North Korea

Discussion in 'Politics' started by KenH, Feb 3, 2006.

  1. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    I find it interesting that the warmongers among us on this board that are so eager to bomb Iran are not showing the same eagerness to bomb North Korea. By all accounts North Korea already has several nuclear weapons and could pretty much wipe out the tens of thousands of U.S. military personnel and the city of Seoul at any point. And the North Korean leader is even worse than the blusterous Iranian leader.

    Interesting. Very interesting.
     
  2. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    I concur, Ken. I guess because they're communists instead of Muslims, it's okay.
     
  3. Enoch

    Enoch
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,267
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ken I find your entire behavior interesting…

    What is your definition of a warmonger and who on this board are you referring to as a warmonger?

    North Korea has been discussed. I think it would be beneficial if people such as yourself could actually discuss the topic of a thread instead of sidetracking it to divert attention. So I applaud you in your attempt with this thread. If your true intent is to discuss North Korea perhaps you should start a thread that focuses on North Korea, instead of starting a thread about warmongers on the Baptist Board and how they post more about Iran than North Korea. It seems a bit juvenile.

    JohnV you would concur with just about anything‚Ķ [​IMG]
     
  4. elijah_lives

    elijah_lives
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    472
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not worried about NK using nuclear weapons, unless their leaders come to believe that the very survival of their nation is at stake. I am concerned about their use of that technology to earn hard currency, through sales to rogue states or terrorist groups.

    I am concerned, however, about Iran using them, because the leaders of that nation have apocalyptic beliefs that would be advanced by attacking Israel. MAD doctrine doesn't deter madmen, it only deters sane men. They will also spread that technology (as they promised recently), and that aspect is harder to contain than NK is. NK has a land border with China and SK only; Iran has porous borders on all sides. I think that we can more easily contain the spread of this tech from NK than we can that of Iran.

    I'm not happy about NK have nuclear weapons, but Iran is the more serious threat.

    I am probably one of the "warmongers" referred to, but I dispute that. I personally hate war, have lost family members to war, and suffer great pain daily because of war. It's just that we have been under attack since 1993, and I am a proponent of "aggressive defense". Most, if not all, military members I know hate warefare, but are prepared to fight to preserve western civilization. It really isn't warmongering.

    Labels don't bother me.
     
  5. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,255
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ken. Nice. You are reduced to name-calling. Very mature.

    Right now, I don't see N. Korea vowing to wipe another country off the map. I don't see Koreans with signs saying "death to America".

    If you have any, perhaps you could put your disdain for the folks who you used to agree with, and put some up.
     
  6. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,255
    Likes Received:
    4
    Absolutely ridiculous.
     
  7. fromtheright

    fromtheright
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/2844.JPG>

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ken,

    I find it interesting that the warmongers among us on this board that are so eager to bomb Iran

    Care to name names? A "if the shoe fits" dodges the question as to whether there are any at all and whether, instead, your post simply is irresponsible name-calling to label as "war-monger" people who are not in fact so.
     
  8. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    I consider anyone who advocates bombing Iran at this point - without proof that it is trying to develop a nuclear weapon and intends to use such a weapon in a first strike - to be a warmonger.

    That is my definition for use in this thread.
     
  9. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,915
    Likes Received:
    295
    Who are the "warmongers" of whom you speak? I don't remember anyone eargerly advocating that we bomb Iran.

    Maybe my memory is just faulty.

    Names?
     
  10. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
  11. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,915
    Likes Received:
    295
    elijah_lives has answered. We have yet to hear from Bunyon.

    Other than calling your fellow board members childish names, what is the purpose of this thread?

    What is the answer you are really looking for in respect to N. Korea? The whole thread looks like some kind of setup to make your point. I'll bet you can make it without applying your 'warmonger" label to others.

