View Full Version : Who Is More Dangerous, Iraq or North Korea?
01-10-2003, 06:52 PM
The North Koreans have used our preoccupation with Iraq to blackmail the world. They have restarted their nuclear weapons program (weapons which they are probably not afraid to sell) in an attempt to force the United States to resume fuel and food shipments to them and also to force the US to sign a nonaggression pact. Their rationale for restarting the program is that Bush called them part of the Axis of Evil and they need to be prepared to repel US aggression. To make matters worse, South Korean people seem to want the US presence in their country reduced or ended altogether. Many romantic Koreans do not feel threatened by the North and foolishly believe that if the 2 countries were to reunify, things would be peachy.
What do you think we should do about this? I for one think NK basically has us over the table. We should negotiate a non-aggression pact to take away their axis of evil rationale (and we would never invade anyway, NK is a lot tougher than Saddam), but not send economic aid unless NK makes true reforms in its Human Rights practices. The only other option is to drop a daisy cutter on the nuke site, which would essetially cause the death of all our soldiers on the peninsula, since NK is always poised to blow them away.
Well, I think North Korea is more dangerous, for sure.
I also think we should pull out of South Korea, because they resent us as much as the North does.
01-10-2003, 07:19 PM
That's a tough one, as all international relation questions are lately.
Without all the facts (intelligence info, et al) it's hard to play backseat president on this without a huge margin for error.
Knowing what I know about it, my first instinct would be to ask the UN to declare economic sanctions on NK immediately. They desperately want to play a part in the larger world community, but caving into blackmail only sends the message that it's okay to threaten everyone to get there. Not unlike an immature child who wants his way, the only way NK can be seen as worthy of respect is to teach them a hard lesson. Blackmail, whether from terrorists, bank robbers, kidnappers, or nations can NEVER be tolerated or else the situation snowballs.
Just look at the concept of plane hijacking. Once a couple lunatics did it (Palestinians in the '60's, wasn't it?), the door swung wide open for that to become an "acceptable" method of extortion. That is until another set of Middle Eastern lunatics pretty much ended any possibility of hijacking for money or freedom in the future. Any would-be hijackers from now on are forced to either die as martyrs or get beaten to a pulp by the enraged and frightened passengers.
If NK responds to sanctions or other "disciplinary" action by us or the UN with nuclear explosions somewhere, the only logical response is to wipe them from the map. They get ONE chance to use their nuclear weapons capability. After that, we should be free and clear to open up the missile tubes on our subs and turn that government to dust. NOBODY wants it to come to that, but these ****-ant third world countries can't be allowed to think that blackmail or terrorism is an acceptable method of getting their way. Like a rabid dog, all they seem to understand is force. And if they want to play that game, we have to play it too...and fortunately for us, we have a 50 year head start.
01-11-2003, 01:40 AM
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "dangerous" and just what you think these nations are truly capable of and what you think their intentions really are with regard to this idea of war. I would have to suppose that North Korea is capable of a lot more than Iraq, but at the same time has a lot more to lose if a war breaks out. Fact is, China doesn't want a war and most of the other nations in that region would just as likely prefer that their economic relations with the US aren't disturbed. Can you imagine North Korea (as dependent as they are on China for resources) going to war with us ... and then asking China (home to factories that produce fun things like Star Wars toys) to back them. I see this situation as being a big ego game and global political diversion, one that most certainly needs to end quickly. It's not surprising that there are factions in South Korea that would perhaps like to see a unified "Korean" Korea. Let's compare it to the British wanting to finally get rid of the US military and nukes that had made themselves quite at home during the cold war.
As for Iraq ... who knows? I suppose they are a more convenient target for our loathing, what with the fact that they don't seem to rely on the US for economic support. If Nike started making running shoes in factories in Iraq or if Microsoft relied on factories in Iraq to supply them with microchips for the X-box, then it would be a different story. As it is, we only need their oil and we can get at most of that through Kuwait. So who really cares about Iraq as long as they don't try to "unleash" some of their "advanced weaponry" on our poor little country (or our buddy Israel.)
What might be seen as a danger ... and this relates to both nations and a few others ... is just how desperate they may get as times get harder and harder for their people. If they hate us and they continue to leech from the nations around them for support (who will soon hate us because we only seem to want to pick fights) then very soon it may become more and more expensive to produce our goods in overseas factories. Where would we be then? We'd have to try and remember how to MAKE things (besides hot air) here in our own country again.
01-11-2003, 02:27 AM
Originally posted by plasticfetish
So who really cares about Iraq as long as they don't try to "unleash" some of their "advanced weaponry" on our poor little country (or our buddy Israel.)
What might be seen as a danger ... and this relates to both nations and a few others ... is just how desperate they may get as times get harder and harder for their people. If they hate us and they continue to leech from the nations around them for support (who will soon hate us because we only seem to want to pick fights) ...
Another possibility to consider based on the above is that either NK or Iraq will sell a bomb or two to terrorist groups who are willing to do the dirty work.
Imagine for second that the US enters Iraq before the inspection teams actually find a smoking gun. This almost certainly forces Saddam to pull his stuff out of hiding to avoid becoming besieged in Bagdad. Then, post invasion, W can say "Aha! See, I told you that he had weapons of mass destruction!" Of course, this also means that several hundred to thousand of our soldiers will die just for the honor of "finding" those weapons. At least W can exact that revenge for his father, which is what all this is really all about anyway.
Or, Saddam sells some dangerous stuff to terrorists before the US invades. They attack us somewhere, and try to divert our attention from Iraq itself. It's not beyond reason that Muslim Extremists could obtain a bomb from either Iraq or NK and detonate it inside Israel. Whatever happens, the governments of those two countries know that they are majorly screwed if push comes to shove. There only true option if they wish to inflict damage on us is to do it through the terrorist network.
If everybody doesn't cool their jets soon, this is going to get a lot uglier in a hurry.:(
01-11-2003, 05:16 AM
Both. Both are angry with the western world right now and both are prepared for war. The North koreans have a final solution up their sleeve although they don't appear to have plans to send it to the western world just to themselves by return post. Iraq is just being bloody minded in a different way. Iraq poses a threat to the troops sent over there if a war breaks out but only to us in that the oil fields will be destroyed and our transports and ability to move freely will suffer. The largest threat is still from free radicals like Osama and his goons, the basque separatists in Spain, rogue IRA factions etc. The small terrorist cells that go largely unnoticed in this larger muscle flexing in the gulf. IMO the best war would the war on home turf with all resources pooled to keep guard of the populace agaisnst the smaller factions who slip the net.Large scale war seems ultimately fruitless.
01-11-2003, 10:34 AM
Directly I think NK is more dangerous.
Indirectly I think Iraq is more dangerous.
NK has the means to attack us and others directly.
Iraq is a threat due to their interest of harboring and funding terrorists.
It's a tough call.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2016 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.