North Korea Threatens World War III - The evils of Communism

[Capitalist Imperial]

Well, here you are, commie pukes.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,75152,00.html

Now tell me, who are the true war-mongers?

Democratic, Capitalist America? No!!!!

Communist, Dictatorial North Korea? Yes!!!

Who is threatening the world with using nuclear weapons? As usual, the commies.

And they are not just suggesting that they will use nukes in defense, but MERELY IN RESPONSE TO ECONOMIC SACNTIONS!!!

Talk about war-mongering lunatics!!!

As usual, leave it to the communists to threaten the world with destruction just because they are not getting their way.

It is OK, though, US leadership has a much cooler head than pyagong (or however its spelled), and will seek to acheive a peaceful resolution if possible.

However, if NK is persistent in beating its war drums, we certainly can arrange an "accomodation" to their wishes for conflict.

In the end, I am confident the US will still be a viable, standing nation.

I cannot say the same for North Korea.

[Sirion]

Ok, I will say this, once, and for the whole world of leftist behind me (ok, probably just most, but still): There is a fact that all cappies here don't realise, or more likely don't WANT to know, and that is that NO so called "communist" nation today is a truly communist nation. According to www.communism.com , communism is:

Scientific definition:

A classless society with no exploitation. No state machine used by one section of the population to oppress another section. No need for professional armies or police forces. No use of production for profit or exchange. Society runs in accord with the principle: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

Bullshit definition (ie: commonly believed--but WRONG)
Rule of society by a single party which maintains a monopoly of political power and suppresses all opposition. Control of the economy via centralized bureaucratic planning.
Examples of bullshit definition: the former Soviet Union, China, Cuba, North Korea, etc.

I hope every right winger here can read this, and accept it as a fact.

North Korea, while not being a true workers state, it is an example on attacks on foreign imperialism. Therefore, it must be supported. However, when NK is beating the drums of war, has it become an "imperialst" state?

I will say no. The thing is, while NK is the pushing part here (at least, thats what media says. Don't expect the reports to be neutral), they are still the underdog. Threats like this cannot be supported, but take a look on North Korea. People are dying there. An economic sanction will hurt those who have least in society more than NK's leaders.

I cannot say that I support NK very much, but I have no problem with understanding their ways. If they ATTACK South Korea (in any other form than a socialist revolution), the case will be completely different, however.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from Sirion on 5:23 pm on Jan. 10, 2003
Ok, I will say this, once, and for the whole world of leftist behind me (ok, probably just most, but still): There is a fact that all cappies here don't realise, or more likely don't WANT to know, and that is that NO so called "communist" nation today is a truly communist nation. According to www.communism.com , communism is:

Scientific definition:

A classless society with no exploitation. No state machine used by one section of the population to oppress another section. No need for professional armies or police forces. No use of production for profit or exchange. Society runs in accord with the principle: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

Bullshit definition (ie: commonly believed--but WRONG)
Rule of society by a single party which maintains a monopoly of political power and suppresses all opposition. Control of the economy via centralized bureaucratic planning.
Examples of bullshit definition: the former Soviet Union, China, Cuba, North Korea, etc.

I hope every right winger here can read this, and accept it as a fact.

North Korea, while not being a true workers state, it is an example on attacks on foreign imperialism. Therefore, it must be supported. However, when NK is beating the drums of war, has it become an "imperialst" state?

I will say no. The thing is, while NK is the pushing part here (at least, thats what media says. Don't expect the reports to be neutral), they are still the underdog. Threats like this cannot be supported, but take a look on North Korea. People are dying there. An economic sanction will hurt those who have least in society more than NK's leaders.

I cannot say that I support NK very much, but I have no problem with understanding their ways. If they ATTACK South Korea (in any other form than a socialist revolution), the case will be completely different, however.

Sirion, we've been through this before, and to the contrary, every cappie here understands that Marxism is theorhetically different than real-world communism.

Our point has always been, that when you try to establish a marxist state, what eventually evoloves in a communist dictatorship.

It has happpened over and over and over.

Case in point: North Korea

Again, its OK, let them draw their blade, as they will end up cutting their own throat.

And I can't believe, that while NK leadership has outwardly threatened the use of Nuclear Weapons, you are still focusing on their economic sanctions! Where are your priorities?

Is their no end to leftist lunacy?

[ComradeJunichi]

North Korea did not try to establish a Marxist state, but a state based on the ideas of Kim Il Sung - Juche.

If we take a few steps back to retrace the tracks that lead up to today's situation, I want to konw why this is the solution that is being led to.