    So, why don't you lay it on the line. Don't keep us in suspense any longer. Maybe we can have some debate without the derogatory labels. :cool:
     
  12. SeekingTruth

    SeekingTruth
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2005
    Messages:
    514
    Likes Received:
    1
    Posting Rules:

    4. Personal attacks will not be tolerated . The board has an edit button enabled. We encourage you to use it and edit your own words. ...

    Could it be that KenH has forgotten the rules? Why personally attack a BB member with the use of such a pejorative term?
     
  13. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Simple point. Those that are eager to bomb Iran NOW(which doesn't have nuclear weapons) are inconsistent since they are not equally advocating bombing North Korea NOW(which does have nuclear weapons and is widely regarded as a rogue state).
     
  14. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    I apologize to anyone who is offended by my characterizing those who advocate bombing Iran NOW as warmongers.

    I don't see that as being a personal attack but some people apparently see things differently.

    Regardless, I apologize to anyone who is offended by my choice of term.
     
  15. elijah_lives

    elijah_lives
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    472
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not offended, Kenh, just puzzled. You can't see a difference between Iran and NK? One has threatened to wipe another nation off the face off the earth, the other is more than likely simply interested in surviving as a nation. What is intent to you? What is proof? By your stated standards, Israel would be destroyed before you'd accept Iran as a threat. That's too late. To show intent, Iran would have to use it.

    If Iran was genuinely interested in developing nuclear energy, and not nuclear weapons, than it would not have gone to the length that it has to harden and conceal the "research" sites there; instead, it is doing everything possible to raise the alarm bells not just here in the USA, but in the moderate states of the Middle East, Russia, and China, as well as the EU.

    Do you remember Beruit? And the fingerprints of Iran all over it? We are already in a state of war with them, based on an act of war promulgated by Iran.

    Iran could diffuse this crisis in a minute, if it wanted to.
     
  16. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,915
    Likes Received:
    295
    Simple point. Those that are eager to bomb Iran NOW(which doesn't have nuclear weapons) are inconsistent since they are not equally advocating bombing North Korea NOW(which does have nuclear weapons and is widely regarded as a rogue state). </font>[/QUOTE]Is it your contention that nuclear capability is the only reason?
     
  17. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Carpro, I am just really surprised that after the failure of our intelligence agencies about Iraq that the same group of people who supported the invasion of Iraq are risking getting burned again on the Iran issue. Is there any military action against a foreign country that the Bush administration's supporters would have any question about at all?
     
  18. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,915
    Likes Received:
    295
    Questions?

    Sure, lots of them.

    Take military action off the table as an option?

    Not a chance.
     
  19. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, the military option should not be taken off the table toward any nation since alliances change over time.
     
  20. fromtheright

    fromtheright
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/2844.JPG>

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ken,

    I find it interesting that the warmongers among us on this board that are so eager to bomb Iran are not showing the same eagerness to bomb North Korea. By all accounts North Korea already has several nuclear weapons and could pretty much wipe out the tens of thousands of U.S. military personnel and the city of Seoul at any point. And the North Korean leader is even worse than the blusterous Iranian leader.

    Ken, are you saying that we should attack North Korea instead or are you saying that neither should be attacked?

    If NK is attacked instead, surely you are aware of the military danger that they pose. If any of their nukes survive, they still represent a clear threat to South Korea. If not, they still represent a threat to South Korea with the conventional weapons they possess. An attack on North Korea will have to involve far more than taking out their reactors or nuclear program.

    If neither should be attacked, my question to you is when? Do we wait until they get to such a position as North Korea? Ken, it is simply a matter of measuring our capability vs. theirs, as well as the level of threat. It is an extremely simplistic comparison to imply that we should instead go after the greater threat. Let us also keep in mind that this has in fact been considered and obviously ruled out. We may very well rue that decision. At what point do you think we should have done so against North Korea?

    I apologize to anyone who is offended by my choice of term.

    Thank you. It has become a pattern, however, like "Bush bootlickers".
     

Share This Page

Loading...