Should N. Korea be next?

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Spiderman, Apr 1, 2003.

  1. Spiderman CPA Man in Tights, Dopey Administrative Assistant

    Just curious, for those who seem to advocate that getting rid of Saddam because of his treatment of his country and the US should be "the world's policeman" is reason for the current war, should N. Korea be next? Kim is pretty much cut from the same cloth... why or why not?
  2. train The Wildcard!!!...

    Yes!!!...

    Because i'm from TX, and we can!...;) :D
  3. Ferret CPA Founder, Slacker

    I don't know about this one. I'm going to save my opinion until after our current war is over...

    -Ferret

    "...need to do research to find out what's really going on..."
  4. train The Wildcard!!!...

    Research takes time...

    Start firing!!!...
  5. EricBess Active Member

    Hussein has a history of making it about more than his own people. I don't think that the US should be "the world's policemen", but I think that the situation in Korea looks as if there may be impact on the rest of the world.

    So, should we go in there are get rid of Kim? I don't necessarily think so, but I think the situation should be analyzed.

    Besides, there is a fundamental difference. Korea announced that they were going to build weapons. There is obviously unrest there and that means potential room for a diplomatic solution. Hussein lied about his intentions every step of the way, leaving it clear that any diplomatic solution would just be a farce as far as he was concerned.
  6. Spiderman CPA Man in Tights, Dopey Administrative Assistant

    But how long before "negotiations" are exhausted, as Bush claimed was the case with Saddam? If all Kim is doing is to provocate and bluster just to prop up his economy, are negotiations just a sham in themselves?
  7. Mazzak Stylemongering Protodeity

    I am just posting to announce that Spiderman just used the words Bluster and Sham in the same sentence.
  8. Spiderman CPA Man in Tights, Dopey Administrative Assistant

    Watch this space for more uses of two words in the same sentence :p
  9. train The Wildcard!!!...

    I know sham... not bluster... is that like blister?... i'm too lazy to go to m-w.com...:rolleyes:
  10. Svenmonkey Pants Chancellor

    And too lazy to form a non-stereotypical-Texan opinion on things...
  11. Zhaneel Resident Gryphon Queen

    I think we should go for a diplomatic solution. An actual one, not just a half-assed attempt just to say they've tried diplomacy and it's failed.
  12. DÛke Memento Mori

    ...
    LOL! Has it ever occured to you, Sven, that an ape only speaks the language of the apes? Your demand is...futile. :D
  13. Svenmonkey Pants Chancellor

    I guess so. :)

    And the North Koreans actually want a diplomatic solution. I'm pretty sure they're doing all this "We've got nuclear capabilities!" thing so they can get international appeasement aid.
  14. Jigglypuff Big Cute Pink Thing

    Hello. I have nothing productive to add to this thread other than to define 'bluster' and save train the trouble.

    It means to speak in an arrogant or bullying manner or to make loud, empty threats.

    This has been another edition of "Learn New Vocabulary With Jigglypuff." We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

    (- Steve -)
  15. Apollo Bird Boy

    The heck with the regularly scheduled thread, I want more words with Jigglypuff! Can you define hullabaloo for us? :D

    I think it's a safe bet we'll be much slower invading Korea--they have a huge army and less oil, so Bush won't be so eager to jump down their throats.

    As Michael Moore said somewhere or another, Bush must have been furious when Korea announced they had The Bomb. I mean, here he is ready to run into Iraq, who hasn't been proven to have anything, and little old Korea pops up going "Hey! Look at me! I've actually got something to be excited about!" It's like they were sitting there as the third, ignored member of the Axis of Evil and just felt left out of the whole mess. But Bush is still ignoring them, because they actually pose a threat.
  16. Ferret CPA Founder, Slacker

    I'm pretty sure he's keeping a close eye on them - he's just not telling CNN about it...

    -Ferret

    "I'm Geraldo Rivera and tonight I'm going to tell the world where ALL of our military is hiding..."
  17. Spiderman CPA Man in Tights, Dopey Administrative Assistant

    This is most likely true, which really amounts to blackmail. Should the world give in?

    But people are answering the wrong question. I didn't ask "what should we do about N. Korea", I asked the people who said fighting in Iraq is a good thing because he's a tyrant if the same applies to North Korea. Admittedly that's a small group (two people I think)...
  18. Ferret CPA Founder, Slacker

    So, your question is: As soon as our current whipping boy is brought down, should we put Kim in that position? Probably not - or at least not until we can get some other Asian countries on our side...if we could score China life would be good.

    -Ferret

    "Let's dig up Nixon!"
  19. Spiderman CPA Man in Tights, Dopey Administrative Assistant

    So the follow-up question is: Why not? He's pretty much the same, evil, ruthless dictator Saddam is... and why would we need to wait for other Asian countries to be on our side?
  20. Thallid Ice Cream Man 21sT CeNTuRy sChIZoId MaN

    There are evil ruthless dictators (by US standards certainly) in dozens of countries and ineffective governments the world over.

Share This Page