One of the main factors we see is the breaking of the '94 Treaty. But is it debatable on who broke the treaty? Was it the DPRK for breaking the seals into their nuclear facilities? Was it the US for not opening up totally in diplomacy with the North? We've seen tension rise in the last few years. Why? What part of the US policy on the North has caused to the possibility of nuclear war on the tiny peninsula of Korea? Is it logical that the North threaten almost the whole world with their poor starving country behind them?

Yes, CI you're right. The DPRK has threatened war and even a nuclear war on the peninsula, which would eventually lead to World War III as they put it, but why did they say this? I worry of both a nuclear crisis and the economic sanctions that might be placed on the DPRK. The DPRK have threatened the possibility of war, or even a nuclear war, if these economic sanctions were to be dropped on them.

In conclusion, I believe that the North will win in this situation. Winning meaning, they will get what they want. This is only an opinion. The "International Community" is in fear of North Korea, but they are also in fear of a nuclear war. The North have nothing to lose, and is willing to face anything.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from ComradeJunichi on 8:22 pm on Jan. 10, 2003
North Korea did not try to establish a Marxist state, but a state based on the ideas of Kim Il Sung - Juche.

If we take a few steps back to retrace the tracks that lead up to today's situation, I want to konw why this is the solution that is being led to.

One of the main factors we see is the breaking of the '94 Treaty. But is it debatable on who broke the treaty? Was it the DPRK for breaking the seals into their nuclear facilities? Was it the US for not opening up totally in diplomacy with the North? We've seen tension rise in the last few years. Why? What part of the US policy on the North has caused to the possibility of nuclear war on the tiny peninsula of Korea? Is it logical that the North threaten almost the whole world with their poor starving country behind them?

Yes, CI you're right. The DPRK has threatened war and even a nuclear war on the peninsula, which would eventually lead to World War III as they put it, but why did they say this? I worry of both a nuclear crisis and the economic sanctions that might be placed on the DPRK. The DPRK have threatened the possibility of war, or even a nuclear war, if these economic sanctions were to be dropped on them.

In conclusion, I believe that the North will win in this situation. Winning meaning, they will get what they want. This is only an opinion. The "International Community" is in fear of North Korea, but they are also in fear of a nuclear war. The North have nothing to lose, and is willing to face anything.

Heed my words, Junichi, North Korea will never, and I mean NEVER, win against the United States.

[Ghost]

I completely agree with you. Compare the power of N. Korea to the USA.

Even if it came to nukes, the US would win. And even if all the "communist" states allied, the USA has the backing of Great Britain and the UN.

[ComradeJunichi]

So in the situation and conflict on the small peninsula named Korea, do you believe that North Korea will lose? Even in military strength, the US will not win a war in a matter of days. The situation is a very complicated situation. South Korea holding a lot less than 1 million troops, and the US stationing 37 thousand troops is nothing compared to the standing army of 1.1 million in the DPRK. The DPRK holds at least 2-3 working nukes, and they are willing to use them. Like I've said, the North has nothing to lose.

[ComradeJunichi]

Quote: from Ghost on 10:14 pm on Jan. 10, 2003
I completely agree with you. Compare the power of N. Korea to the USA.

Even if it came to nukes, the US would win. And even if all the "communist" states allied, the USA has the backing of Great Britain and the UN.


It's not that simple. Yes, obviously the US military is stronger than the North Korean military. However, the DPRK has a centralized army of a standing 1.1 million troops stationed IN the Korean peninsula - 2/3's of this 1.1 million army are mobilized near the DMZ, or the 38th parallel.

Is that the way of thinking? One has 50 nukes, one has 3, hence 50 will win? Do you know how big the Korean peninsula is? Also, if a nuclear war broke out the support of the UN would not be there. It's the International Community who is against nuclear war.

There are no "communist" states allied with North Korea besides China. Russia has close ties, but that is different.



Funny how they want peace with North Korea and they want the North to 'change', however when both North and South Korea have began to break ice, the US had to pop out of nowhere and label them part of the "axis of evil". The US policy on the North was pretty much a closed curtain, and the US rejected the requests for dialogue by the DPRK.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

The USA gets nukes: No problem
Brittain gets nukes : No problem
N Korea gets nukes :...ow boy. They are suddenly the biggest threat ever and should be ... to protect "freedom and democracy" by installing a puppet dicatotor.

The American dream, nothing more than a sick nightmare.

[Sirion]

I would recommend everyone to read the Mumia Abu-Jamal article in the politics section for more enlighting on the subject CCCP brought up

[antieverything]

Strange as it may be, I agree with pretty much CI has said on this thread. I think hell just froze over!

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from ComradeJunichi on 10:15 pm on Jan. 10, 2003
So in the situation and conflict on the small peninsula named Korea, do you believe that North Korea will lose? Even in military strength, the US will not win a war in a matter of days. The situation is a very complicated situation. South Korea holding a lot less than 1 million troops, and the US stationing 37 thousand troops is nothing compared to the standing army of 1.1 million in the DPRK. The DPRK holds at least 2-3 working nukes, and they are willing to use them. Like I've said, the North has nothing to lose.


