Pound North Korea into oblivion

[VigilVirus]

Before you compare me to Hitler, I'm not supporting NK, but neither do I support the US...

I agree and this is pretty much my position also. Emprworm seems to see no middleground in this conflict, but history has shown that there were neutrals in every single conflict.

There were neutrals in WWI, WWII, Cold War and any other war you can ever think of.

[ordos45]

Let's all sing, Joy to the world...North Korea has kicked out UN Inspectors! Let everything, fall apart! *stops the stupid sarcastic singing*

[emprworm]

emprworm, you take a harsh stand against enemies of the US having nukes

i really dont care about anyone supporting the US. THis has nothing to do with supporting the US. I support South korea. I take a harsh stand against a dictator having nukes. I think that is what this is all about for many of you in here. You hate the US so bad that you will actually side with a dictator before you acknowledge that the US siding with South Korea is the right thing to do. You choose an Adolph HItler over the US. That is what this is all about, isn't it?

I take a harsh stand against North Korea. Enemies of the US are irrelevant. Virtually every country in the world is an enemy of the US. Name one country that actually likes us? George Bush led the charge to liberate 25 million people in Afghanistan- something that has been needed to be done for more than a decade. With the help of the United Nations, an oppressive brutal regime was brought down. And despite the objective fact that this was a moral thing to do, everyone hates Bush because of it. They say that his motives weren't "good enough" to save 25 million people. They would rather have the Taliban back in place right now. Bush is hated by millions simply because the poor little Taliban are no longer in power. Problem with such a despicable argument is that Bush's motives are irrelevant. I don't care if Bush did it because he lost a bar bet over a football game. It was STILL the right thing to do, and to everyone that hates Bush because a country of oppressed women and children are no longer being persecuted, you are a vile worm as far as I'm concerned. Bush's motives are irrelevant. Half of you in here, if given the power, would rather take back Afghanistan and put the Taliban back in power. That would probably make many of you happy. That is why you are slimy worms.

Enemies of the US are irrelevant. Yet I really don't have any worries about most of them having nukes. If France became a dictatorship, well, then we would need to rethink our position of allowing France nukes. A democratic France that hates the US and has LIMITED nukes is no big worry to me.

[DukeLeto]

Duke Leeto backs North Korea.

ExAtreides backs North Korea.

Vigil backs North Korea

Edric O backs North Korea

emprworm backs South Korea.

Acelethal backs South Korea

I back NEUTRALITY. To say I back North Korea because I wish to remain neutral is like saying the United States backed the Nazis from 1929-1941. ::)

[VigilVirus]

Emprworm, you seem to think that the number of nukes matters. Well I got news for you, 1 is enough.

[nampigai]

George Bush led the charge to liberate 25 million people in Afghanistan- something that has been needed to be done for more than a decade. With the help of the United Nations, an oppressive brutal regime was brought down. And despite the objective fact that this was a moral thing to do, everyone hates Bush because of it. They say that his motives weren't "good enough" to save 25 million people. They would rather have the Taliban back in place right now. Bush is hated by millions simply because the poor little Taliban are no longer in power. Problem with such a despicable argument is that Bush's motives are irrelevant. I don't care if Bush did it because he lost a bar bet over a football game. It was STILL the right thing to do, and to everyone that hates Bush because a country of oppressed women and children are no longer being persecuted, you are a vile worm as far as I'm concerned. Bush's motives are irrelevant. Half of you in here, if given the power, would rather take back Afghanistan and put the Taliban back in power. That would probably make many of you happy. That is why you are slimy worms.

Please emprworm stop with the heroism, Bush did liberate them because it was the moral thing to do, he couldn't care less of the Afghan people stop making him a saint. He did it out of revenge.

I never said I wanted Taliban back, however if the Terrorist hadn't stroke against the US the Afghan people would still be under Taliban government and that's a fact.

I'm against war first of all because I have a lot of friends in the army, and I face to be re-drafted if our country will enter any major war. Second I think war is a total waste of life it shows just how far we've come since the stoneage. Therefore I prefer a diplomatic solution by all means, however if this does not succeed, and if NK really DO pose a threat to the world then yes I'll stand side by side with Americans, Chinese and Russian to remove that threat, but only after any diplomatic solution have been tried.

As I remember the whole problem started with some oil vents being shut off.

I'm not anti-American, but I get so pissed when Bush starts acting like the Emperor of the Earth, I'm amazed that the US could allow such a dumbass in the whitehouse.

[emprworm]

Please emprworm stop with the heroism,

and please stop with your barbarism. the words of half of the people in here condemn the actions of the UN bringing down the Taliban. You want the Taliban back? Are you glad or are you mad that the Taliban have been brought down? Answer that.

