Korea and Iraq

[lostsoul]

This is my first post but for the past few months i have been coming here very often.
i hope its not too stupid, but i am wondering what do you people think the reason is for Iraq and North Korea to be treated so different when they kind of have simlair situations.

Iraq seems to have meet every single demand(except of the removal of Saddam) and yet their is a huge build up of forces in the middle east preparing a war against iraq. Korea on the other hand has done the oppsite and has broke the requirments set by Americia, and yet America says it is not thinking of war.

Is there a purpose for this? or does America only fight battles they know they can win easily?

thanks in advance and take care :-)

[chamo]

Well you have to look at the reasons for going to war, in Iraq the only reason for war is essentially over oil, if America has more control over the world's oil resources then they have more imperialistic power. North Korea does actually pose much more of a threat but USA does not see a good enough reason to take action, economically that is of course. Anyway, they would be too concerned with moving troops into the Middle East and organising the war there to be ready for DPRK. North Korea may be developing nuclear weapons but I wouldn't think there is any reason fo rhtem to use them, America pose more of a threat to the world with their nuclear weapons that DPRK do.

[Bolschewik]

The DPRK would likely give bush a real fight: they have hunderds of thousands in the military, and millions on reserve. Also a huge majority, roughly 95% of the people are extreme supporters of their permenant president, the late Kim Il Sung. The only real way Bush can win a war with N. Korea would be to nuke them, or send in millions of troops, - a proxy army cannot work in DPRK as it can in Central Asia.

[chamo]

The borders of DPRK are too well guarded and the army too large and well supplied for U$A to win easily. They will only fight a war that is quick, easy, and has a large economical benefit or imperial benefit.

[TheEndOfMan]

Happyguy is compleatly correct... You have to understand America have never fought a war that doesn't serve their ecconomy in some way.... Look at WWII, it got America out of the depression.... This stupid fucking "war on terror", which is really just a continuation of the gulf war, is just another example of America's facist, oppressive stance in the world today. NO WAR ON IRAQ! DOWN WITH THE USA!

(Edited by TheEndOfMan at 10:04 pm on Dec. 30, 2002)

[ComradeJunichi]

I find myself to wholeheartedly agree with Bolschewik. The DPRK army, which I read was standing 1.1 million, will not submit easily to the US. The war, in my opinion, would be deadly. Most of the fight being on the 38th parallel, that would mean 2 million North Korean, South Korean, and American troops face to face - in my opinion would be almost like trench warfare in WWII. But, if it big bad weapons start coming in, the word war would mean nothing.

[lostsoul]

its just funny, how when iraq agrees with all of Amercia's demands there still is a big chance of war, and when Korea defies America, then America "isn't even considering war"(in the word of Collen Powells).

Why are other countries supporting America's "war on terrorism"? if it is only benfits America's economy, and not really anyone else. If the Iraq war happens, then won't that give America better control of oil, and since oil has the power to effect an entire countries economy, won't that give America full power of the worlds economy? why would other countries and non-americians try to fight this war with them?

Lately it is pissing me off, when the Amercian Goverment is saying the war is to help the people of iraq, do you think their livies will get better after the war? or worst?


sorry for all the questions :-)

take care everyone and thanks for the informative replies.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

They can't conquer North Korea. Because that requires the total control over key city's. And every military can tell you that citys are the hardest battles. One single sniper can easily take out hunderds of men (Zaitsev/Stalingrad) if he is just hid good enough and leaves his position at the right time. Every dark cornor, every hole, every obstacle is a great place to hide. In city warfare the defender is in advantage before the battle even starts.

Don't think that the USA would risk millions of soldiers to conquer a country that doesn't mean anything to Americans. Soon after the first casualtys protests would follow, how higher the number of casualtys, how heavyer the protests.

North Korea has no real natural treasures, but Iraq has oil. Oil wich is essential for the American way of life.

[ComradeJunichi]

its just funny, how when iraq agrees with all of Amercia's demands there still is a big chance of war, and when Korea defies America, then America "isn't even considering war"(in the word of Collen Powells).


I do think they are 'considering' war, but somewhat trying to avoid. When the North and South were finally having talks and the North was opening itself, Bush came out of nowhere and the North became more isolated. I'm guessing the US was dumbfounded when the DPRK challenged them. DPRK won't go down that easily.

Why are other countries supporting America's "war on terrorism"?

Besides England, which countries? Some may support the anti-terrorism, but creating war and more sphere of influences is not supported. It's one of the main reason Islamic Jihad has occured.

If the Iraq war happens, then won't that give America better control of oil, and since oil has the power to effect an entire countries economy, won't that give America full power of the worlds economy?

