If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   Best Korea is restarting its nuclear reactor to obtain more fuel for nuclear weapons. The way things are going, they may wind up getting some of those materials sooner than they're planning on   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 251
    More: News, Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center, chinese foreign ministry, nuclear reactors, graphite, North Koreans, nuclear powers, Yongbyon, electricity generation  
•       •       •

7637 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Apr 2013 at 8:07 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



251 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-04-02 05:53:34 AM  
Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.
 
2013-04-02 08:09:08 AM  
Lol R.I.P. the use of nuclear weapons. it was good while it lasted.
 
2013-04-02 08:09:54 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-04-02 08:10:05 AM  
Iraq didnt have an ally like China watching their back.

That said, China seems to be getting sick of Best Korea's shiat, so we may see an invasion soon.
 
2013-04-02 08:10:18 AM  
So where are these missile strikes they promised?  Still not seeing anything.
 
2013-04-02 08:10:55 AM  
$$Trillions of dollars in rare metals in BK. Good way to pay back China.
 
2013-04-02 08:11:01 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


8/10.
 
2013-04-02 08:12:02 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


it's amazing how such different countries have so few dissimilarities
 
2013-04-02 08:13:27 AM  

Deep Contact: $$Trillions of dollars in rare metals in BK. Good way to pay back China.


Yeah, China would be thrilled if we robbed their little brother to pay them.
 
2013-04-02 08:13:56 AM  
The Norks are collapsing.  They are probably no more than weeks/a couple of months from total economic meltdown.  Whenever they got in this situation in the past, Madeline Albright showed up with food.  Now no one is showing up with food, and the Norks can't figure it out.
 
2013-04-02 08:14:55 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


Iraq: hated by most countries in region, stern opponent to our ally Israel. But not WMDs

Best Korea: WMDs and backing of China. China tells them to STFU, they don't then *BOOM* we get to replay the video game Mercenaries
 
2013-04-02 08:15:16 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


This.

I'm just glad I'm not in Korea. I was stationed at Camp Red Cloud (I was in the Air Force, but stationed on the Army camp as a geographically separated unit). I was there in the late 90's when things were stable, for the most part. The only incident when I was there was some NK spies/special forces were captured in the sea off the SK coast. We had to lock the base down and upper brass was getting serious for about two weeks. So for pretty much the whole time I was there, it was a party all the time with a few deployments to the Korean countryside (I was in a mobile Comm unit). I guessing nobody is having a good time there at the moment.

/CSB
 
2013-04-02 08:15:21 AM  

Dick Gozinya: Iraq didnt have an ally like China watching their back.

That said, China seems to be getting sick of Best Korea's shiat, so we may see an invasion soon.


Is China gonna have to choke a biatch?

Seriously, but doesn't China have treaties to protect NK? I saw that yesterday China was reportedly amassing their forces on the NK border, figured it was their version of 'strategery'.

So, China is obligated to protect NK in the event they are attacked -OR- they launch an attack to punch wee baby farkface out in one?
 
2013-04-02 08:15:28 AM  
It's all a show, and China will demand they start to unwind this soon.
 
2013-04-02 08:16:04 AM  
We can deliver plutonium in under a half hour, or you get 3 bucks off.
 
2013-04-02 08:16:24 AM  
I've been watching loads of West Wing lately. Into the 6th season now and I find it amazing how much stuff they got right. Pres. Bartlet comments that unless China steps in and smacks NK around, they're going to be the biggest threat to global stability since the Cuban Missile Crisis, and he just might be right.
 
2013-04-02 08:16:40 AM  

Zeno-25: [i.imgur.com image 645x835]


Would have been funnier if the feet were made of clay.
 
2013-04-02 08:17:10 AM  
If you think this story is the bomb, check out the links from our Featured Partners!
 
2013-04-02 08:17:32 AM  

awalkingecho: Deep Contact: $$Trillions of dollars in rare metals in BK. Good way to pay back China.

Yeah, China would be thrilled if we robbed their little brother to pay them.


Of course they would...they get their cash and keep their hands clean.

I'm not so thrilled about giving China trillions of dollars, though....with that kind of money they don't need to sell general tso's chicken anymore.

I needs me some general tso's chicken.
 
2013-04-02 08:17:58 AM  

Zeno-25: [i.imgur.com image 645x835]


And by "Food Aid" Lil' Kim means "Dinner".
 
2013-04-02 08:18:39 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


Diffence?

China
 
2013-04-02 08:20:46 AM  

trickymoo: I saw that yesterday China was reportedly amassing their forces on the NK border,


link?

I'd say that it's probably a show of force to tell Lil' Kim to knock it off or this is what he'll have to face
 
2013-04-02 08:20:57 AM  

somedude210: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

Iraq: hated by most countries in region, stern opponent to our ally Israel. But not WMDs

Best Korea: WMDs and backing of China. China tells them to STFU, they don't then *BOOM* we get to replay the video game Mercenaries


Mercenaries?

What is this? 2001? My XBox 360 frowns at your shenanigans.
 
2013-04-02 08:21:08 AM  
Enough with The Mouse that Roared schtick already, Best Korea. This is not going to end for you like it did in the book.
 
2013-04-02 08:22:51 AM  
I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens.

But, hey!  You guys go ahead with your nuclear holocaust fetish.
 
2013-04-02 08:23:56 AM  
schoenhaesslich.de

Team America.  Fark Yeah.™
 
2013-04-02 08:24:25 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


Yes because gas is so much cheaper since we invaded Iraq.
 
2013-04-02 08:25:01 AM  

Dick Gozinya: Iraq didnt have an ally like China watching their back.

That said, China seems to be getting sick of Best Korea's shiat, so we may see an invasion soon.


China was sick of Best Korea's shiat in 2002. South Korea would happily let the whole nation starve to death then wander into the empty space to build condos. North Korea's saber rattling is like a starving dog barking at everyone who comes near the fence.
 
2013-04-02 08:25:17 AM  
I don't know why everyone's so worried about China. Their official statements have basically been "We think America is showing proper restraint and North Korea is off the chain and needs to reign it back in" and their media as a whole is very critical of Un, even calling him 'Fatty Kim' and such.
Hell, if North Korea touches anyone in the region China will probably flatten them, and I would very much like to see that. I'm tired of America playing the lone sheriff in town. There are other strong countries, let them take care of their local problems.
 
2013-04-02 08:25:22 AM  

Vodka Zombie: I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens.

But, hey!  You guys go ahead with your nuclear holocaust fetish.


And, as I recall, kittens in a box hate America.  Stinkin' kittens....Caturday's for America-hatin' COMMIES.
 
2013-04-02 08:25:53 AM  
This is the most subtle viral marketing plan ever for the May launch of "M*A*S*H*: The Next Generation" on Hallmark.
 
2013-04-02 08:26:14 AM  

Vodka Zombie: I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens.

But, hey!  You guys go ahead with your nuclear holocaust fetish.


No one is going to nuke them. EVEN if they used a nuke, I seriously doubt anyone would respond with nuclear weapons. A few precision strikes could eliminate their ability to make war with hopefully a minimum of casualties. What happens after the dust settles though, well that's the big mystery.
 
2013-04-02 08:26:24 AM  

Vodka Zombie: I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens.

But, hey!  You guys go ahead with your nuclear holocaust fetish.


We are never going to nuke NK. The consequences for doing that in a region so unstable are mind-boggling, never mind that we're supposed to be the 'lead-by-example' country in terms of not using them and, eventually, reducing stockpiles. Even if NK led with a nuke, the response would be conventional, and it would not be forgiving. 

But it would be efficient.
 
2013-04-02 08:27:13 AM  

somedude210: trickymoo: I saw that yesterday China was reportedly amassing their forces on the NK border,

link?

I'd say that it's probably a show of force to tell Lil' Kim to knock it off or this is what he'll have to face


link
and another
 
2013-04-02 08:27:23 AM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

Diffence?

China


TO be fair even China is starting to make moves to distance themselves from their crazy cousin

trickymoo: So, China is obligated to protect NK in the event they are attacked -OR- they launch an attack to punch wee baby farkface out in one?