Bush did liberate them because it was the moral thing to do, he couldn't care less of the Afghan people stop making him a saint.

first of all, you might be right that Bush doesn't care about the Afghan people. And you might be WRONG as well. Problem is that it is IRRELEVANT. What Bush did was STILL RIGHT regardless of how bad you wish the Taliban still had power.

He did it out of revenge.

irrelevant. It needed to be done. Bush's motives are irrelevant. Again, you wish the Taliban was still in power enslaving women and children? That says a lot about you.

I never said I wanted Taliban back,

then say it here and now that you are GLAD that Taliban is gone. Tell me then. Quit beating around the bush (lol no pun intended). Answer this one simple question: ARE YOU GLAD THAT THE UN BROUGHT DOWN THE TALIBAN?

however if the Terrorist hadn't stroke against the US the Afghan people would still be under Taliban government and that's a fact.

you know why that is? Because worms like you people would be butchering the US for being "imperialists!" LOL I can see it now. 1996. United States unprovoked invades Afghanistan and topples the Taliban. What would NaMpIgAi say to that? LOL. Your double standard is as bright as the sun. Don't try to tell me that NaMpIgAi would actuaually have APPROVED of the US toppling the Taliban in 1996 unprovoked. Despite the FACT that you would be outraged at the US Imperialists, toppling the Taliban in 1996 would STILL be the right thing to do. Its just that the entire slimy worm world would have been outraged. The ONLY POSSIBLE way the US could get away with toppling the Taliban is with 9/11. We should have done it long long ago, but people like you are so hateful of the US that you would rather allow an oppressive, totalitarian regime to persecute and butcher people than have the US Imperialists go in there and stop it.

And then when the US actually IS PROVOKED there you are STILL whining about all this 'revenge' crap. Either way, you would rather have millions of oppressed people in torment simply because your hatred of the US supercedes the innocent women and children of an oppressed land. You hate the US too much to care about them. What would NaMpIgAi have said if the US invaded and kicked the Taliban's ass back in 1996 WITHOUT a 9/11? Be honest. Cuz I know full well what you would say.

[Anathema]

Bringing down the Taliban was the right thing, but no country should be allowed to casually bomb other countries, wich leads to wars like Vietnam. Any war against a dictatorial regime should be sanctioned by the UN or not be fought at all. Though sometimes I get sick of those UN pen pushers not doing anything at all.

[emprworm]

but no country should be allowed to casually bomb other countries, wich leads to wars like Vietnam. Any war against a dictatorial regime should be sanctioned by the UN or not be fought at all

that is fine, Earthnuker. I agree with that. Bush got UN support for his actions. Everything was done the right way. Anyone who was actually ANGRY at the US for toppling the Taliban has some moral problems as far as I'm concerned. If the US sees a bad regime, I agree that it should petition the UN before it brings it down. But all this was done by the US. There is no moral reason that anyone can be angry at the US for bringing down the oppressive vile Taliban. The US did everything appropriately in that case. It was not a Vietnam.

[emprworm]

i also wanted to add that UN -- not US-- lives were sacrificed in bringing down the Taliban. This I can promise you: the men and women of the world that were there fighting - MANY of them were doing it FOR THE AFGHAN PEOPLE. So regardless of Bush's personal reasons, the people that were there giving their lives and spilling their blood were doing it for the RIGHT reasons. And I get absolutely disgusted when I read crap from arm-chair warriors about how WRONG all those people were. Its like these people actually wish the Taliban were back in power. Disgusting.

[VigilVirus]

Quote:

"I never said I wanted Taliban back,

then say it here and now that you are GLAD that Taliban is gone. Tell me then. Quit beating around the bush (lol no pun intended). Answer this one simple question: ARE YOU GLAD THAT THE UN BROUGHT DOWN THE TALIBAN?"

Are you an idiot?? Look at the phrase you quoted, it answers your freaking question.

however if the Terrorist hadn't stroke against the US the Afghan people would still be under Taliban government and that's a fact.

you know why that is? Because worms like you people would be butchering the US for being "imperialists!" LOL I can see it now. 1996. United States unprovoked invades Afghanistan and topples the Taliban. What would NaMpIgAi say to that? LOL. Your double standard is as bright as the sun. Don't try to tell me that NaMpIgAi would actuaually have APPROVED of the US toppling the Taliban in 1996 unprovoked. Despite the FACT that you would be outraged at the US Imperialists, toppling the Taliban in 1996 would STILL be the right thing to do. Its just that the entire slimy worm world would have been outraged. The ONLY POSSIBLE way the US could get away with toppling the Taliban is with 9/11. We should have done it long long ago, but people like you are so hateful of the US that you would rather allow an oppressive, totalitarian regime to persecute and butcher people than have the US Imperialists go in there and stop it.

