So when America Attacks Northern Korea, what will you think ?

I was about to go on some long rant but it looks like you've got everything covered here gonorrhoea. Carry on.

Is this supposed to be a surprise? Because, well, it isn't. America sure is one, but not in the sense you're thinking. Do you really think that they want to annex Iraq or North Korea? No, America's set on expanding its influence- in all the corners of the world.
Indeed, it does quite a bit of good- we're assisting the Yemeni government in actually solidifying control of his land and driving out al-Qaeda, training Colombian Special Forces to go out and destroy militias, defending Mongolia from Chinese imperialism, &c.
This being said, I think the invasion of Iraq was a bad idea; Iran was the country to invade. It had WMDs and a truly shitty regime, much worse than Saddam's IMO.
HOWEVER, pulling out of Iraq now will only complicate issues and make the lives of Iraqis worse.

I completely agree....to an extent.

I think that the spread of influence could, but not necessarily, lead to the annexation of land outside the U.S.

Spreading ideas is a good thing. Influence can also be a good thing. I support both of these ideas. But taking your ideals and cramming them down someone's throat is not the way to go about influencing the world.

As for withdrawing from Iraq, I think it would be a good idea. BUT, I also think that it should be done slowly and intelligently.

Slowly start to replace our troops with Iraqi militia and begin pulling out.

I don't think that their troops would do any worse than ours.

Thanks Giglamesh
- as an aside any mistakes you see here like no punctuation or anything is due to my computer acting up so i can"t use that stuff ill edit this entry later once i fix it up -
edits:
Alerith, for the most part, we aren't cramming our ideologies down other countries' throats; exceptions being Iraq and Afghanistan. But in these countries at least we did have some concern over terrorism, WMDs, and the such even if much of this turned out to be fallacious.
Iraq is highly underdeveloped and often Iraqi militias will flee scenes of danger and they just aren't prepared to take on the responsibility.
We have to stay in these countries for many more years before we can allow them to assume full responsibility.
And I don't see the us annexing any other lands in the near future.

Also, I have a question: Is it really that bad if America or one of the more developed powers were to annex, say Haiti, and provide stability, improve the economy, work to reduce crime, and other problems?
Is it so evil?
I've been pondering this myself.

The funny thing is about all of this, is the Americans trained the Taliban there by fueling terrorisum them selves... now they are gunna simular training to other Middle Eastern groups to defend them selves, but who's to say in say 10 years these troops also hate America for leaving and learn to fly planes...

3rd world countries need support not blowing to shite... they need aid and very little else... We should let them develope on their own, not force it... I mean we have very crap pasts (Slavery of Blacks, Executions, Witch hunts etc...) But we have giot their in the end, if you don't get to make and correct the istakes your selves you don't learn...

You can't change a countries value for Human life... especially when that country still stones Women to death for having an affair and the kids even join in... Its not gunna happen by over throwing leaders and so fourth, many will see it as an attack on their way of life... They hate the way in our countries Women are treated Equal, even the Women over their think the Women here are dogs and have no self respect... You can change none of that... and thats what makes these people Dangerous... Your trying to change their way of life through force and they don't want it at the end of the day as its all they know, and they hate the Western way, so SOD em... Some times you have to be cruel to be kind... Let them learn from history as we did...

also i have a question
is it really that bad if america or one of the more developed powers were to annex say haiti and provide stability improve the economy and work to reduce crime and other peoblems?
is it so evil?
ive been pondering this myself

As LoS has just said, you won't stop peoples opinions of human life. You can take over a country, enforce laws to act a certain way and all that, but you cant force people to think differently.

Thats why, although I wouldnt call it "evil", annexation wouldnt be a good idea simply because not everyone thinks the same as we do or our government does, and the annexation will only cause more problems within the nation.

I am not Allown on this any more... Brilliant !!!

And I think if we was to invade Korea the same thing would happen... a Majority of the people there would be un-happy... And who's to say that our way is the right way... I mean back to the stoning thing, if people got stinned for breaking their marriage and family apart may be pretty much every one I know would have the Parents they had at birth rather than a whole host of different Dad's...

The funny thing is about all of this, is the Americans trained the Taliban there by fueling terrorisum them selves... now they are gunna simular training to other Middle Eastern groups to defend them selves, but who's to say in say 10 years these troops also hate America for leaving and learn to fly planes...