China is positioning themselves to 'take care' of their ally in the impending collapse. Normally the Norks would saber rattle, get some food aid to quell the masses and the world would keep on spinning. The west has taken a 'fark it, whatevs' strat which has the Norks confused. So they keep ratcheting up the crazy dial hoping for aid to come.

China realizes that they may have to choke a biatch and are prepping for that moment.

This is going to be one of those rare moments where the US leans back and lets regional powers handle their regional conflict.
 
2013-04-02 08:27:24 AM  
Listen, if you need food, just ask for food.  If you need technology, just ask for it.  We'll give it to you.  In our country we give our children iPads and mini electric cars.   These things are toys to us.   The only cost will be you gotta lighten up a bit, and open up more.  Tell us things.  Tell us what you need.

You want to stay a farm country?  Fine.  But use modern methods so you can actually feed your people.
 
2013-04-02 08:27:29 AM  
Forgot to mention, but if the media in China is critical of North Korea, then it's safe to say that the government also does not like them. They keep a pretty good focus on their messaging and generally the media is in line with the state's positions.
 
2013-04-02 08:27:37 AM  

nekom: Vodka Zombie: I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens.

But, hey!  You guys go ahead with your nuclear holocaust fetish.

No one is going to nuke them. EVEN if they used a nuke, I seriously doubt anyone would respond with nuclear weapons. A few precision strikes could eliminate their ability to make war with hopefully a minimum of casualties. What happens after the dust settles though, well that's the big mystery.


Who copied off who's paper? Hah
 
2013-04-02 08:27:44 AM  

Sensual Tyrannosaurus: I don't know why everyone's so worried about China. Their official statements have basically been "We think America is showing proper restraint and North Korea is off the chain and needs to reign it back in" and their media as a whole is very critical of Un, even calling him 'Fatty Kim' and such.
Hell, if North Korea touches anyone in the region China will probably flatten them, and I would very much like to see that. I'm tired of America playing the lone sheriff in town. There are other strong countries, let them take care of their local problems.


With all the talk of debt payoff, perhaps the US and China struck a deal to give China BK's mineral reserves.

On the other hand, the aftermath of the Great 2 Hour War with BK would make an awesome Fallout 5.
 
2013-04-02 08:28:20 AM  

PanicMan: Listen, if you need food, just ask for food.  If you need technology, just ask for it.  We'll give it to you.  In our country we give our children iPads and mini electric cars.   These things are toys to us.   The only cost will be you gotta lighten up a bit, and open up more.  Tell us things.  Tell us what you need.

You want to stay a farm country?  Fine.  But use modern methods so you can actually feed your people.


What, GMOs and processed crap? They're better off starving.
 
2013-04-02 08:29:28 AM  

Macinfarker: [schoenhaesslich.de image 480x320]

Team America.  Fark Yeah.™


That was a horrible movie and you should feel bad for even mentioning it
 
2013-04-02 08:29:34 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


Not only that but most of the redevelopment contracts would end up being awarded to south Korean conglomerates and not Halliburton. No windfall for our ruling elite.
 
2013-04-02 08:29:59 AM  

Vodka Zombie: I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens.

But, hey!  You guys go ahead with your nuclear holocaust fetish.


I highly doubt we would nuke them.  If they managed to get a warhead to an American city (which is near impossible) I would say the chances of us retaliating with nuclear weapons of our own are barely above zero.  There's no point nuking a place that's that backward---some serious bombing of Pyongyang and conventional infantry/tanks cutting through the border would probably be enough to totally destabilize the regime.

Bottom line---NK is a house of cards---and none to sturdy by those standards.  We don't need to use excessive force if we want to rid the world of the Kims once and for all, and I doubt that Obama is the kind of man who would use such excessive force.  If Bush/Cheney were still in power, it might be a different story.
 
2013-04-02 08:31:24 AM  

Macinfarker: With all the talk of debt payoff, perhaps the US and China struck a deal to give China BK's mineral reserves.


Its funny, everyone talks of the norks like they have no resources when the reality is they have a metric fark ton of mineral and metal reserves. Lot of stuff that goes into modern electronics too.

Like I said, China is going to take care of this pimple if it keeps up the pressure.
 
2013-04-02 08:33:43 AM  

MyKingdomForYourHorse: Macinfarker: With all the talk of debt payoff, perhaps the US and China struck a deal to give China BK's mineral reserves.

Its funny, everyone talks of the norks like they have no resources when the reality is they have a metric fark ton of mineral and metal reserves. Lot of stuff that goes into modern electronics too.

Like I said, China is going to take care of this pimple if it keeps up the pressure.


Yeah they do. They don't, however, really have the capability to do much with it. Unless they're going to ride up to the DMZ and ask if they can drop some off at Samsung pretty please...
 
2013-04-02 08:34:11 AM  
If we sit back and wait for North Korea to attack there are going to be a lot of deaths and a lot of expensive damage on the South Korean side. On the other hand if we have the South secure the border against a brief attack from the North we could go in and destroy their nuclear capability and their command and control structure in probably a day. I think the biggest thing though is being prepared to prevent a mass exodus from North to South.
 
2013-04-02 08:34:12 AM  

awalkingecho: What, GMOs and processed crap? They're better off starving.


Please tell me you are trolling here. Please.
 
2013-04-02 08:35:46 AM  

Jim from Saint Paul: somedude210: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

Iraq: hated by most countries in region, stern opponent to our ally Israel. But not WMDs

Best Korea: WMDs and backing of China. China tells them to STFU, they don't then *BOOM* we get to replay the video game Mercenaries

Mercenaries?

What is this? 2001? My XBox 360 frowns at your shenanigans.


Mercenaries 2 then, if you wish.

But how many games do you know that are set in N/S Korea?

Mercs was an awesome game. I remember the first time I called in a bunker buster. It hits the building with a little 'poof' and I was like "That's it?" and then about a second later "KA-FARKING-BOOM!". Even my character ducked, shielded her eyes (Jennifer Mui FTW!) and went "Holy fark!"
 
2013-04-02 08:36:22 AM  

awalkingecho: PanicMan: Listen, if you need food, just ask for food.  If you need technology, just ask for it.  We'll give it to you.  In our country we give our children iPads and mini electric cars.   These things are toys to us.   The only cost will be you gotta lighten up a bit, and open up more.  Tell us things.  Tell us what you need.

You want to stay a farm country?  Fine.  But use modern methods so you can actually feed your people.

What, GMOs and processed crap? They're better off starving.


Let's ask the starving how they feel about it.
 
2013-04-02 08:36:56 AM  
 If they restarted it today, they'd have enough material for a nuclear device in about 16 months. Course there's actually processing the material etc. I'd say there's no real need to worry.
 
2013-04-02 08:37:51 AM  

Featured Farker: If you think this story is the bomb, check out the links from our Featured Partners!


Give "NoScript" a shot....I wasn't aware of that "Featured Partners" nonsense until I looked at Fark from a non-mine computer...
 
2013-04-02 08:38:30 AM  
But first they will require more minerals.
 
2013-04-02 08:38:35 AM  

MyKingdomForYourHorse: Macinfarker: [schoenhaesslich.de image 480x320]

Team America.  Fark Yeah.™

That was a horrible movie and you should feel bad for even mentioning it


It's about Amuhrica. Therefore it is the greatest movie of all time. I don't negotiate with critics.
 
2013-04-02 08:39:06 AM  

MythDragon: Mercs was an awesome game. I remember the first time I called in a bunker buster. It hits the building with a little 'poof' and I was like "That's it?" and then about a second later "KA-FARKING-BOOM!". Even my character ducked, shielded her eyes (Jennifer Mui FTW!) and went "Holy fark!"


Mercs actually was one of those rare games where I played through to get 100% completion

awalkingecho: Yeah they do. They don't, however, really have the capability to do much with it. Unless they're going to ride up to the DMZ and ask if they can drop some off at Samsung pretty please...


Yep. China flattens them, contracts awarded to South Korean conglomerates for rebuild and the bulk of resources are sold to China. All to help make our iphones cheaper.

Ain't globalism grand!
 
2013-04-02 08:39:14 AM  
We should be scared of a nuclear plant that doesn't even have cooling towers anymore.
 
