 |
|
MRT144
|
|
Seattle Washington
Oct 2002
time: 21:27
|
|
lets start a war on liberalism!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
I dont get it, are u not capable of readin my abbreviations? or do u just not like me and need something to whine about, cuz frankly its getn kinda stupid.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
LoneWolf
|
|
Let us ignore NK. We no longer have a national interest there.
BTW, what is the position of France on NK nukes? And where is the UN? What of "multilateralism"?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
wut is not polite about it? u sed u can read it right? plz dont be inane and bring threads down to getting on ppl for how they spell when u can read it perfectly well.
thats wut is not polite.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Q Cubed
|
 |
t3h y3ll0w p3ril
Apr 1999
time: 23:27
|
|
and now to answer the one thing you've contributed to this thread:
quote:
yes and I already explained the pt. It was a sarcastic response to oerdin. he was asserting that their military buildup was due to our sanctions and threats. and that it was keeping them poor and uneducated.
so in turn I posed the question that if we stopped sanctioning and threataning them would they engage in education form..etc...neway. its pretty clear. lets not drag this out just so u can save ur ego or sumtin. |
nkorea, if statistics are to be believed, has a 100% literacy rate. believe it if you want or not, but nkoreans are, by and large, not so much uneducated as brainwashed. they are intelligent people who have had a decent education, no better and no worse than an american education, save the constant barrage of propaganda the nkoreans suffer through.
they are kept poor because they are operating with a broken system. it's as simple as that. even if the united states stopped all sanctions against nkorea and allowed trade with the country, nkorea itself is so firmly locked in the concept of self-reliance, or juche, that it would more than likely refuse to allow any foreign investment outside of the few special economic zones which it has--meaning, by and large, most of the 22million nkoreans would still remain poor.
the nkorean military buildup is largely due to a perceived threat by the nkoreans of american and skorean might. nkorea, being firmly stalinist, has an apocalyptic view of the world which boils down to a paranoia of any capitalist nation seeking to destroy its "worker's paradise". therefore, it seeks to defend itself by investing as much as it can into the military.
therefore, one can conclude that yes, nkorea's military buildup is largely due to what it sees as american threats and sanctions, even if america itself does not think that it is doing anything at all.
one must realize that in a nation as closed to the world as nkorea, any sort of outside pressure is considered a threatening act, and will only cause it to engage in further paranoiac behavior. nkorea will never scale down its spending on the military, no matter what us policy might be.
and for the record, giving skorea nukes is a bad idea.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Q Cubed
|
|
t3h y3ll0w p3ril
Apr 1999
time: 23:27
|
|
quote:
Furthermore thier are issues of weapons superiority and capability from the NKoreas viewpoint unless they make a first strike there will be no strike at all. |
not quite. you are quite correct in assuming that if the us engages in a first strike, there will probably be no retaliatory strike against american soil.
however, nkorea has enough conventional munitions and weaponry that there would most definitely be a strike on skorea.
quote:
The whole damned thing can be destroyed from space if we know where it is and they can't do a thing about it. |
how so?
the united states has no space-based weapons platforms; spy satellites, not coming equipped with weaponry, does not count.
second, even with the spy satellites in the sky, there is a lot we don't know about the nkorean military's distribution. in the end, it would be difficult to cripple the nkorean military in any sort of first strike.
quote:
I for one believe that someone in NK realizes this.I don't see what the NKorean leadership hopes to gain unless its a deterence against emerging nuclear powers nieghboring it.So what did the NKoreans teach the Bush whitehouse? |
emerging nuclear powers neighboring it? there are no emerging nuclear powers. russia and china have had the bomb. skorea, japan, and taiwan can all develop nuclear capability fairly quickly, but have not done so because all three nations are under the american nuclear umbrella.
the nkorean leadership seeks to gain another payoff. it's as simple as that. in exchange for them scaling down or perhaps not constructing as many nukes, they want us to fund their evil regime for that much longer.
that's why it's building it.
even if nkorea didn't have the nuclear deterrent, it is highly doubtful that the united states would ever attack it first; skorea, being a close ally, has far too much at risk of being destroyed that it would likely refuse to cooperate with an action.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
hehe hi q. well I have no idea about the literacy rate. but I mistyped a lil education form=education reform.