America armed and supported Afghani militias in order to oppose the Soviets - all through history powers have made and broken alliances to support their own interests at the time.

3rd world countries need support not blowing to shite... they need aid and very little else... We should let them develope on their own, not force it... I mean we have very crap pasts (Slavery of Blacks, Executions, Witch hunts etc...) But we have giot their in the end, if you don't get to make and correct the istakes your selves you don't learn...

See, this is where you go wrong. Giving them money, food, whatever else will NOT solve the problem if they don't know how to handle it! We've been funnelling billions upon billions into third world countries, see the effects in Africa? Getting the aid to the right people in the right way (etc.) is more pertinent than just writing checks to greedy, corrupt governments.
Oh, and almost forgot to mention - giving them everything on a silver platter also won't help much. They need hands-on assistance in nation-building, although not necessarily invasion.

You can't change a countries value for Human life... especially when that country still stones Women to death for having an affair and the kids even join in...

Ok, this is too far. Cultural tolerance is great, I endorse it. But come on, really, doesn't it go a bit too far to support cultural traditions that end with innocent people being seriously wounded or even dead?

Your trying to change their way of life through force and they don't want it at the end of the day as its all they know, and they hate the Western way, so SOD em... Some times you have to be cruel to be kind... Let them learn from history as we did...

I'm not endorsing a complete change of any nation's culture. What I am endorsing is getting rid of a cruel, self-serving dictator and bringing peace and prosperity (or at least a decent life) to millions of Koreans.
God, I want to shout when you say that North Korean people starving is part of their way of life. Seriously here! That's a corrupt government robbing its people in order to serve its own interests regardless of the effects on its people.

Thats why, although I wouldnt call it "evil", annexation wouldnt be a good idea simply because not everyone thinks the same as we do or our government does, and the annexation will only cause more problems within the nation.

Well, not always. I'm sure the Mexicans or Haitians, for instance, wouldn't mind being part of a wealthy country (for the most part). It may be different for, say, the French or the Tunisians. But again, I'm not advocating a territorial empire of the sort I mentioned.

I am not Allown on this any more...

Don't worry, you're still losing.

And I think if we was to invade Korea the same thing would happen... a Majority of the people there would be un-happy...

I highly doubt that such a miserable people would be ill-pleased to be liberated from the cruel, arrogant dictator currently presiding over their every affair. I'm sure once they get the basic necessities of life and civil rights (presumably either under a new North Korean government or as part of South Korea) they'll be plenty happy about the American-SK invasion.

I highly doubt that such a miserable people would be ill-pleased to be liberated from the cruel, arrogant dictator currently presiding over their every affair. I'm sure once they get the basic necessities of life and civil rights (presumably either under a new North Korean government or as part of South Korea) they'll be plenty happy about the American-SK invasion.

But thats what we sort of thought when we removed Saddam. All his people would be glad to be rid of him. But it turns out that some people still viewed him as a good leader, or else we wouldnt still have some of the issues we are having in the middle east.

When you take over an area, you divide the people into 3 groups:

Loyalist: People who remain loyal to the old regime
Rebels: People who are trying to work with the new power
Neutrals: People who don't care either way but end up dying anyways.

HOW MANY TIMES MUST I SAY THAT IRAQ AND NORTH KOREA ARE IN NO WAY THE SAME FUCKING SITUATION!?
God, I've told LoS that 10 times and he doesn't seem to pay attention; and now Alerith jumps in without even reading the thread just to repeat the same tired old arguments.
Unless you two have some fresh arguments for me, I'm not going to post here any longer.

No need to get testy. I personally view it as the same situation. Threat of UMDs, our need to police the world, our insecurity and fear of other nations.

Different face, same situation.

You view it as you will, and ill view it as I will.

Same here I have said time over this is kind of the same sort of situation... (Not exactly the same, but fairly)

Its your opinion, and I have my own... I have listened to yours but don't agree... But don't let that stop you from posting your views...

I read this, so I know about the hardships North Korean's are facing and I know they need help:- http://hrw.org/doc/?t=asia&c=nkorea

I agree some thing needs doing, but nothing that will grow into a mini War... Nothing that envolves soilders going in... NOt sure how that should work... May be the Aid should go from USA to China and then China takes it to them, they trust China more so than the Western world... May be their local neighbours should help them, not some country half way across the globe away... I don't see why America has to stick its nose in every darn place and police the world... different laws different countries...