2013-04-02 08:39:32 AM  

Sensual Tyrannosaurus: Forgot to mention, but if the media in China is critical of North Korea, then it's safe to say that the government also does not like them. They keep a pretty good focus on their messaging and generally the media is in line with the state's positions.


A journalist in China just got jailed for writing an article critical of N.Korea and calling for China to cut them off.
 
2013-04-02 08:40:28 AM  

Rapmaster2000: But first they will require more minerals.


Upgrade complete.
 
2013-04-02 08:43:30 AM  

Dick Gozinya: Iraq didnt have an ally like China watching their back.

That said, China seems to be getting sick of Best Korea's shiat, so we may see an invasion soon.


Iraq didn't have the ability to blow up Riyadh / Jerusalem / Ankara at a moment's notice.  Or a 2-mile-deep minefield protecting half its border.
 
2013-04-02 08:43:47 AM  

Macinfarker: Rapmaster2000: But first they will require more minerals.

Upgrade complete.


Our enemies are legion! And STILL you procrastinate! Command, or you will be relieved! This is not an idle threat!
 
2013-04-02 08:43:48 AM  

Deep Contact: $$Trillions of dollars in rare metals in BK. Good way to pay back China.


Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the conspiracy theories begin.

/idiots
 
2013-04-02 08:44:09 AM  
"Little fat man...no one really likes him..."

t.fod4.com
 
2013-04-02 08:45:20 AM  

Quantum Apostrophe: Zeno-25: [i.imgur.com image 645x835]

Would have been funnier if the feet were made of clay.


Because Bible?
 
2013-04-02 08:47:27 AM  

nekom: Vodka Zombie: I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens.

But, hey!  You guys go ahead with your nuclear holocaust fetish.

No one is going to nuke them. EVEN if they used a nuke, I seriously doubt anyone would respond with nuclear weapons. A few precision strikes could eliminate their ability to make war with hopefully a minimum of casualties. What happens after the dust settles though, well that's the big mystery.


If NK nuked SK, we would probably not nuke them, hell if they nuked Japan (which in a Joker way would be farking hilarious) we would only respond with low yield munitions.....and then watch as a pissed off Japan became a full fledged nuclear power in a matter of farking days.  Farking nipon nukes with tentacles and shiat.  However. If NK nuked the mainland United States, somehow, maybe by giant sling shot or something, the sitting POTUS would HAVE to nuke them back, at least once.  Not to send a message to the world, but to make sure that we didnt end up with a GoP majority rule and President for the next farking millennia.  Any less of a response would be the death of the controlling power.
 
2013-04-02 08:48:23 AM  
"Are you going to bark all day, little doggy, or are you gonna bite"? -Vic Vega
 
2013-04-02 08:48:33 AM  

Marine1: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the conspiracy theories begin.


It's not really CT, China is making play into Africa for access to minerals and resources. North has a metric ton of mineral and metal resources as well, they just lack the technology and ability to get at them.

Here's the think about the north, though while they are cozy with China they technically do not let China in. They use China as a power chip play against the US and the west in general. In short, no one informed them that the cold war ended years ago, and we don't give a shiat about communism anymore, we just want our cheap electronics.

China is looking at this propped up dictatorship and for the first time actually weighing in the cost vs benefit ration and wondering if maybe just perhaps they either turn a blind eye for a bit, or handle the problem themselves if they couldn't be better off.
 
2013-04-02 08:51:11 AM  
North Korea: The Little Engine that Couldn't
 
2013-04-02 08:54:46 AM  
Anyone think there's a chance the restructuring of the mothballed reactors will just wind up being a giant Chernobyl-esque fiasco and solve the problem itself?
 
2013-04-02 08:54:57 AM  

HMS_Blinkin:  If they managed to get a warhead to an American city (which is near impossible) I would say the chances of us retaliating with nuclear weapons of our own are barely above zero.  There's no point nuking a place that's that backward


For starters, I'm not so sure that getting a nuke into America is impossible.  Our borders are far from air tight.  Someone with enough determination and luck could sneak a payload within blast range the same way people sneak in trailer loads of drugs.

Second, we've got to consider that someone with one nuke might have two.
Do we have time to wait for a conventional land army to dismantle that place?

Not that we'd want to encourage the use of these weapons, but we also wouldn't want to lose another city.
 
2013-04-02 08:55:05 AM  

Vodka Zombie: I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens.

But, hey!  You guys go ahead with your nuclear holocaust fetish.


Your tits, you should calm them,
 
2013-04-02 08:55:36 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


You must be new here.
 
2013-04-02 08:55:51 AM  

nekom: Vodka Zombie: I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens.

But, hey!  You guys go ahead with your nuclear holocaust fetish.

No one is going to nuke them. EVEN if they used a nuke, I seriously doubt anyone would respond with nuclear weapons. A few precision strikes could eliminate their ability to make war with hopefully a minimum of casualties. What happens after the dust settles though, well that's the big mystery.


There's no mystery about what happens next in North Korea.

The North Korean population are an amazing resource ripe for exploitation.  Because they have operated largely independently, they have skilled machinists, electricians, factory assemblers and labourers as well as a large unskilled labour pool that would be willing delighted to work for, quite literally, peanuts.

South Korea are licking their lips at the idea of becoming an economic superpower in their own right from working North Koreans as a captive labour force.  So are the Americans, so are the Chinese.  The nations that should be lobbying hardest for peaceful integration between the Koreas with a Marshall plan funded jointly by China, America and South Korea are nations like Vietnam, Burma, Cambodia and other nations that attract factory jobs by being cheaper then China.
 
2013-04-02 08:55:57 AM  

nekom: Vodka Zombie: I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens.

But, hey!  You guys go ahead with your nuclear holocaust fetish.

No one is going to nuke them. EVEN if they used a nuke, I seriously doubt anyone would respond with nuclear weapons. A few precision strikes could eliminate their ability to make war with hopefully a minimum of casualties. What happens after the dust settles though, well that's the big mystery.


With some of the fuel-air and bunker bombs in our arsenal... we can achieve small yield nuke results, w/o the radiation... just conventional ordinance.
 
2013-04-02 08:58:01 AM  

Dick Gozinya: Iraq didnt have an ally like China watching their back.

That said, China seems to be getting sick of Best Korea's shiat, so we may see an invasion soon.


By China?
 
2013-04-02 08:58:50 AM  
Really?  No one is going to hold subby accountable for the unnecessary dandling preposition?  Fine...<shiat with which I put up>

fark YOU SUBBY!  fark YOU AND THE HORSE UPON WHICH YOU RODE!
 
2013-04-02 08:59:08 AM  
I actually don't think China will invade and "take care" of NK and here's my thoughts on why:

China's last official battle was in 1979, warfare has dramatically changed since that time and they are badly out of practice. The most their soldiers have experienced is running decades old drills or enforcing/bullying the farmer populace of rural china.

I think the movement of chinese forces to the border is actually to prevent a metric shiat ton of NK hillbilly refugees from flooding into china.

The US on the other hand is very experienced in modern combat and the way the media has sold it the US people in general think an invasion would be a walk-in-the-park operation.

So why wouldn't china let the US and SK do all the hard work?
- US can waste more money on yet another war making it easier for china to pick up more bonds for dirt cheap.
- China can use the treaty as a bargaining chip for NK's natural resources, by offering to break the treaty and lend NK no support should the US/SK forces invade in exchange for resource or mineral rights
- China spends very little in the way of resources by staying out of the conflict.
- China takes on minimal risk to the military and in fact has an opportunity to turn any border conflicts as a recruitment effort by treating NK like Asia's version of Mexico.

Seriously, by letting the US and SK flex their military muscle and even "letting" the US go to war with NK, it becomes a win-win-win situation for them...
 
2013-04-02 08:59:17 AM  
Quick! To the Defensecontractormobile!
 
2013-04-02 08:59:19 AM  
I don't know why people seem to think a fight with N Korea would be cake.  Obviously the US has more firepower and weaponry, but NK has crazy asian people on their side.

I wouldn't wave the flag too much when it involves killing millions of people and probably taking several thousand casaulties.

And then what?  Thing the rebuilding in Afghanistan is tough?  There is nothing in NK to build an economy from.
 