Yes, the US will get oil benefits out of this. A theory I've heard and pondered about, and researching/writing a report about, is the EU. One of America's goal would be the EU.

You should have posted this in soc vs cap, because you would be getting the capitalist point of view also. Not a onesided argument.

[chamo]

It would be good to see the views of cappies, I ask for a moderator to move this topic to the Socialism vs Capitalism forum.

[lostsoul]

sorry for posting it here under politics, i am kind of new to posting and thought it was more politics since it delt with America's forgin policy toward other countries.

[ComradeJunichi]

No, it's okay. I was just suggesting that if you put it in Soc vs. Cap you'd get both sides of the story.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Reply's on my previous post in this thread plz!!!

[chamo]

Quote: from CCCP on 8:17 pm on Dec. 30, 2002
They can't conquer North Korea. Because that requires the total control over key city's. And every military can tell you that citys are the hardest battles. One single sniper can easily take out hunderds of men (Zaitsev/Stalingrad) if he is just hid good enough and leaves his position at the right time. Every dark cornor, every hole, every obstacle is a great place to hide. In city warfare the defender is in advantage before the battle even starts.

Don't think that the USA would risk millions of soldiers to conquer a country that doesn't mean anything to Americans. Soon after the first casualtys protests would follow, how higher the number of casualtys, how heavyer the protests.

North Korea has no real natural treasures, but Iraq has oil. Oil wich is essential for the American way of life.


Comrade, you seem to be pretty knowledgable on fighting war, and as has been said; this is not going to be an easy war for america to win. For them there is no point, a tough war, no economical benefits to be gained from North Korea.

Hypocritical from U$, but what did you expect. DPRK is one of those countries on the terrorist list, but as there is no $$$ to be gained there Bush will not bother.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Like I said.:smile:

[lostsoul]

i agree with you all. But by America not doing anything, won't it show that America can be defied.

Like the war on afgan seemed to be a war to simply show America's might. North Korea starting their nuclear program dispite America's agreement makes America look like it has no power over them.

sorry if the above paragraph doesn't make sense, but what i am basically trying to say is, in my opinion, America only wants money, power, and respect. And North Korea isn't respecting them. From some of my books i read that, America's reason for entering Vietnam was that they didn't want communism to spread, do you think they will try to do something to make North Korea's standing up against America not spread too?

take care


p.s. I wish everyone on this board and their families a happy new year!

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

China. Think China would act if their communist brothers would be attacked by captalists. The last time they send millions of soldiers to Korea. But at the other hand, China has captalized a lot.

[ComradeJunichi]

America has done something, what it's done is break relationships between to the two countries. Broke them while they were first breaking the ice between each other. Why did this all start?

[Pete]

Has anyone watched the film "Deterence." I saw it in the summer and it made me scared shitless of America, because it seemed so true. The 'rogue state' Iraq launches nuclear weapons at the U$ because they send a bomber with a nuke in to Iraqi Territory. The American people do everything to 'protect' the president. In the end, America new that Iraq's Nukes where duds and they blow the shit out of Baghdad anyways. America=homicidal bully. That is what that film showed me. I hope it was at least minory relavent to the posts.

[lostsoul]

i agree crazypete, america is a big bully, but i don't know about homicidal. I think they have no balls, they only fight when they know they can win. Any of us have the power to go and pick on little kids in a park, but we don't do it. America would(with the intention to take their candy)!!

i wish someone would stand up to them. Che, Fidel, and cuba did, but after that i don't think any country really has.

I don't want to sound anti-americian, so i'll let Chairman Mao say it for me.
http://www.maoism.org/msw/vol9/mswv9_30.htm

take care

[MJM]

Like the war on afgan seemed to be a war to simply show America's might.

Not quite. The oil pipeline through Afghanistan is being made now, the true motive for the war there. People said this before the war, now everyone seems to have forgotten about it, at least our great "free" press has- surprise, surprise.

(Edited by MJM at 2:18 pm on Jan. 3, 2003)

[lostsoul]

i heard that many times before, but is it really true? Many inncocent livies were lost in the afgan war, i don't even think America is cruel enough to do that for oil pipes as a motive.

[chamo]

Trust me, america is prepared to do anything for oil, but tries to cover up that they are now getting oil.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Any nation has the cruelty to kill for oil, but the US has the power and takes it's oppurtunity.

[Dhul Fiqar]

I thought the best explanation was from this government spokesman on CNN:

"We have to be careful in Korea, because their country is situated in a very volatile region that we don't want to see destabilized."

LOL, like the Middle East is notoriously harmonious!

--- G.