And then when the US actually IS PROVOKED there you are STILL whining about all this 'revenge' crap. Either way, you would rather have millions of oppressed people in torment simply because your hatred of the US supercedes the innocent women and children of an oppressed land. You hate the US too much to care about them. What would NaMpIgAi have said if the US invaded and kicked the Taliban's ass back in 1996 WITHOUT a 9/11? Be honest. Cuz I know full well what you would say.

US didn't give a crap about Taliban or any of those oppressed people until the problem touched them on 9/11. I'm pretty sure you didn't give a crap about them either, fact is, you probably didn't even know how badly they lived at that time, because the media didn't tell anything about it.

US would have never done anything about Taliban without 9/11. The fact is, if they did, they would be fucking oppressors, getting into other country's politics.

US should not be the worldwide fatherperson, who takes it upon himself to punish the naughty children - that is just rediculous. Each country must be on its own.

[nampigai]

ok yes I'm glad Taliban isn't governing Afghanistan.

And do you know what I would have said, had the US attackedin 1996? that's good you should start making money on it.

yes it needed to be done, but you make Bush look like a hero who did it out of mercy for the Afghan people. He couldn't care less, in my book his intentions do count.

As for the attack on Taliban the US wasn't alone in that, I sincerely hope only the best of the Afghan people.

As for the US being imperialistic, well don't tell me you aren't! Tell me that you only attack the countries out of goodness and mercy of the opressed people and not for own benefit, I would like to believe that but I have a hard time doing it.

As for double standards, well in my eyes the US of A is the Land of hypocracy. And no I do not envy you, i do not envy people living in Luxemburg, I do not envy people living in Monaco, I'm fine with where I am.

Imo the way to deal with the third worlds is education of their people and I don't mean like what we are doing now, we should make a whole hearted try to improve their living standards, instead of just using them for cheap manufacturing. But we don't want to because it's inconvenient for us. hmmmm I guess I'm going allittle off topic...

But as for you question: Yes I'm glad the Taliban was removed from power, now we need to help them get their country on the right track again.

[nampigai]

Bringing down the Taliban was the right thing, but no country should be allowed to casually bomb other countries, wich leads to wars like Vietnam. Any war against a dictatorial regime should be sanctioned by the UN or not be fought at all. Though sometimes I get sick of those UN pen pushers not doing anything at all.

I agree with you there, we need a stronger UN or maybe a new organization, with less beuracracy and more guts.

[emprworm]

Are you an idiot?? Look at the phrase you quoted, it answers your freaking question.

no it didnt. Saying "I never said I wanted the Taliban back" is far, far, from saying "I am glad the UN toppled the taliban." So, I ask again, tell me if you are glad the UN toppled the Taliban. Yes or no?

US didn't give a crap about Taliban or any of those oppressed people until the problem touched them on 9/11.

i already addressed this nonsense. You have the same double standard as Nam. What would you have said if the US toppled the Taliban in 1996 unprovoked? Oh, I'm sure you would have given hearty approval! LOL. The word for that is bigotry.

US would have never done anything about Taliban without 9/11. The fact is, if they did, they would be fucking oppressors, getting into other country's politics.

exactly. Your moral position is clear as day. You freely have no moral problem with a regime persecuting and butchering innocent women and children. This is why you are, to me, morally corrupted. Your hatred of the US is so intense that you would gladly and with great joy prounounce the Taliban to maintain butchering and slaughtering of innocent people, subversion into human slavery- and you would heartily approve of this action so long as those damned imperialist US doesn't interferre. Oh but the moment..>THE VERY INSTANT...the Imperialist US comes in and tries to stop the human subvsersion, massacre, oppression and slavery, there you are to CONDEMN THEM. You are the same person who said you dont give a rip about SK. Lets face it, humanity to you is nothing more than a pile of dog excrement. What happened to you, in your life, that you such look upon your own kind with such vile disgust? When did a human being to you become nothing more than a 90% bag of mostly water?

It is sad, Vigil, to see people speak the way you do.

[emprworm]

US would have never done anything about Taliban without 9/11. The fact is, if they did, they would be fucking oppressors, getting into other country's politics.

the more i think about it, the more repugnant your statement is. Your moral compass is twisted.

You call human lives, slavery, persecution simply Politics? Women who are brutalized and executed routinely in cold blood without a trial...you call that POLITICS? You call the UN trying to stop human brutality GETTING INTO SOMEONE ELSES POLITICS? You call me an idiot. You've called me a moron. You've called me a F$##$ing moron. Well you are warped. Here: Have some politics. Stare at it hard, maybe you can imagine the look in her eyes- imagine what she is thinking during this moment. Then tell me that trying to stop this is just interferring with someone else's politics you sick vile worm.

