Tactical Bombings are in Order! - Target: North Korea

[Stormin Norman]

It is my assessment that we should run a bombing mission over N. Korea for the purpose of destroying the materials and machinery necessary for creating nuclear weapons. Furthermore this will truly show the world what is meant by the new policy of preemption. Take out only those targets deemed necessary for accomplishing the said mission. Then, wait and see how the N. Koreans wish to proceed.

Thoughts and comments welcome. Why or why not?

[Moskitto]

i don't understand it, Iraq starts letting weapons inspectors in, and we're talking about going to war with them and N.Korea throws them out and no one's talking about going to war with them. Why?

[Stormin Norman]

I'm talking about it. However, I think the reluctance of many has to do with the perception that this is a Chinese ploy to divide our attention over two regions so they can attempt a run at Taiwan.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

And yes lett the plane fly over all nations who have nukes: USA, Russia, China, France, Pakistan, India..

Why do you want to bomb someone who doesn't even have nukes? Why don't you bomb the guys who do have it? Or can't your "great 4 Reich" handle it?

Heil Bush!! Lang leben Der 4 Reich!!

[pastradamus]

Another fine example of capitalism trying to reach its peak,when it exploits the world,when people are slaves of its evil,and when the workers are firmly under its thumb & exploited.

[El Brujo]

Funny how the US gets sore about other countries building up their defence system with nukes but the US has the most weapons of mass destruction in the world (not to mention, its the only country that has actually USED them in combat on 100% CIVILLIAN targets). If the yanks don't trust the rest of the world with small nuclear power why should the rest of the world trust the yanks with them. A little HYPOCRICY there, wouldn't we agree?

[Geddan]

Well, when will the US bomb India, France, the UK, Russia, China and Israel for possessing nukes? Ooops, I forgot, they are capitalists, the true human ideal.

I think that the US should stop being stubborn kids and give North Korea some food and things you know that Kim Jong Il can't do anything "bad" with. If you give him money he might buy nukes (why that would be wrong when the US has got like 20,000 nukes is unclear to me) so I would say that instead of war, send food.

When liberal papers in Sweden tells me that Bush is THE peacekeeper, I'd like to show them who he really is. A warmonger who want's to show the world that he is good at pushing little red buttons, and of course stopping communism.

All hail peace.

[Stormin Norman]

"Funny how the US gets sore about other countries building up their defence system with nukes"

Hey moron, since you haven't been keeping up on current events, let me educate you. The N. Koreans have been threatening war. They are using the nuclear situation as a means to intimidate. Nobody is under the assumption that they are developing a defensive system, except maybe you. They are trying to blackmail the U.S. into continuing food and oil shipments. The administration has wisely stated the position that it will not cow-tow to such underhanded, aggressive talk. All this does is prove that Bush was right in labeling them part of the "Axis of Evil". The N. Koreans are flaunting their nuclear capability, and threatening their neighbors.

Of course, I don't expect a leftist like yourself to understand the difference between a maniacal rouge nation and a nation of democracy and freedom. That much is apparent by the world view you espouse.

There is a big difference between using nclear weapons to end a protracted war, such as WWII, and using them to initiate global instabilty by spawning war.

It never ceases to amaze me how the left will side with nations like N. Korea over the U.S. Are you that blinded by your flawed ideology? This is just a further example of how suicidal left wingers are. I suppose you believe that every nation should acquire nuclear weapons. Yes, that would help in materializing your naive view of peace on earth. We have the power to stop a potential catastrophe, why shouldn't we? What do you suggest, that we continue to bankroll their nuclear program like the Clinton administration did?

[Communist Chris]

Quote: from Moskitto on 7:35 pm on Dec. 28, 2002
i don't understand it, Iraq starts letting weapons inspectors in, and we're talking about going to war with them and N.Korea throws them out and no one's talking about going to war with them. Why?

This is true. I think American propaganda has gone to far. All you see on CNN is there "Showdown in Iraq" but you don't here them about going into North Korea. I still think that Bush wants to go to Iraq for the fucking oil. Stormin Norman I wish an F-16 would fall on your house but only killing you not the people that live around you.