That's not the point. Guys, it's not the situation - threats of weapons, the American influential desires.
Iraq and North Korea are different due to the amount of human rights abuses, we've actually seen them demonstrate the use of their weapons, and the people, cultures, internal situations, etc. are highly different.

And, do you think that sending NK aid and talking to them endlessly will help matters? You know what happens when we send food off to Third World countries? Sure, some of it goes to the people. But the vast majority ends up in government (or in some cases, warlord, but that's irrelevant to NK) caches. As soon as the UN boys and girls have left a particular area to give aid, the people go back to starving. Jesus Hitler discussed this earlier in the thread.

Lastly, North Korea and China are not on the best of terms right now.

Things I see the same:-

Iraq and Korea share the following:-

Sadam "had mass Weapons of Destruction According to USA intelligence", so Does North Korea
Sadam used Tourture and exersized executions as he saw fit so does Kim
Sadam Upressed his people, so does Kim
Iraq has large Oil resurves, and Korea does "Rumoured, and Geologists Assume, based on the ground type"
Iraq had no countries whilling to back them up, neither does Korea (Perfect targets)
Both have a split population of around 60% / 40% of the people not backing their Leader
Both are 3rd Worldy in need of Aid an help, and Invading could be passed off as such

Yeah... so I guess if you rule out all of that then there is no difference what so ever...LOL

Nobody does any thing for free... and I am sure Bush has an alternative mission in mind... No country is going to send lots of soliders to their deaths for no reason but to help a country that shows no threat to their own way of life...

But North Korea DOES. I've mentioned before that we're much more certain about NK - they motherfucking tested it for the world to see. And not even Bush would invade a country that's just rumoured to have oil.
Also, Iraq had Syria. And North Korea is protected by China, who wouldn't be pleased with the Korean immigrant flood in their own country.

As for differences, I meant cultural and various others that are important- Iraq is fuelled by Islam-related violence, it is the perfect grounds for al-Qaeda and other terrorist organisations; furthermore, it has numerous tribal and ethnic divides. Where's North Korea's equivalent to Kurdistan, or the Shi'a and Sunni Muslims?

Sadam "had mass Weapons of Destruction According to USA intelligence", so Does North Korea

The Bush administration claimed that Saddam had "weapons of mass destruction" (I hate saying that) but a good portion of the population always knew that was horseshit. The North Korean regime actually does have them, and threatens to use them all the time.

Sadam used Tourture and exersized executions as he saw fit so does Kim
Sadam Upressed his people, so does Kim

So does every other dictator. You might as well say that both nations occupy land.

Iraq has large Oil resurves, and Korea does "Rumoured, and Geologists Assume, based on the ground type"

They maybe might have oil. You've continues to make that claim with next to no proof. Anyway, even if we would invade it would take years of scouting and construction before we could get anything from there.

Iraq had no countries whilling to back them up, neither does Korea (Perfect targets)

Perfect targets? So now we're justs picking random countries? If we were choosing easy targets, why not Sierra Leone? NK has one of the largest armies in the world, it is not an easy target by any stretch of the imagination.

Both have a split population of around 60% / 40% of the people not backing their Leader

North Korea does not have a split population.

Both are 3rd Worldy in need of Aid an help, and Invading could be passed off as such

Invading North Korea is aid.

---

I'll let you guess who wrote that.

You dop know that Bush is developing weapons Far Worst than Korea, and he has intent to use them... See the below link, or type in on google, you will find LOADS on this little Gem...

http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/869

And should Korea be attacked, I am sure most imigrants will be placed in England... We love having them, they are great... 

Ok, I don't support bioterror weapons. Bush isn't the greatest President ever (what an understatement!), yeah. But that doesn't exactly placate Kim Jong-il's actions, either. Just because the US or an American of authority is doing something, doesn't mean it excuses other people doing similar things, y'know? (and I do hope that these biowarfare programmes are shut down by domestic/international pressures)

People have a tendency of running from a wartorn shithole to the nearest convenient locale. Hence, immigrant flood to China.

Bush is not THE worst president ever. (*ccough* Hoover)

I thought Colonel Klink was the worst president ever.......