2013-04-02 08:59:25 AM  

MNguy: Sensual Tyrannosaurus: Forgot to mention, but if the media in China is critical of North Korea, then it's safe to say that the government also does not like them. They keep a pretty good focus on their messaging and generally the media is in line with the state's positions.

A journalist in China just got jailed suspended for writing an article critical of N.Korea and calling for China to cut them off.


FTFM
 
2013-04-02 08:59:40 AM  
dangling

farking dangling
 
2013-04-02 08:59:50 AM  

way south: HMS_Blinkin:  If they managed to get a warhead to an American city (which is near impossible) I would say the chances of us retaliating with nuclear weapons of our own are barely above zero.  There's no point nuking a place that's that backward

For starters, I'm not so sure that getting a nuke into America is impossible.  Our borders are far from air tight.  Someone with enough determination and luck could sneak a payload within blast range the same way people sneak in trailer loads of drugs.

Second, we've got to consider that someone with one nuke might have two.
Do we have time to wait for a conventional land army to dismantle that place?

Not that we'd want to encourage the use of these weapons, but we also wouldn't want to lose another city.


They're thought to have between 4 and 10 at present. That being said, if you think there aren't people watching satellites for each and everything larger than a bug moving on that peninsula right now and seeing where it's going, you've got another thing coming. Nothing is getting shipped here.
 
kab
2013-04-02 09:00:07 AM  

Vodka Zombie: I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens Texas

 
2013-04-02 09:00:28 AM  

DoctorOfLove: The Norks are collapsing.  They are probably no more than weeks/a couple of months from total economic meltdown.


Right - six days, six weeks... I think not six months.
 
2013-04-02 09:01:48 AM  
October 2008

North Korea has now achieved one of its most-prized objectives: removal from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism. In exchange, the U.S. has received "promises" on verification that are vague and amount to an agreement to negotiate the critical points later. In the Bush administration's waning days, this is what passes for diplomatic "success."
Link

Thanks Bush!
 
2013-04-02 09:01:52 AM  

kab: Vodka Zombie: I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens Texas


you owe me a keyboard
 
2013-04-02 09:01:57 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


because that whole "invade Korea" gig worked out so well last time.

/Iraq and DPRK are not the same situation
//also the Iraq was such a brilliant idea you'd want to try it again?
 
2013-04-02 09:02:58 AM  
Until John Bolton speaks on this issue there can be no well reasoned opinions.  And by that I mean whatever he says the opposite is likely to be true.
 
2013-04-02 09:04:14 AM  

awalkingecho: PanicMan: Listen, if you need food, just ask for food.  If you need technology, just ask for it.  We'll give it to you.  In our country we give our children iPads and mini electric cars.   These things are toys to us.   The only cost will be you gotta lighten up a bit, and open up more.  Tell us things.  Tell us what you need.

You want to stay a farm country?  Fine.  But use modern methods so you can actually feed your people.

What, GMOs and processed crap? They're better off starving.


They don't have Whole Foods, ironic fixed gear bicycles and meaningless organic food labels in North Korea.
 
2013-04-02 09:04:38 AM  

CeroX: Seriously, by letting the US and SK flex their military muscle and even "letting" the US go to war with NK, it becomes a win-win-win situation for them...


And the US realizes it, which is why its offering no food aid through western sources and is only doing shows of power. China and the US are two giants looking down at this petulant child and asking each other

"Ok, who's going to spank him first?"
 
2013-04-02 09:05:10 AM  

Macinfarker: Rapmaster2000: But first they will require more minerals.

Upgrade complete.


Ugh. My non-work computer is broken and now all I want to do is play that game. Damn it all!
 
2013-04-02 09:05:21 AM  
Sternly worded letter incoming....

Just think about the humanitarian issue in NK. Sad we can't do anything.
 
2013-04-02 09:07:22 AM  

INeedAName: I've been watching loads of West Wing lately. Into the 6th season now and I find it amazing how much stuff they got right. Pres. Bartlet comments that unless China steps in and smacks NK around, they're going to be the biggest threat to global stability since the Cuban Missile Crisis, and he just might be right.


In times of trouble, I am greatly relieved to know that we have top men watching reruns of the west wing....
 
2013-04-02 09:07:23 AM  

CeroX: I actually don't think China will invade and "take care" of NK and here's my thoughts on why:

China's last official battle was in 1979, warfare has dramatically changed since that time and they are badly out of practice. The most their soldiers have experienced is running decades old drills or enforcing/bullying the farmer populace of rural china.

I think the movement of chinese forces to the border is actually to prevent a metric shiat ton of NK hillbilly refugees from flooding into china.

The US on the other hand is very experienced in modern combat and the way the media has sold it the US people in general think an invasion would be a walk-in-the-park operation.

So why wouldn't china let the US and SK do all the hard work?
- US can waste more money on yet another war making it easier for china to pick up more bonds for dirt cheap.
- China can use the treaty as a bargaining chip for NK's natural resources, by offering to break the treaty and lend NK no support should the US/SK forces invade in exchange for resource or mineral rights
- China spends very little in the way of resources by staying out of the conflict.
- China takes on minimal risk to the military and in fact has an opportunity to turn any border conflicts as a recruitment effort by treating NK like Asia's version of Mexico.

Seriously, by letting the US and SK flex their military muscle and even "letting" the US go to war with NK, it becomes a win-win-win situation for them...


Because right now, they have NK separating 10billion US/SK troops from their border. If NK fell and we took over, we'd be way too close for their comfort
 
2013-04-02 09:08:06 AM  
Actually, that's an interesting question.  How would the world react if China invaded Best Korea?
 
2013-04-02 09:08:15 AM  

MugzyBrown: I don't know why people seem to think a fight with N Korea would be cake.


Because it would be, if we had ground forces in place. It's more like pie at the moment... we would have air superiority overnight. We could decapitate the CnC abilities and air defenses within a week. However, you can't win a war with air power alone. Something going down with NoKo would be something similar like we did to Iraq back in '91...where we had a few weeks to load in the ground forces. Sure, we can do amphib attacks better than anyone, but that's limited in scale. We would need at least 2-4 weeks to move in troops, tanks, supplies... but we -could- do so should the need arise.
 
2013-04-02 09:08:21 AM  

Jim from Saint Paul: Mercenaries?


That was a great game, what's wrong with you?
 
2013-04-02 09:08:52 AM  
farm9.staticflickr.com
/How about a nice game of chess?
 
2013-04-02 09:10:19 AM  

somedude210: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

Iraq: hated by most countries in region, stern opponent to our ally Israel. But not WMDs

Best Korea: WMDs and backing of China. China tells them to STFU, they don't then *BOOM* we get to replay the video game Mercenaries


Mercenaries was awesome. I'm sad the franchise didn't get a better sequel. Well, maybe it did, it was just called "Just Cause 2."
 
2013-04-02 09:11:14 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


We didn't get one friggen gallon of oil and our gas prices went from like $1.00 to $4.00.  If it was about Oil, we screwed up royally.
 
2013-04-02 09:12:09 AM  

DysphoricMania:
With some of the fuel-air and bunker bombs in our arsenal... we can achieve small yield nuke results, w/o the radiation... just conventional ordinance.


Right, and couple that with our advanced GPS targeting and really, the political disadvantages aside, there really would be no tactical reason to use a nuclear weapon. Nukes would be essential if your accuracy is "We can get it within a mile of the target", but we can knock down a building and leave adjacent buildings largely untouched. We neither need nor want their cities lying in burning ruins, we simply need to destroy their capacity to make war, and that can be done pretty much with tomahawks alone.
 
2013-04-02 09:12:24 AM  

Macinfarker: Rapmaster2000: But first they will require more minerals.

Upgrade complete.


I am about to drop the hammer and dispense some indiscriminate justice.
 
2013-04-02 09:14:52 AM  
shiat just got real.  Again.
 
2013-04-02 09:16:30 AM  
Leaving bombs out of the equation, because presumably will take them a while to get all the stuff ready and what not, isn't it more worrying that the NK's are messing around with a nuclear facility [again]?  Natural disasters strike, plus they are a bunch of crazy people; safety protocols, construction....  Isn't a Chernobyl &/or Fukushima f-up more of a threat than chubby doing any harm by getting all war-mongery?
 
