Dh brought up a good point - about N.Korea testing nuclears.
mckayleesmom wrote: Last night when I read MTA's post and told him about it..I asked why in the heck Kim Jong Il would do that again after already being warned. He said that its possible that Kim Jong Il's advisors are advising him to keep doing it because they might be hoping that another country somehow takes him out. Make him look like a threat, get another country to take action and get him killed....Makes sense to me.
C&K*s Mommie replied: Yes, I agree that it is likely provocation on his part. That possibly in his mind that we (the US) or any other powerful country will be the evil ones for taking out a leader who was doing nothing more than making threats but posing no serious danger otherwise. That is if and until he is successful with the atom bomb and destroys most of the world himself.
At this point it is not looking like Kim Jong Il will have his death wish. More sanctions, are looking to be the worst punishment he will recieve.... YET AGAIN! 
punkeemunkee'smom replied:
          I can NOT believe that all we are doing is saying 'NO,NO-Bad dictator' Are we going to wait until his missles reach Japan's shore before we seem concerned? The world at large says we would be bulying him if we take him out??? WHO CARES???? Are we going to sit here and twiddle our thumbs or worse yet PAY HIM OFF? WTH happened to WE DON"T NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS? 
MommyToAshley replied: I actually think he did the test as an advertisement... to let terrorist or anyone else that wants to hurt the US & our allies know that he now has nuclear weapons for sale. It is already well known that he sells other arms... what's to stop him from selling nuclear weapons? It looks like we aren't going to do anything about it.  Scary!
my2monkeyboys replied: I say take him out! Load, aim, fire. I just don't think anyone has the b@lls to do it, for whatever reason.
C&K*s Mommie replied: Abbie, M2A & WillsMama~ ITA!!!
Nina J replied: Is the US the only country that has used nuclear weapons against another country?? I think I might have asked this before, but I can't remember..I can't remember if there is other country's who have used nuclear weapons against another country either. There are 9 other country's that have them (I think there are nine), except they cannot confirm if Israel has them. I'm just saying my thoughts out loud 
I think it's in the best interests of alot of nations to ensure that N. Korea, particuarly Kim Jong Il, doesn't do anything stupid..
mom2my2cuties replied: Yes the US is the only one who has used used nuclear weapons on another country - with the appropriate provacation. Remember Pearl Harbor?
At that time - we used 2 atom bombs on Japan at which point they surrendered.
TANNER'S MOM replied: Well, I don't think taking him out will be near as easy as we THOUGHT taking Sadaam and the Talaban would be. I think taking him out would mine a lot great sacifrice and greater dedication to war. I am not sure our country has the heart to give to another let the man power. Half our troops our deployed right now..if we send them somewhere else, who can guard home base..which lets not forget 9/11 can get hit faster than anything!
redchief replied:
Umm... Reason #1: Global Nuclear Holocaust. *shudder*
redchief replied:
Yes.
redchief replied: Government psychologists have described Kim Jung Il II as a megalomaniac. If you take that description on it's face, the N. Korean dictator is doing what he's doing to satisfy his ego. Such persons fear no retaliation, and unfortunately everytime the world body slaps his wrist for going against security council wishes, it only builds his ego more. This, in my opinion, is the most dangerous man in the world at this time.
jcc64 replied: I saw a documentary about North Korea and Kim Jong Il. He seems completely insane, but has done an amazing job of insulating himself and protecting his power indefinitely. The people there are powerless and suffering terribly.
But I have to ask everyone who wants to, once again, bomb first, ask questions later:
At what point are we going to acknowledge that our military, and most importantly the lives of those who inhabit it, are not an infinite reservoir of resources???? We are already entrenched in war in Afghanistan and Iraq. How many fires can we put out at once? I believe none of this is lost on North Korea, or any of our other mortal enemies, including Iraq. We made our choices, now we are living with the consequences, of which there are many more to come, I'm sure.
I admit I don't know enough about politics in that region to understand what his true intentions are. But a knee jerk aggressive response on our part seems suicidal to me.
cameragirl21 replied: IMO, load, aim and fire is not that simple. This is not the days of Hiroshima and Nagasaki...these days many other nations have nukes and pointing one at NK and then firing can lead to some sort of nuclear holocaust.
we thought it would be simple in afghanistan and iraq and we are now bogged down in both and i do wonder, now that iran is such a huge threat if we did the right thing with iraq, given that iraq and iran were natural enemies and now that threat right on iran's border is gone.
we can only load, aim and fire if we're 100% sure we'll come out victorious and if iraq and afghanistan are any example, we can't be very sure at all and i'm sure the rest of the world has noticed, which is exactly why the nuclear test was carried out IMO....
redchief replied:
I think suicide is a vast understatement. I think if we get militarily involved in N. Korea it may actually touch off world war 3. Regardless of how you feel about our country's other military endeavors, I believe we need to stay hands off on North Korea right now. They are too close to Russia and China (from whom they allegedly got their nuclear technology). As Jeanne said, we don't have inexhaustable resources. World opinion also has to be acknowledged. I firmly believe that we, arguably the most powerful nation in the world, are going to have to keep up the verbal rhetoric and let one of the other world powers do the actual pushing in North Korea.
I think part of the problem IS world opinion. I believe they've (the world nations) have come to EXPECT the US to take care of it's more serious problems. I believe this is why we're so entrenched in the Middle East. See, the UN passes resolutions promising dire consequences to so-and-so if so-and-so doesn't behave. So-and-so ignores world resolution and a new resolution is passed again threatening action if so-and-so continues to misbehave. So-and-so thumbs his nose at the world again and again until the US follows through with the action once promised. At that point the UN backs away and says, "Nope, the US is on it's own. That's not what we meant when we said you have to do such-and-such or face economic and military consequences."
So-and-so could be Saddam Hussein, Ho Chi Minh (albeit this occured after the French were already getting spankied there), Kim Jueng Il (I and II) or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The script is already written and has been played out
Frankly, I'm sick of the UN yo-yo. I say we pull our money and troop commitment out of the UN and see how they manage without us. Oh, rats! The USA is the money and troop commitment in the UN for the most part. Maybe the only way out is to go isolationist. Aww, rats, again! Our economy is so tied to the global economy that if we went isolationist our economy would fail and we'd go broke. Well, maybe we could just mind our own business. You mean our business here or in every industrialized country in the world? Oh, man, now I'm talking to myself.
cameragirl21 replied: there's one thing you and i agree on, Ed--I believe the UN has become the soap box for third world nations and that we as a nation should have no part of it.
the UN does not belong in NYC or anywhere in the US, they should move their HQ to Africa or Asia where they're doing the most benefit.
Nina J replied:
The US pays the most money for the UN's budget because they are the only country that reaches the budget ceiling. They pay the full 23%, Japan is next at 19%. I just looked that up on wikipedia 
Personally, I fear the US government will look at N. Korea with the domino effect in mind.
Well, this is a lame reply..I know exactly what I want to say, but I can't think of the words
mom2my2cuties replied: Turned out - they actually DID NOT test a Nuke - morons couldn't get the dang thing to fire...Perhaps Kim Jong Il will just accidentally kill himself next time and take the majority of his administration wtih him.
|