[Geddan]

Well Stormin Norman, when two questionable countries are in conflict, we lefts side for those who will take the most damage or is the underdog. I personally hate the dictatorship which rules North Korea but the US ain't any better, since the US has got tons of abc-weapons (or bnc-weapons) which they use as intimidation, just as you said North Korea will. The US is threatening to bomb North Korea and kill innocents for reasons that make the US an as good target, therefore I side with North Korea. IF North Korea later threatens South Korea, fuck North Korean Kim Jong Il, then South Korea will get my support.

All hail peace

[Stormin Norman]

I suppose the only way to help you idiots understand the full power of the weapons you propose to let fall into the hands of people like Saddam is another demostration of its destruction. People like you easily forget what human suffering entails, and often need a reminder. If we follwed your advice, I fear that demonstration would come all too soon.

[Stormin Norman]

"since the US has got tons of abc-weapons (or bnc-weapons"

You're wrong. Look it up, then tell me the extent of our chemical and biological weapons programs. Idiot.

[Communist Chris]

Why the US does not fight two front war and only with Iraq?
Here are my reasons:
1) The US government does not have the logic to fight at two fronts.
2) North Korea scares the shit out of them.
3) Iraq is not such a powerfull country to fight a war.
4) North Korea has nukes and will use them if necessery.
5) North Korea will kick the US ass.
6)They don't have the money to split their military in 2.
I don't support this war, but it would be nice to see the US government to be put in it's place.

[Geddan]

Well Storming Norman, abc is either Atomic, Biological or Chemical. If the US has got a lot of atomic weapons, they thus have a lot of abc-weapons. Besides, to be a know-it-all, a nuke weighs more than a ton :) The nukes throughout the world were for 30 or 40 years ago calculated to be 30,000. If US had their share part of them, they must have had tons.

The US might lack a biological or chemical warfare program, but they have given such weaponry to Iraq, so who's an idiot here, Norm? Me, or your beloved government? :)

I haven't said that I support nukes in the hands of North Korea or Iraq. The fact is, I don't support weapons of mass-destruction at all. I wan't to see them all defused. Even the US', although they sure have some noble purpose (like blowing up some chinese people to give the other chinese people some place to live, or maybe use them as grand fireworks). Well, I would like to see any such crap defused, and I would like to see the money put in nuke programs to be put in research of, say, fusion, the neverending power source.

(Edited by Geddan at 11:02 pm on Dec. 28, 2002)

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

He stormin Moron do u think that the USA should get rid of it's nukes after it has it missle defense system. It's fair.

And why are u on Che-lives. this aint Bush-lives. You don't listen, only thing you can do is calling everyone a moron. While you have nothing good to say. When do you realize that someday captalism will rip itself apart.

[Michael De Panama]

While I'm going to have to admit that I find North Korea to be a much greater threat than Iraq is painted out to be, I find Stormin Norman's claims that "North Korea is declaring war on the U.S." quite absurd.

North Korea is trying to reactivate some nuclear power plants to power up their country independently, since the U.S. has stopped in juicing them up ever since we found out that North Korea is housing nukes. That's not a declaration of war, that's dealing with a situation that's been brought to them. The argument North Korea brings is that they broke the U.N. agreements and built nukes, U.S. broke the U.N. agreements and stopped juicing their country, so why the fuck should there be any U.N. weapons inspectors?

I'm not taking the predictable "no war" leftist stance here completely. I don't know what must be done in this situation. I think, however, that something like this is a lot more of an important reason to consider military action than is the situation in Iraq.

[Xvall]

LOL. SN. Yeah man, we gotta watch out for them sneaky chinese. They're always plotting behind our backs because they hate our freedom and democracy. Ignore the fact that they make 50% of our shit.

[ComradeJunichi]

US has stopped oil shipment, and etc, they have rejected all requests for dialogue between the two countries. DPRK decides to reopen it's nuclear facilities for electricity, etc. Then, expel the IAEA. 1) Electricity, 2) Hoping this will reopen dialogue.

I am not a supporter of the DPRK, and I'm not saying this paragraph is true. I'm just taking a look from both sides, and questioning 'why' the DPRK would do this or that.