2013-04-02 09:16:46 AM  

okiemule: [farm9.staticflickr.com image 850x419]
/How about a nice game of chess?


"global thermonuclear war" works a lot better when only one side gets to use the "global" and "thermonuclear" parts.
 
2013-04-02 09:18:50 AM  

ACunningPlan: Leaving bombs out of the equation, because presumably will take them a while to get all the stuff ready and what not, isn't it more worrying that the NK's are messing around with a nuclear facility [again]?  Natural disasters strike, plus they are a bunch of crazy people; safety protocols, construction....  Isn't a Chernobyl &/or Fukushima f-up more of a threat than chubby doing any harm by getting all war-mongery?


I just asked that above, no one seems to think so but frankly if we reach THAT point, China needs to man up and take the toys out of their hands.
 
2013-04-02 09:19:17 AM  

seniorgato: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

We didn't get one friggen gallon of oil and our gas prices went from like $1.00 to $4.00.  If it was about Oil, we screwed up royally.


It's wasn't for the good of the public, it was for the good of the Military Industrial Complex.  It was a wonderful proving ground for the current generation of military hardware.  They even got to design, build, and deliver a few new vehicles like the MRAP.  It also got all the contracts to build bases, rebuild infrastructure, train personnel, feed the military, provide security etc etc. The MIC is still wary of getting involved in anything in east Asia because it's a logistical nightmare and the profit margins are slim.
 
2013-04-02 09:20:50 AM  

awalkingecho: Anyone think there's a chance the restructuring of the mothballed reactors will just wind up being a giant Chernobyl-esque fiasco and solve the problem itself?


That would be interesting as all fark....   What would happen If a north korean nuclear reactor melted down, and started sending radiation into china, SK, and japan?  If the north koreans could not contain it, would the world have to take down the regime just to fix it?
 
2013-04-02 09:20:53 AM  

PerilousApricot: Because right now, they have NK separating 10billion US/SK troops from their border. If NK fell and we took over, we'd be way too close for their comfort


If i were China, i would use the treaty as a bargaining chip:

"We will break our treaty with the NK and not come to their defense should you go to war on these conditions:

1. When the conflict is over, the US pulls back to SK, and allow the rebuild/annexing of NK to be handled by China
1a. leaving negotiating room to include: A joint taskforce between China and SK with US/UN oversight to rebuild/reintegrate NK

2. China is awarded all mineral and developmental rights to the former NK
2a. leaving negotiating room to split with SK for 50/50

Unless these conditions are met, we feel we are obligated to continue to honor the treaty with NK"

US then only has to worry about the actual combat, leaving any post-iraq financial syndrome to China/SK which would probably give the pentagon a huge viagra fueled boner...
 
2013-04-02 09:22:24 AM  

Maul555: awalkingecho: Anyone think there's a chance the restructuring of the mothballed reactors will just wind up being a giant Chernobyl-esque fiasco and solve the problem itself?

That would be interesting as all fark....   What would happen If a north korean nuclear reactor melted down, and started sending radiation into china, SK, and japan?  If the north koreans could not contain it, would the world have to take down the regime just to fix it?


I think it would be a global necessity that we would have to do precisely that.
 
2013-04-02 09:22:42 AM  

LoneCoon: Mercenaries was awesome. I'm sad the franchise didn't get a better sequel. Well, maybe it did, it was just called "Just Cause 2."


Bought Just Cause 2 on Steam sale, gave up after a few attempts of playing it.   Just seemed like a crapfest / really didn't like the mechanics of the game.
 
2013-04-02 09:22:47 AM  

awalkingecho: ACunningPlan: Leaving bombs out of the equation, because presumably will take them a while to get all the stuff ready and what not, isn't it more worrying that the NK's are messing around with a nuclear facility [again]?  Natural disasters strike, plus they are a bunch of crazy people; safety protocols, construction....  Isn't a Chernobyl &/or Fukushima f-up more of a threat than chubby doing any harm by getting all war-mongery?

I just asked that above, no one seems to think so but frankly if we reach THAT point, China needs to man up and take the toys out of their hands.


Thank you.  Agreed, it is to be hoped if NK run into a problem, China does take charge.

/Be worried, you had the same thought I did:)
 
2013-04-02 09:22:51 AM  

DubtodaIll: seniorgato: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

We didn't get one friggen gallon of oil and our gas prices went from like $1.00 to $4.00.  If it was about Oil, we screwed up royally.

It's wasn't for the good of the public, it was for the good of the Military Industrial Complex.  It was a wonderful proving ground for the current generation of military hardware.  They even got to design, build, and deliver a few new vehicles like the MRAP.  It also got all the contracts to build bases, rebuild infrastructure, train personnel, feed the military, provide security etc etc. The MIC is still wary of getting involved in anything in east Asia because it's a logistical nightmare and the profit margins are slim.


When dudes like you take a shiat, do you factor the Military-Industrial Complex into it?
 
2013-04-02 09:24:46 AM  

Mugato: Yes because gas is so much cheaper since we invaded Iraq.


Since when does war benefit the little people?
 
2013-04-02 09:28:38 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


In fairness, we thought they still had WMDs because we had the receipts...
 
2013-04-02 09:29:28 AM  

generallyso: Since when does war benefit the little people?


Well in Roman times when the Roman army conquered some new land the money that came from that was divided up equally among all Roman citizens. In a couple cases this meant the poorer among them got near a year's income in one fell swoop.
 
2013-04-02 09:29:58 AM  
All that Worst Korea needs to do is to get their best Starcraft player to command their forces in a massive Zerg rush northwards for a quick Ender's Game style victory.

PS. Go search Google for zerg rush. Do it now. We'll be here when you get back.
 
2013-04-02 09:31:37 AM  

CeroX: 1. When the conflict is over, the US pulls back to SK, and allow the rebuild/annexing of NK to be handled by China


That one will never happen. Even China, publicly, agrees that both North Korea and South Korea are Korea. Nominally, this is still a Civil War.

In 1865 terms, China is like if Great Britain had backed the Confederacy. No matter how much they farked up, the southern states were never going to become part of Great Britain, and eventually the US would be unified again.
 
2013-04-02 09:33:07 AM  

way south: HMS_Blinkin:  If they managed to get a warhead to an American city (which is near impossible) I would say the chances of us retaliating with nuclear weapons of our own are barely above zero.  There's no point nuking a place that's that backward

For starters, I'm not so sure that getting a nuke into America is impossible.  Our borders are far from air tight.  Someone with enough determination and luck could sneak a payload within blast range the same way people sneak in trailer loads of drugs.

Second, we've got to consider that someone with one nuke might have two.
Do we have time to wait for a conventional land army to dismantle that place?

Not that we'd want to encourage the use of these weapons, but we also wouldn't want to lose another city.


Someone's receiving payola from Homeland security after having built a WOPR in their garage from a bucket, broom, Lite-brite and a Merlin.
 
2013-04-02 09:34:55 AM  

WhyteRaven74: Well in Roman times when the Roman army conquered some new land the money that came from that was divided up equally among all Roman citizens. In a couple cases this meant the poorer among them got near a year's income in one fell swoop.


I don't think the Roman army is in business anymore.
 
2013-04-02 09:35:18 AM  

BgJonson79: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

In fairness, we thought they still had WMDs because we had the receipts...


That's always been my pet theory on the WMDs, and not just the US, other countries' paw prints too.  Plus people who want something badly, don't always tell the whole truth; possibly a few fishermans' tales came from the Iraqi dissidents.
 
2013-04-02 09:35:36 AM  

Gordon Bennett: All that Worst Korea needs to do is to get their best Starcraft player to command their forces in a massive Zerg rush northwards for a quick Ender's Game style victory.

PS. Go search Google for zerg rush. Do it now. We'll be here when you get back.


You should do the googling for zergling rush, as in rushing for an early spawning pool. Rushing to zerg is just hastily selecting your race before you find a game.

/I am a jerk
 
2013-04-02 09:38:36 AM  

awalkingecho: Unless they're going to ride up to the DMZ and ask if they can drop some off at Samsung pretty please...


if Best Korea up and decided to knock off the bullshiat and wanted to have trade relations with South Korea, it would be signed by the end of the day.
 