[Edric O]

This thread is nothing more than a flame war now... it should be locked.

[emprworm]

into the dungeon I'm sure. but I want to urge everyone here who considered toppling that Taliban as "interferring with someone else's politics" to stare long and hard at that picture. Take a good look at yourself, and reflect on your own morality. Imagine what that woman is thinking the moment that picture was taken. Try to see what her dreams in life may have been. Its so easy to "politicize" a human life isn't it?

Thank GOD the UN brought down this regime. I am so grateful.

I hope the world brings down every single one like it from this point on.

[VigilVirus]

I understand everything about how bad those people's lives are.

But tell me, how is any of that US business? Are they the Protectors of the World or something? I think not!

Many countries have regimes which are very sick and disgust me with their perverseness and vileness, yet in the end who is the One who can tell us right from wrong?? You? Me? No. It is God. And since US government is not God, how can they decide that what anyone does is immoral? They are not the supreme omniscient beings, and they are faulty like all humans. So how can they really do anything about other countries?? What reasons do they have? Wouldn't it be invasion without just cause?

People of the countries oppressed by corrupt governments alone have the power and the right to change their fate. They must learn not to tolerate their regimes, but to stand up against them. No one should do that for them, because that would be interference with the sovereignity of a country.

I want to add that bringing down Taliban was an excellent thing in my opinion. And it was because of 9/11 that the US was brought into this conflict and was able to do it, without being an agressor.

[emprworm]

But tell me, how is any of that US business? Are they the Protectors of the World or something? I think not!

who will defend the helpless? How DARE you sit around eating pizzas, watching movies, fine dining,

playing sports, going on vacations, dating pretty ladies, etc. while women are put on their knees and shot in the back of the head. And you want to ALLOW THAT on grounds of "soveriengty?" Screw that bull#$#t. I'll gladly take your criticism ANY DAY if it means obliterating governments that practice that kind of barbarism. I'm sure your opinion would be a bit more "moral" if you were the one living in oppression. If you were oppressed and you knew the big mighty US and UN were out there, and you knew they could save you, and they instead just went about their business, turned a blind eye while eating their fruit pies, chips, and cheeseburgers, allowing you to suffer, ignoring your pleas because it would be "interferring with someone else's politics", that makes YOU WORSE than the scum pulling the trigger. God forbid the world becomes as apathetic as you have shown yourself to be.

[Edric O]

Emprworm, you basically want a One World Government. Run by the United States, who get to decide which regimes are acceptable and which ones need to be removed.

[ordos45]

Actually I believe it is the Roosevelet Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine that states if there is a United States citizen in danger in any region of the world we will intervene with full military force and act as the protectors of the world. *rolls eyes* As if.

But that image was uncalled for. Yes I suspect this will be locked as soon as someone with the authority to do so sees it.

[VigilVirus]

Lol, very true, Edric.

How do you figure that it is US that can decide whether or not to destroy a certain country's government or not?

You see - any militaristic interference with another country without an action of war from that country before, is an act of aggression, pure and simple.

[emprworm]

Emprworm, you basically want a One World Government. Run by the United States, who get to decide which regimes are acceptable and which ones need to be removed

then you are misled, Edric. Surely I do not need to post more pictures do I? I want a world of multiple governments that all employ basic human rights. Whether those governments are communist or not, I really dont care, so long as all people have basic rights. There is no excuse...NONE...that the United Nations should allow any country on this earth to publicly execute someone without a trial or to enslave people. If you have the power to stop a man from raping and killing children and instead just sit there and watch, you are as guilty as the man committing the crime. Those who have the power to stop thtat kind of barbarism (called Crimes Against Humanity) MUST stop it. Who has the power to stop it? Those with Armies who uphold human rights: US, Germany, UK, France, Australia, and others. The United Nations SHOULD take on the role of policing the world. Many of you in here are content to allow barbarism to flourish, and it DOES INDEED FLOURISH. you condemn "policing" yet that is EXACTLY what this world needs more of. You are not allowed to walk down to a store, shoot the cashier and rob are you? Neither should a "regime" be able to do the same thing. The most moral function of the UN is this:

1. Identify basic human rights violations (crimes against humanity). The UN will be in agreement with a country that is in violation.

2. Demand the violations cease.

3. Use force, if necessary.

This is not a 1 world government, Edric. This is a moral function of the UN, and this is its most noble role. A role that it must take.

[nemafakei]

Another thread seems to have got to the point that no-one's reslly listening to what people mean, and just bickering about each sentence in isolation and so on... it isn't going anywhere.