of which n. korea most certainly does not have. and would not have if we stopped threataning/sanctioning them. so if that makes it a lil clearer for u then great.
u did contradict urself, u sed militarily n.korea is directly reacting to american threats and sanctions then u instantly go back and say that n.korea's military buildup would happen regardless of US policy. so perhaps u want to look at that a lil.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
oh and on how I type. I'm not here to change neone's mind. I'm just here to read threads and give my opinion. if ppl wish t hate on my opinion cuz they dislike how its presented then its their loss. since I certainly dont need nething from them so I feel no need to conform to their shortcomings.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Q Cubed
|
|
t3h y3ll0w p3ril
Apr 1999
time: 23:27
|
|
quote:
hehe hi q. well I have no idea about the literacy rate. but I mistyped a lil education form=education reform. |
what education reform does nkorea need?
1nd33d, D1S 4bbr3v +n6 duz Nu++in b+t 0bfsc8 yu0r p+ m0.
nk0r34 duz h4v 4n 3duc8n4| SYS, s0 yu0r 4||3g4t10n d4t d g0vt k3pz d3m un3duc8d 1z f4|z.
h0w3vR, d g0v+ 4ls0 k3pz d3m br41nw4sh3d; d4t 1z n0t s0 much 4 pRt 0f d 3duc8shun SYS, h0w3vR, bt m0 d f4u|t 0f 4 p3rv4s1v3 s+4|1n1s+ m1nds3+ wch 0fn r3wr1+3s h1st n d 1984 s3ns3.
quote:
u did contradict urself, u sed militarily n.korea is directly reacting to american threats and sanctions then u instantly go back and say that n.korea's military buildup would happen regardless of US policy. so perhaps u want to look at that a lil. |
this is what i said, yavoon:
quote:
the nkorean military buildup is largely due to a perceived threat by the nkoreans of american and skorean might. nkorea, being firmly stalinist, has an apocalyptic view of the world which boils down to a paranoia of any capitalist nation seeking to destroy its "worker's paradise". therefore, it seeks to defend itself by investing as much as it can into the military.
therefore, one can conclude that yes, nkorea's military buildup is largely due to what it sees as american threats and sanctions, even if america itself does not think that it is doing anything at all.
one must realize that in a nation as closed to the world as nkorea, any sort of outside pressure is considered a threatening act, and will only cause it to engage in further paranoiac behavior. nkorea will never scale down its spending on the military, no matter what us policy might be. |
actually, no, i didn't contradict myself.
i said that the nkorean military buildup is largely due to perceived threats, not a direct reaction to american behavior.
nkorea sees virtually anything as a perceived threat, so no matter what the us does, nkorea would see it as a hostile act by an aggressor.
who's twisting words now? perhaps if you read what i said, you'd realize that i didn't pin the blame on the us's policies at all. you'd also realize that i'd be agreeing with you on the fact that nothing we do would stop nkorea's militarization.
"so perhaps u want to look at that a lil" next time.
quote:
oh and on how I type. I'm not here to change neone's mind. I'm just here to read threads and give my opinion. if ppl wish t hate on my opinion cuz they dislike how its presented then its their loss. since I certainly dont need nething from them so I feel no need to conform to their shortcomings. |
if you're not here to argue to convince other people, why do you argue?
if you wish for people to accord your opinions more weight and respect, rather than shoot your mouth off and seem like an uninformed yokel, you have to match your text to the audience. it's one of the most critical basics of effective composition.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-04-2003 23:18
mg we're being threataned quickly lets build WOMD.
Don't worry though, I have many other forms of entertainment. Posting on 'Poly is just slightly more fun than playing Counter-Strike right now. I'm just wasting time on a Friday afternoon waiting for my ride back home. 
Thanks Jaguar Warrior. I always am honored to be sig material. Although, I wonder if you are overexaggerating the significance of me disliking Clinton or saying his foreign policy is crap. I've never professed to be a Clinton fan. In fact, I continually grill him on his foreign policy. He was a good president for the economy, that's about it. It's important for people to remember there are more than two political ideologies. Just because I bash Republicans, doesn't mean I'm a Democrat 
|