2013-04-02 09:40:09 AM  

This text is now purple: CeroX: 1. When the conflict is over, the US pulls back to SK, and allow the rebuild/annexing of NK to be handled by China

That one will never happen. Even China, publicly, agrees that both North Korea and South Korea are Korea. Nominally, this is still a Civil War.

In 1865 terms, China is like if Great Britain had backed the Confederacy. No matter how much they farked up, the southern states were never going to become part of Great Britain, and eventually the US would be unified again.


i might be over simplifying the terms, but i didn't necessarily mean that NK would become annexed by chuna, just that china would oversee the annex/reintegration

This would basically allow china to have a lot of control as to where and how NK get rebuilt and may even allow china to swoop in and set up some new factories for some of it's manufacturing operations since they are experienced in getting back hill hicks integrated into working heavy equipment for next to nothing while getting those bumpkins to believe they are living like kings (and compared to how they used to live, eating dirt and all that, they would be)...
 
2013-04-02 09:40:22 AM  

generallyso: WhyteRaven74: Well in Roman times when the Roman army conquered some new land the money that came from that was divided up equally among all Roman citizens. In a couple cases this meant the poorer among them got near a year's income in one fell swoop.

I don't think the Roman army is in business anymore.


And 'Roman Citizen' didn't include slaves, who were the majority of the population in Rome.
 
2013-04-02 09:41:59 AM  

MNguy: generallyso: WhyteRaven74: Well in Roman times when the Roman army conquered some new land the money that came from that was divided up equally among all Roman citizens. In a couple cases this meant the poorer among them got near a year's income in one fell swoop.

I don't think the Roman army is in business anymore.

And 'Roman Citizen' didn't include slaves, who were the majority of the population in Rome.


Conquest, also, does not exactly fit the definition of 'War' as we know and use it today.
 
2013-04-02 09:43:50 AM  

Dick Gozinya: Iraq didnt have an ally like China watching their back.


It's amazing how conveniently people forget this. Further, that Iraq had recently been lobbing Scuds at Israel and pursuing a chemical weapons program at the same time. The fear was real. From NK... not so much. We already beat them into submission in 1953.
 
2013-04-02 09:45:33 AM  
It's an empty threat isn't it? For instance. Bruce nuclear power station here in Ontario, Canada, mothballed a reactor in 1995. It took $2.5 Billion dollars to bring it back up to speed, and Canada is a leader in nuclear technology with access to correct parts and technology. It's takes 5-7 years to recondition and bring a reactor back on line with proper equipment and money. I doubt Best Korea could scrape together 2.5 dollars let alone billions. And they're years behind in parts and technology. I doubt you'll ever see these sh*t heads ever bring that reactor back.
 
2013-04-02 09:45:58 AM  
Serious question: what does North Korea have to benefit by goading South Korea/USA into making the first strike? I understand that in all likelihood all this attention seeking behavior is supposed to pressure the UN into giving NK aid, but as the stakes get higher all they're really doing is painting a big target on their nuclear power station/refinery/thingamajig. Surely they are at least in some way aware of this.

Also, in regards to China strengthening it's military presence on the boarder: I don't think China is really interested in direct conflict, it's one thing to let the regime commit suicide by attacking SK (potentially), but after all the time and energy spent standing up for NK, it would be embarrassing to do a 180 now. They're still a communism, after all, just a far more open one. More likely China is securing the border in the event of 25 million Koreans fleeing the evil capitalist invaders, IMO.
 
2013-04-02 09:46:16 AM  

Featured Farker: If you think this story is the bomb, check out the links from our Featured Partners!


This is getting old
 
2013-04-02 09:46:52 AM  

Lehk: if Best Korea up and decided to knock off the bullshiat and wanted to have trade relations with South Korea, it would be signed by the end of the day.


Which is why China is backing off Best Korea, there are some minimal trade relations right now. SK has a few factories in the north right across the border where skilled workers go to build shiat for NK. Its a massive influx of cash yet Fatty Mcfaterson is threatening to close it down.

When he did that, not the nuke threat mind you, but when Best Korea threatened to shut down economic relations, that's when the entire world including China took a collective look at Kim and asked "Dude really?"
 
2013-04-02 09:48:30 AM  

sodomizer: Dick Gozinya: Iraq didnt have an ally like China watching their back.

It's amazing how conveniently people forget this. Further, that Iraq had recently been lobbing Scuds at Israel and pursuing a chemical weapons program at the same time. The fear was real. From NK... not so much. We already beat them into submission in 1953.


Not to mention the attempted assassination of an ex president, which is an act of war.
 
2013-04-02 09:49:29 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


What not having WMDs may look like: Warning: graphic, disturbing images of the civilian victims of Iraqi chemical weapons
 
2013-04-02 09:52:14 AM  

Mugato: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

Yes because gas is so much cheaper since we invaded Iraq.


shiat, we must have forgotten to steal all that oil we apparently invaded to take.
 
2013-04-02 09:53:33 AM  
It would be awesome if China finally got sick of their shiat and invaded Best Korea to save us the trouble.
 
2013-04-02 09:53:50 AM  

meanmutton: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

What not having WMDs may look like: Warning: graphic, disturbing images of the civilian victims of Iraqi chemical weapons


Are those the same deaths from the chemical weapons Reagan illegally sold to Saddam?
 
2013-04-02 09:55:23 AM  

Random Anonymous Blackmail: It would be awesome if China finally got sick of their shiat and invaded Best Korea to save us the trouble.


That would freak half the planet right the fark out, though.  Seriously.  If China invaded ANYONE, we'd be running around in a panic.
 
2013-04-02 09:57:05 AM  
Airdrop a few thousand tons of 11.5 inch subway subs wrapped in miniature American flags.

problem=solved
 
2013-04-02 09:57:41 AM  

orclover: nekom: Vodka Zombie: I would feel kind of bad if we nuked North Korea.  The people there are pretty much political prisoners and completely ignorant of the planet.

It would be like blowing up a box of kittens.

But, hey!  You guys go ahead with your nuclear holocaust fetish.

No one is going to nuke them. EVEN if they used a nuke, I seriously doubt anyone would respond with nuclear weapons. A few precision strikes could eliminate their ability to make war with hopefully a minimum of casualties. What happens after the dust settles though, well that's the big mystery.

If NK nuked SK, we would probably not nuke them, hell if they nuked Japan (which in a Joker way would be farking hilarious) we would only respond with low yield munitions.....and then watch as a pissed off Japan became a full fledged nuclear power in a matter of farking days.  Farking nipon nukes with tentacles and shiat.  However. If NK nuked the mainland United States, somehow, maybe by giant sling shot or something, the sitting POTUS would HAVE to nuke them back, at least once.  Not to send a message to the world, but to make sure that we didnt end up with a GoP majority rule and President for the next farking millennia.  Any less of a response would be the death of the controlling power.


as it should be.
 
2013-04-02 09:59:41 AM  

DysphoricMania: MugzyBrown: I don't know why people seem to think a fight with N Korea would be cake.

Because it would be, if we had ground forces in place. It's more like pie at the moment... we would have air superiority overnight. We could decapitate the CnC abilities and air defenses within a week. However, you can't win a war with air power alone. Something going down with NoKo would be something similar like we did to Iraq back in '91...where we had a few weeks to load in the ground forces. Sure, we can do amphib attacks better than anyone, but that's limited in scale. We would need at least 2-4 weeks to move in troops, tanks, supplies... but we -could- do so should the need arise.


4.bp.blogspot.com

Wha'chu talk'n 'bout DysphoricMania?

 
2013-04-02 10:00:09 AM  

meanmutton: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

What not having WMDs may look like: Warning: graphic, disturbing images of the civilian victims of Iraqi chemical weapons


Maybe he forgot about that and the 14+ stern letters and resolutions from the UN to Iraq. That and american oil companies did not get the oil, but dont let that change his koolaid narative of "Blood for Oil"
 
2013-04-02 10:00:18 AM  

MyKingdomForYourHorse: Macinfarker: [schoenhaesslich.de image 480x320]

Team America.  Fark Yeah.™

That was a horrible movie and you should feel bad for even mentioning it


Never post here again.
 
