liven up the tv.

[Frank]

If another country wants to have nuclear weapons then who are we to stop them, it's their business and nobody elses. I say that we should just ignore them and get on with our lives and have fun.

You know some countries are out right, off the hook, all up in your grill, batshit insane right? Those dudes shouldn't have nuclear weapons, man. They shouldn't be allowed forks really. And even the chill countries are not immune to revolution, and I don't mean the flakey beatles, love-in kind of revolution. But have fun getting on with your life while all the right wing extremists, fundamentalist nutjobs and god complex communists take advantage of your beatnik, liberal ideals. Peace, man!

Beatnik Liberal? You really don't know John. The conclusion he draws is questionable, but you can't argue with the fundamental logic of his statement: if it's okay/not okay for The US/China/Russia/India/Pakistan/France/UK/Israel to possess nuclear weapons, then it's okay/not okay for North Korea to have them too. If you don't think anyone should have nuclear weapons (and I don't), you're just coming at the same logical proof from a different angle.

His argument provides the kind of interesting counterfactual necessary to test the validity of any thesis - if it was really okay for states which sometimes act irrationally and belligerently (i) to have nuclear weapons, then it would also be acceptable for states which mostly act in that manner (North Korea) to possess them too. It isn't; so they shouldn't. The falsification of one statement is the proof of the validity of the other, but the logic's the same.


(i) as the US/China/Russia/India/Pakistan/France/UK/Israel all do

[Adrian Bamforth]

You have to hand it to the Stop the War Coallition for their fair and balanced viewpoint, through who's prism there is no conflict it he world which is not entirely the fault of America. All these are irrefutable FACT:

US manoeuvres are preparing for a pre-emotive nuclear attack
The US killed 20% of North Koreans
North Koreans are taking "justifiable precautions"
"War games" are the same as "rape games"
American alone invaded and divided Korea
America refuses to negotiate with North Korea. The North Korean regime just want to talk
America in the occupying power in South Korea
Harsh economic sanctions caused the poor human rights record of North Korea

http://stopwar.org.uk/index.php/usa-war-on-terror/2378-why-north-koreas-anger-over-us-qwar-gamesq-is-justified

[CheechFU]

If another country wants to have nuclear weapons then who are we to stop them, it's their business and nobody elses. I say that we should just ignore them and get on with our lives and have fun.

You know some countries are out right, off the hook, all up in your grill, batshit insane right? Those dudes shouldn't have nuclear weapons, man. They shouldn't be allowed forks really. And even the chill countries are not immune to revolution, and I don't mean the flakey beatles, love-in kind of revolution. But have fun getting on with your life while all the right wing extremists, fundamentalist nutjobs and god complex communists take advantage of your beatnik, liberal ideals. Peace, man!

Beatnik Liberal? You really don't know John. The conclusion he draws is questionable, but you can't argue with the fundamental logic of his statement: if it's okay/not okay for The US/China/Russia/India/Pakistan/France/UK/Israel to possess nuclear weapons, then it's okay/not okay for North Korea to have them too. If you don't think anyone should have nuclear weapons (and I don't), you're just coming at the same logical proof from a different angle.

His argument provides the kind of interesting counterfactual necessary to test the validity of any thesis - if it was really okay for states which sometimes act irrationally and belligerently (i) to have nuclear weapons, then it would also be acceptable for states which mostly act in that manner (North Korea) to possess them too. It isn't; so they shouldn't. The falsification of one statement is the proof of the validity of the other, but the logic's the same.


(i) as the US/China/Russia/India/Pakistan/France/UK/Israel all do

The 'but everyone else is doing it' argument is incredibly retarded.

[Professor Bear]

It is the basis of "nuclear deterrent "and arguably why we never had a third world war.

Also using words like "retarded" as pejorative is a pretty faggy thing to do.

[CheechFU]

It is the basis of "nuclear deterrent "and arguably why we never had a third world war.

Also using words like "retarded" as pejorative is a pretty faggy thing to do.

faggy

[anonymousnet] Enzo Maddox, an earthy obama hater, from Ferndown says, "germ warfare. i'm totally gonna make a mint On it too."

[Spikes]

Thatcher would have known how to deal with this chap. Bring back Thatcher, i say.

[CrazyFoxMachine]

Also using words like "retarded" as pejorative is a pretty faggy thing to do.

And using "faggy" is completely fine is it?

[Professor Bear]

[Richmond Clements]

Also using words like "retarded" as pejorative is a pretty faggy thing to do.

And using "faggy" is completely fine is it?

Maybe it's because I'm also from Norn Iron, but this is obviously sarcastic to me..!

[Frank]

Also using words like "retarded" as pejorative is a pretty faggy thing to do.

And using "faggy" is completely fine is it?

Maybe it's because I'm also from Norn Iron, but this is obviously sarcastic to me..!

Not sure you need to have grown up on the Falls Road to spot that suspicious object underneath your vehicle, Rich. Everyone should look out the window and talk about something else to cover the blushes of two fine forumites; the Fox's for walking into that one, and the Bear's for advancing the since I've been wearing this hat it hasn't rained, therefore my hat prevents it raining line of reasoning.

[Spikes]

I like the sound of a rain preventing hat. Are top men working on it as we speak?

[JOE SOAP]

'Top Men'.