[queen of diamonds]

Ironically enough, following the Korean War in which the UN fought so very hard to establish democracy in SK, the country was ruled by a long string of dictators, a fact that somehow managed to get ignored by the US....

SN, you really don't get it, do you? It's not about defending the country. Give me a break, Hussein hadn't been making threats towards the US before they suggested declaring war on him. It's about what they can get out of it; not only the destruction of a rogue state and compliance in the area, but also the oil within Iraq and ports to ship out oil from other parts of the Gulf, which, if nothing else, will lessen Saudi influence in the US.
NK, on the other hand, is rocky, has terrible weather, awful land, little influence anywhere, and is basically reliant on the UN to sustain itself. Where's the gain?

[peaccenicked]

One barely knows where to begin with SN's Shit crammed brain.
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/2002/12/000182.html

[synthesis]

Quote: from Drake Dracoli on 2:48 am on Dec. 29, 2002
LOL. SN. Yeah man, we gotta watch out for them sneaky chinese. They're always plotting behind our backs because they hate our freedom and democracy. Ignore the fact that they make 50% of our shit.


Stormin Norman: My gran-pappy always told me to keep my eye on those damn dirty chinks. He always said, "Never trust the yellow man." Red bastards always want to take our virgins!

Idaho Secessionist Forces unite!

[Socialist Pig]

Quote: from DyerMaker on 6:52 am on Dec. 29, 2002

Stormin Norman: My gran-pappy always told me to keep my eye on those damn dirty chinks. He always said, "Never trust the yellow man." Red bastards always want to take our virgins!

Idaho Secessionist Forces unite!
heh

America is very trigger happy these days. Planing to give all these countries a good ol' tactical bombing. I don't think they'll be happy until every country in the world is totaly obediant to them.

[El Brujo]

Quote: from Stormin Norman on 5:17 am on Dec. 29, 2002
"Funny how the US gets sore about other countries building up their defence system with nukes"

Hey moron, since you haven't been keeping up on current events, let me educate you. The N. Koreans have been threatening war. They are using the nuclear situation as a means to intimidate. Nobody is under the assumption that they are developing a defensive system, except maybe you. They are trying to blackmail the U.S. into continuing food and oil shipments. The administration has wisely stated the position that it will not cow-tow to such underhanded, aggressive talk. All this does is prove that Bush was right in labeling them part of the "Axis of Evil". The N. Koreans are flaunting their nuclear capability, and threatening their neighbors.

Of course, I don't expect a leftist like yourself to understand the difference between a maniacal rouge nation and a nation of democracy and freedom. That much is apparent by the world view you espouse.

There is a big difference between using nclear weapons to end a protracted war, such as WWII, and using them to initiate global instabilty by spawning war.

It never ceases to amaze me how the left will side with nations like N. Korea over the U.S. Are you that blinded by your flawed ideology? This is just a further example of how suicidal left wingers are. I suppose you believe that every nation should acquire nuclear weapons. Yes, that would help in materializing your naive view of peace on earth. We have the power to stop a potential catastrophe, why shouldn't we? What do you suggest, that we continue to bankroll their nuclear program like the Clinton administration did?


Oh my. Typical brainwashed yankee supremacist.

What I suggest is that the yanks FUCK OFF and stop trying to police the world. There is less of a reason to believe NK is preparing nukes for agression than there is of them preparing nukes for defence. Any idiot with remote common sence knows that it wouldn't be in their interest to attack any country (especially shitheel barbarians like the US) because they would obviously retaliate. The NK regime simply figured that since your shit-for-brains president included them in his stupid "axis of terror" speech along with Iraq and now apparently wants to pick them off one by one, that they might be next (though I don't think so myself because Dubya is already getting well-deserved condemnation from most of the world for wanting to invade Iraq).

The point I am trying to make is, if the US has weapons of mass destruction and a big military for their selfish AGRESSIVE puropses, the rest of the world have all the right to have just that for DEFENSIVE purposes. They would, of course, NOT HAVE TO if the US hadn't INVENTED them and started the whole stigma by bombing whole cities with them and later increasing their production for their anti-communist crusade in the cold war. And the fact that you think its ok to kill thousands of civilians that didn't participate in WWII just so there would be less military casualties (most of which would be VOLUNTARY) proves what sick bastards you right-wingers are.