I say When cuz its so gunna happen...

Korea has one of the largest untapped Oil resurves in the world... so obviously Bush is guuna want to make all his American citerzens fear Korea and see them as holders of Armourgeden... All the people in the USA are gunna be like "Oh God... Oh No please disarm this Dictator of Evil and remove the weapons of mass destruction"

COME ON !!!!... He set off a Nuke in a mine shaft.... America sets off Nukes in the Desert every so often... France set one off out at sea if I remember correctly... so whats the difference... Nothing...

The only reason people think the head of North Korea is nuts is he keeps him self to him self and wonty let America see if he has weapons of mass destruction...

But then again... I don't blame him...

I mean we sent UN officails into Iraq and they all said "There are no signs of any weapons" what happened next... SHOCK AND ORR... Nice... lets kill 2% of the whole population of people to rid the world of a massive threat to NOTHING !!!....

What the leader of Northern Korea needs do is make out he is ready for war... line up all the Nukes shells in a row... (don't arm them) get all the ships in port... and then Evacuate Korea and hid in the mountains with Bin Larden...

God I hate OIL and I hate greed masked in fear....

Any ways What I am gunna think is how will this all be looked at in say 50 years... and should I be called up to fight... it aint gunna happen... I will stay here in England and if the war hits our soil then I will go out fighting... But I wont envade a country for No Real Reason.... The leader of Korea doesn't want a war... he is just scared of looking weak in front of a monster... THINK ABOUT IT !!!

It sounds like, to me, that you want war or something. You want Korea to get armed for war and scare off America. Sorry, but that'd only make things worse.

Yep... I do want a War of some kind... Remove the a large percentage of the population and house prices will come down... The world is getting over crowded, I think there should be a War against people with an IQ less then 100... Cuz is my taxes that pay for them... But thats another debate... LOL

Nah... I don't want a War... (seriously)...

All I am saying is why are we so scared of Korea when the USA is as bad... I know Bush is not killing off his own people by Starvation, But Kim has no other choice, other countries wont trade with him... he has very little import and export... Killing an OAP of a leader may seem a great idea to you guys, but to me it seems Dumb... wasting millions of tax payers dollers to help a nation that doesn't really want to be helped (your only seeing life on the boarder area's, its like them showing images of tiny trailor area's in America and saying thats how they live, forced into caravans)... Think about it... Korea men (all of them) at the age of 15 get militry training and a wage packet... Its only small pockets of people that don't work that die... I know there should always be help for say single Mum's, Disabled people etc... those with reason, but not abled bodied people...

Any ways... I think time is our best weapon on North Korea... Let him die, let him get relaced and see what happens from then on... No channge then we start to act...

Believe it or not, the United States isn't a third world dictatorship. Comparing what happens in America to what happens to North Korea is insane and it shows that you have no fucking idea what you are talking about. We aren't seeing what goes on in the border areas because this isn't fucking Berlin and the divider between North and South Korea isn't a single wall but a two mile barrier that's heavily patrolled by both sides. What information we get comes from people like Red Cross workers and representative from other governments who visit the nation, and that information is almost all negative. There is no way out of that life, and joining the army only means that you'll probably get fed.

Also, why should we wait for one of Kim Jong-Il's sons to take his place? NK turned worse when KJL took power, and I don't see why we hould wait for it to happen again in 30 years.

im just gonna say i dont think it will happen

Interesting argument, Christina. I love how well-worded and eloquent it was!

I think the war will happen in around about 2.5 years when the Oil runs low in America and England:- http://dieoff.org/page140.htm
The decline will happen before 2010, but its already getting thin now...

And for those of you that think the War is not about Oil:- http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/warforoil.html

Now Korea is said to have LOADS of Resurves:- http://www.kimsoft.com/1997/nk-oil3.htm


Ultra Santa - I was not comparing the American way of life, more so Bush to Kim... They are nearly as bad as each other... Bush is just as much a head-case as Kim... I know Korea is by far one of the worst places in the world to be at the moment:- http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/2003/21269.htm

But I am more questioning Bush's Approach to this situation... I don't the think dropping bombs of the Public of Korea will help things much... I doubt a Ground invasion will happen, USA threatening to attack will cause Korea to respond by counter threats...