OK, Junichi, you have a point, 1.1 million "standing" troops is a lot.

But lets look at the big picture.

A "standing" army is not the same as an employed army.

1/2 of fighting a war is the economics to actually employ your forces. In a conventional standoff, NK will have a lot of trouble keeping their troops fed, their equipment running, maintained, and repaired.

On the other hand, the US has more than enough $$$ to equip/feed/supply its troops, and maintain/repair hardware.

How many ships in the NK navy? Chances are 1 US carrier battlegroup, or even a few cruisers, destroyers, and subs, could send the entire NK fleet to the bottom of the ocean within 1 week.

Air forces? You know that there is no comparison in either the aircraft or the skill of the pilots. U.S. pilots train more often than any nation's pilots in the world, and US aircraft are 2nd to none.

Now, even with 1 million troops, what are they equiped with? US land forces have multiple-launch rocket trucks, M1-abrams MBT's, and howitzers, lots of them. What will NK have, soviet T-70's? T-90's? We saw how they did against US tanks in desert storm.

Take all of this into consideration, and the NK military just does not have the weapons or economic endurance to maintain sustained combat operations against a force like the US over time.

So, while NK has a larger standing Army, the US has a larger, more sophisticated overall force, and is able to sustain a larger force over time in combat.


What about nukes?

NK has 2 or 3, with no vehice capability to get them to the US.

USA: 1000's of nukes, mounted on ICBM's w/ MRV's, from subs, bombers, and on cruise missles,all capable of delivery to NK.

Either way, it would be suicide for North Korea

(Edited by Capitalist Imperial at 11:19 pm on Jan. 10, 2003)

[IzmSchism]

Korea is a ***** country, its been pimped out for at least a thousand years, by the chinese, japanese, russian, and american...the only reason it is divided by the34th parrallel is of post war occupany, the north was in the hands of the russians and the south occupied by the US, political ideologies went with their partings, north korea is fast becoming like the russia of 1990, it is a matter of years before it falls, it is THE hermit state, they need food, they are playing their only card left, and an ace it may be, i think they aren't that stupid, they just want to keep their hermitage afloat, and they cannot do that without outside help, so they roll the dice...I live 50 clicks south of the demarcation line, and no one seems to be stressed about north korea, the only thing that pisses of koreans here, are the SOFA mandate. Rumsfield claims that the US can withstand both war efforts simultaneously, but at what cost, and what cost would it be to the North koreans to set off some nukes but the eventual overturn of what they fight to maintain, their own crippled futile idea of communism...

[Moskitto]

as repulsive as the north korean regime is, the US have withdrawn from several weapons treaties as well.

[Mazdak]

Well, i simply wish to state that i am 100% behind N Korea and i have nothing against their regime. Natural disasters should not be blamed on a government. It would be like blaming Bush for hurricanes and tornados. Ridiculous.

[Thine Stalin]

The united states is the one at fault here. During the clinton administration the treaty signed said that North Korea would recieve U.S oil as long as they did not start their nuclear facilities up again, surprise surprise, when bush was elected, he ignored the treaty entirely and decided that he didn't want North Korea getting oil. North Korea was betrayed by america first and so have started up their nuclear program again, and now bush says that the North Koreans have broken the treaty.

Hmm... I really hope alot of americans die if they go to war, I hope Bush and his fucking dishonest administration dies too. But of course we all know the koreans are the ones who are going to suffer, south korea espcially, and of course the U.S doesn't give a fuck, and will blame any large numbers of deaths on NK.

[Guest]

Quote: from Thine Stalin on 2:52 am on Jan. 12, 2003
The united states is the one at fault here. During the clinton administration the treaty signed said that North Korea would recieve U.S oil as long as they did not start their nuclear facilities up again, surprise surprise, when bush was elected, he ignored the treaty entirely and decided that he didn't want North Korea getting oil. North Korea was betrayed by america first and so have started up their nuclear program again, and now bush says that the North Koreans have broken the treaty.

Hmm... I really hope alot of americans die if they go to war, I hope Bush and his fucking dishonest administration dies too. But of course we all know the koreans are the ones who are going to suffer, south korea espcially, and of course the U.S doesn't give a fuck, and will blame any large numbers of deaths on NK.


Got any proof of this...? A link?

[Umoja]

This is crazy. North Korea has a foolish government, since they are threatening war, and in no way representing the people. Foolish.

The United States government, should try to keep this to a war of strong words though, and I am sure if the United States offers to give the N. Koreans enough Nuclear Power for their country, then the whole damn situation can be resolved without firing a shot. Needless to say, I hate all wars.