If there was a "potential threat" as you say there is then why does Dubya bring it up, all of a sudden, after 10 years? If the US really was acting on "national security", they would have done something about it a long time ago.

And finally(though this is off topic), don't give me that shit about the US being for "freedom and democracy". We have Pinochet, Batista, Noriega, The Shah of Iran, Mobutu, BIN-LADEN, SADAAM HUSSEIN, and countless others as living proof that that's not the case.

[synthesis]

And finally(though this is off topic), don't give me that shit about the US being for "freedom and democracy". We have Pinochet, Batista, Noriega, The Shah of Iran, Mobutu, BIN-LADEN, SADAAM HUSSEIN, and countless others as living proof that that's not the case.

Ahhh! You left out one of my favorites, the Duvalier family.

[Umoja]

You make me sick SN. This is a typical routine that white supremecist have used against all other peoples of the world for ages. They come as the advanced people, and show how threatening they are, but generally leave the other peoples alone. Then when the others take their own control from the white supremecist, the white supremecist start to talk about how much of a threat these people are and go in and kill them. This is what holds the world back, the white supremecist like you SN.

[Capitalist Imperial]

[quote]Quote: from Communist Chris on 9:49 pm on Dec. 28, 2002
Why the US does not fight two front war and only with Iraq?
Here are my reasons:
"1) The US government does not have the logic to fight at two fronts."

Like we did in World War 2? And were the only nation to do so?

2) "North Korea scares the shit out of them."

LOL, this is just funny

"3) Iraq is not such a powerfull country to fight a war."

Nope, not after 1991, but bufore that they were the world's 4th largest standing army.

"4) North Korea has nukes and will use them if necessery."

The US is not concerned with present North Korean nuclear capability. They have no ICBM's. We do, and we have MIRV's (multiple warheads) on them, not to mention subs and stand-off cruise nukes launched from aircraft

"5) North Korea will kick the US ass."

LOL, dude, get serious

"6)They don't have the money to split their military in 2."

yes, we do

I don't support this war, but it would be nice to see the US government to be put in it's place.

Anytime someone would like to try, be our guest. If their feelin' froggy, jump. We are not worried

[Stormin Norman]

I think we are capable of fighting a three front war; one in Iraq, one in North Korean, and the one right here at home targeting all anti-American enemies of the state.

[Umoja]

If we oppose the state we should be killed because we are such a danger. We are such a threat to the governments control! I can hear Bush now.

"Oh no! Our bad Stratergery has led to the leftist actually uhh... threatening our country by talking! They ruin our umm... Democrazy with their words! Send them off to those old Jap camps in the West!"

[Moskitto]

Like we did in World War 2? And were the only nation to do so?

actually, the British fought in India and south east Asia as well as Europe, but not to as greater extent,

[Stormin Norman]

"Oh no! Our bad Stratergery has led to the leftist actually uhh... threatening our country by talking! They ruin our umm... Democrazy with their words! Send them off to those old Jap camps in the West!"

I am not talking about those idiots who use their 1st amendment rights to attack the U.S. I am talking about genuine threats to the security of the U.S.. I am talking about illegal immigrants, terrorist organizations, organizations that use their status to degrade the societal values of the America (like NAMBLA), those people who commit violent crimes and pose a genuine threat to the citizens of this country, those who give aid and comfort to the enemy, and those elements who have infiltrated our government for the purpose of upsettig it. I am not talking about peace protestors and little kids who call themselves communists. I was referring to those people with the ability and intent to do serious damage.

[Guest]

just because the USA wants to blow the crap out of a couple of countries smaller than itself, we dont have to get all agitated.

The bully will always get its come-uppance, and once the rest of the world realises that there are more of them than the US, the sooner George "cant spell my name" bush will shut up and sit down.

Sovietsky Souyuz (lost my password but i shall return)

[Umoja]

Real white supremecist sounding SN. Illegal immigrants are the least of our worries, first and formost. Internal terrorist are a problem, but you don't do preemptive strikes on your own citizens. Unless you advocate re-activiating COINTELPRO, but you couldn't advocate that......

You point out how any modern organization has infiltraited our government and destabilized it though. Then I'll believe you.