2013-04-02 10:02:05 AM  

Joe Blowme: meanmutton: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

What not having WMDs may look like: Warning: graphic, disturbing images of the civilian victims of Iraqi chemical weapons

Maybe he forgot about that and the 14+ stern letters and resolutions from the UN to Iraq. That and american oil companies did not get the oil, but dont let that change his koolaid narative of "Blood for Oil"


Never understood this completely made up stupid. Hundreds of thousands of civilians killed, directly and openly funded terror, fired on coalition aircraft thousands of times, but all libs think is we went in and stole all the oil.
 
2013-04-02 10:02:44 AM  

seniorgato: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

We didn't get one friggen gallon of oil and our gas prices went from like $1.00 to $4.00.  If it was about Oil, we screwed up royally.


No, it worked perfectly. No one said the benefit was for the consumer.
 
2013-04-02 10:03:45 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


Iraq.  Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them.  Decade+ of stern letters before someone enforced UN resolutions

Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them.  Only been a little while since the saber started rattling

Kim is following the Saddam script precisely.  Rattle saber, talk up WMDs, buy weapons from (former) communist power and receive lip service backing from them, then beg for food from the West with backing down as the compromise
 
2013-04-02 10:04:32 AM  

thoughtless: Gordon Bennett: All that Worst Korea needs to do is to get their best Starcraft player to command their forces in a massive Zerg rush northwards for a quick Ender's Game style victory.

PS. Go search Google for zerg rush. Do it now. We'll be here when you get back.

You should do the googling for zergling rush, as in rushing for an early spawning pool. Rushing to zerg is just hastily selecting your race before you find a game.

/I am a jerk


That works as well, so either search is fine. Click the mouse to activate the crosshairs.
 
2013-04-02 10:05:49 AM  

Thunderpipes: Never understood this completely made up stupid. Hundreds of thousands of civilians killed, directly and openly funded terror, fired on coalition aircraft thousands of times, but all libs think is we went in and stole all the oil.


It must get lonely when you realize that everyone is ignoring you for being a troll, doesn't it?

I think you need an alt.
 
2013-04-02 10:15:45 AM  

Bored Horde: Because they have operated largely independently, they have skilled machinists, electricians, factory assemblers and labourers


Also great cooks
 
2013-04-02 10:16:38 AM  

Vodka Zombie: Thunderpipes: Never understood this completely made up stupid. Hundreds of thousands of civilians killed, directly and openly funded terror, fired on coalition aircraft thousands of times, but all libs think is we went in and stole all the oil.

It must get lonely when you realize that everyone is ignoring you for being a troll, doesn't it?

I think you need an alt.


So which part of this is trolling? All i see is facts that are easily GIS for truth.
 
2013-04-02 10:22:12 AM  

LoneCoon: somedude210: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

Iraq: hated by most countries in region, stern opponent to our ally Israel. But not WMDs

Best Korea: WMDs and backing of China. China tells them to STFU, they don't then *BOOM* we get to replay the video game Mercenaries

Mercenaries was awesome. I'm sad the franchise didn't get a better sequel. Well, maybe it did, it was just called "Just Cause 2."


Oh no, you didn't...
 
2013-04-02 10:26:24 AM  

way south: HMS_Blinkin:  If they managed to get a warhead to an American city (which is near impossible) I would say the chances of us retaliating with nuclear weapons of our own are barely above zero.  There's no point nuking a place that's that backward

For starters, I'm not so sure that getting a nuke into America is impossible.  Our borders are far from air tight.  Someone with enough determination and luck could sneak a payload within blast range the same way people sneak in trailer loads of drugs.

Second, we've got to consider that someone with one nuke might have two.
Do we have time to wait for a conventional land army to dismantle that place?

Not that we'd want to encourage the use of these weapons, but we also wouldn't want to lose another city.




boingboing.net
 
2013-04-02 10:27:30 AM  

bhcompy: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

Iraq.  Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them.  Decade+ of stern letters before someone enforced UN resolutions

Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them.  Only been a little while since the saber started rattling

Kim is following the Saddam script precisely.  Rattle saber, talk up WMDs, buy weapons from (former) communist power and receive lip service backing from them, then beg for food from the West with backing down as the compromise


OR...

Best Korea is the little annoying brother that likes to talk shiat and kick people then hide behind big brother. Little brother is hoping they will get their enemy into a fight with big brother. Big brother is annoyed at little brother, but big brother doesn't like little brother's enemy also, so secretly big brother is waiting for little brother's enemy to push them to get to little brother so they can beat the snot out of little brother's enemy without Mom & Dad stepping in.
 
2013-04-02 10:29:03 AM  

Opus Croakus: Airdrop a few thousand tons of 11.5 inch subway subs wrapped in miniature American flags.

problem=solved


I'm pretty sure that biowarfare is frowned upon.
 
2013-04-02 10:30:43 AM  

meanmutton: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

What not having WMDs may look like: Warning: graphic, disturbing images of the civilian victims of Iraqi chemical weapons


Stop being disingenuous.  Are there any pics of chemical attacks during the war?  After?  any items of interest found during the war?  No?  Then STFU.  EVERYONE KNOWS he had chemical weapons many years before the war.  That wasn't the issue.  The issue was whether he still had any, was buying or making new ones, or was planning to do so.  The answer is no to all of those, and it now looks like even the idiots in power knew that all along.
 
2013-04-02 10:31:37 AM  
China moves in to "help NK". China decapitates the NK political and military regime. The entirety of NK becomes a Kaesong Industrial region aka new Hong Kong. We get Taiwan.
Book it.
 
2013-04-02 10:33:58 AM  

Mugato: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

Yes because gas is so much cheaper since we invaded Iraq.


no no no, you've got it all wrong.  The way the liberal derp goes is:
  1. Bush was teh "greedy e-vile guy" who invaded Iraq to get oil
                    AND
  2. Bush was also teh "stupid guy" that couldn't pull it off.
 
2013-04-02 10:34:30 AM  

dai the flu: Serious question: what does North Korea have to benefit by goading South Korea/USA into making the first strike? I understand that in all likelihood all this attention seeking behavior is supposed to pressure the UN into giving NK aid, but as the stakes get higher all they're really doing is painting a big target on their nuclear power station/refinery/thingamajig. Surely they are at least in some way aware of this.

Also, in regards to China strengthening it's military presence on the boarder: I don't think China is really interested in direct conflict, it's one thing to let the regime commit suicide by attacking SK (potentially), but after all the time and energy spent standing up for NK, it would be embarrassing to do a 180 now. They're still a communism, after all, just a far more open one. More likely China is securing the border in the event of 25 million Koreans fleeing the evil capitalist invaders, IMO.


I'm guessing that they save a lot by not having any job killing regulations or safety features. So a few workers die or some radioactive material gets out, they don't care.
 
2013-04-02 10:34:33 AM  

meanmutton: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

What not having WMDs may look like: Warning: graphic, disturbing images of the civilian victims of Iraqi chemical weapons


how long are you going to drink that kook-aid?  I'm an Iraq war vet and even I think we had no business there
 
2013-04-02 10:37:29 AM  

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: no no no, you've got it all wrong.  The way the liberal derp goes is:
  1. Bush was teh "greedy e-vile guy" who invaded Iraq to get oil
                    AND
  2. Bush was also teh "stupid guy" that couldn't pull it off.


You're apparently trying to make a point by alluding to the notion that those two things are mutually exclusive.  They are not.
 
2013-04-02 10:39:27 AM  

LewDux: Bored Horde: Because they have operated largely independently, they have skilled machinists, electricians, factory assemblers and labourers

Also great cooks


True. It takes great talent to make tree bark tasty.
 
2013-04-02 10:41:37 AM  

PsyLord: Actually, that's an interesting question.  How would the world react if China invaded Best Korea?


If they pledged (and did) stop at the DMZ:

popcorn and LOL.
 
2013-04-02 10:43:33 AM  

DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: PsyLord: Actually, that's an interesting question.  How would the world react if China invaded Best Korea?

If they pledged (and did) stop at the DMZ:

popcorn and LOL.


This. We would then, when the hour-long special was over with, give a standing ovation as Korea was whole again.
 
2013-04-02 10:46:06 AM  

Mugato: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

Yes because gas is so much cheaper since we invaded Iraq.


What do you expect from the farkups in the Bush administration? They couldn't even steal a country's oil correctly.

/Although I'm sure Cheney made out like a bandit from war profiteering.
 
2013-04-02 10:47:28 AM  

Thisbymaster: We should be scared of a nuclear plant that doesn't even have cooling towers anymore


Little Kim: "Start the prant".

Officer: "Great One, there are no cooling towers."

Little Kim: "Start the prant."
 
2013-04-02 10:48:32 AM  

jat26006: meanmutton: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

What not having WMDs may look like: Warning: graphic, disturbing images of the civilian victims of Iraqi chemical weapons

how long are you going to drink that kook-aid?  I'm an Iraq war vet and even I think we had no business there


Opinions, this is how they work. But you dont speak for all of us
 
2013-04-02 10:50:37 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: Although I'm sure Cheney made out like a bandit from war profiteering.


You would have to be a total sociopath to start a war just to raise the stock in the company you were the CEO of.

I don't have a punchline to that setup.
 
2013-04-02 10:56:07 AM  

awalkingecho: DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: PsyLord: Actually, that's an interesting question.  How would the world react if China invaded Best Korea?

If they pledged (and did) stop at the DMZ:

popcorn and LOL.

This. We would then, when the hour-long special was over with, give a standing ovation as Korea was whole again.


The only problem is that if China annexed BK, SK and Japan would probably object.
 
2013-04-02 11:00:13 AM  

PsyLord: awalkingecho: DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: PsyLord: Actually, that's an interesting question.  How would the world react if China invaded Best Korea?

If they pledged (and did) stop at the DMZ:

popcorn and LOL.

This. We would then, when the hour-long special was over with, give a standing ovation as Korea was whole again.

The only problem is that if China annexed BK, SK and Japan would probably object.


They wouldn't annex. Unification along with mineral rights for PRC and a smattering of things like refugee assistance and humanitarian reconstruction for SK companies all footed through our tax bill.

All in the name of making cheap shiat they can sell to us
 
2013-04-02 11:02:16 AM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


Yes, minus the oil Iraq and North Korea are equivalent.  We have equivalent historical dealings with both, equivalent diplomatic engagements and should have the same solution for what is obviously an equivalent situation.  Good call.  This must be why you get woken up sometimes in the middle of the night by calls from world leaders asking for advice.
 
2013-04-02 11:02:55 AM  

Joe Blowme: jat26006: meanmutton: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

What not having WMDs may look like: Warning: graphic, disturbing images of the civilian victims of Iraqi chemical weapons

how long are you going to drink that kook-aid?  I'm an Iraq war vet and even I think we had no business there

Opinions, this is how they work. But you dont speak for all of us


Welcome to fark?   Isn't the comments section opinions?  I must have had it allllll wrong all of these years. I do realize there are vets that cling to the idea that our invasion of Iraq was justified.  Some day you'll wake up.
 
2013-04-02 11:03:37 AM  

PsyLord: awalkingecho: DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: PsyLord: Actually, that's an interesting question.  How would the world react if China invaded Best Korea?

If they pledged (and did) stop at the DMZ:

popcorn and LOL.

This. We would then, when the hour-long special was over with, give a standing ovation as Korea was whole again.

The only problem is that if China annexed BK, SK and Japan would probably object.


No. If it was a free border. Japan doesn't give a shiat. Many north north koreans culturally identify with southern china. Of course south korea identifies with north korea. It would be a Berlin wall east west germany unification. (with north korea being a Kaesong Industrial region in the beginning
 
2013-04-02 11:06:23 AM  
Check out their advanced form of communicationi763.photobucket.com
 
2013-04-02 11:08:26 AM  
As much as I hate that this instability and chest-beating has been going on, I'd be lying if I said it was not interesting. I'm grateful I've been given cause to go digging deeper and learn more about the dynamics of the politics in that region in the wake of all of this, but it's time for it to be over with.
 
2013-04-02 11:09:28 AM  

Badafuco: Check out their advanced form of communication[i763.photobucket.com image 451x250]


Looks like the Big Man is considering trying out the peasant's traditional fare.
 
2013-04-02 11:18:44 AM  

CeroX: PerilousApricot: Because right now, they have NK separating 10billion US/SK troops from their border. If NK fell and we took over, we'd be way too close for their comfort

If i were China, i would use the treaty as a bargaining chip:

"We will break our treaty with the NK and not come to their defense should you go to war on these conditions:

1. When the conflict is over, the US pulls back to SK, and allow the rebuild/annexing of NK to be handled by China
1a. leaving negotiating room to include: A joint taskforce between China and SK with US/UN oversight to rebuild/reintegrate NK

2. China is awarded all mineral and developmental rights to the former NK
2a. leaving negotiating room to split with SK for 50/50

Unless these conditions are met, we feel we are obligated to continue to honor the treaty with NK"

US then only has to worry about the actual combat, leaving any post-iraq financial syndrome to China/SK which would probably give the pentagon a huge viagra fueled boner...


Sure, let the US take all the risk, and China gets all the reward.  Not that rebuilding is easy or cheap, but at least they're not draining their coffers on things that go kablooey and have no benefits beyond that point.  The US should say, "How about you help in the first place?  Smack your petulant child around a bit, then we'll talk."
 
2013-04-02 11:23:14 AM  

Sensual Tyrannosaurus: I don't know why everyone's so worried about China.


Because we have been conditioned to whimper in fear about everything foreign.
 
2013-04-02 11:25:23 AM  

Badafuco: Check out their advanced form of communication[i763.photobucket.com image 451x250]


Oddly enough, a lot of their released photos seem to feature phones. HA! Imperialist dogs! Tremble in fear at my FOUR LINE telephone. Obama only has one red phone on his desk!
 
2013-04-02 11:31:15 AM  
i1182.photobucket.com
 
2013-04-02 11:34:07 AM  

Badafuco: Check out their advanced form of communication[i763.photobucket.com image 451x250]


The expression on the face of the guy in the background says it all.
 
2013-04-02 11:35:28 AM  
It's a clever plan. Provoke America into war, get a lot of destruction going on, quit. Congress then soaks US Taxpayers for a coupe trillion dollars to reconstruct what we paid to blow up.

Zippity-do-dah and new schools, new hospitals, new roads and highways, new airports, farm aid, civilian experts in every sector and if History is any guide ... men with great sacks of cash show up and buy your loyalty.

... Bob's your uncle.
 
2013-04-02 11:37:04 AM  

BSABSVR: Sensual Tyrannosaurus: I don't know why everyone's so worried about China.

Because we have been conditioned to whimper in fear about everything foreign.


Absolutely FT. It seems everyone on FARK is all about america puting the smack down on NK. It's not going to happen. Never will. No one in the region wants that. Not SK, not Japan, not China. If anyone does it will be China. Sorry USA, your not that important economically here.
 
2013-04-02 11:37:08 AM  
Little Kimmy just said he wanted some more yellow cake, he didn't intend for there to be nuclear weapons involved.
 
2013-04-02 11:37:45 AM  

chopit: Sure, let the US take all the risk, and China gets all the reward. Not that rebuilding is easy or cheap, but at least they're not draining their coffers on things that go kablooey and have no benefits beyond that point. The US should say, "How about you help in the first place? Smack your petulant child around a bit, then we'll talk."


Looking at it from china's perspective and not from the perspective of a patriotic us citizen... how you you do it if you were china? Because seriously, china has the upper hand in this negotiation and has even more to gain.
The pentagon would be able to save face by being able to go in and "liberate" the Norks and then basically let SK and China hash out how to clean up after us including any insurgents (if they exist out there) or otherwise. The pentagon gets to pop a few viagra and slap a commie country with its dick and then after it blows its load on the face of NK it gets to walk out and let china and SK lick up the leftovers...

Sure the US could get all pissy and start telling china to do it, but that would make us look bad by demanding china break a treaty with its neighbor just because we say so... never gonna happen, but if china could broker a deal, then they will listen...
 
2013-04-02 11:38:48 AM  

Digipr0f69: Sorry USA, your not that important economically here.


B.. b...  but FREEDOM!

And Jesus!
 
2013-04-02 11:40:16 AM  

Dick Gozinya: Iraq didnt have an ally like China watching their back.

That said, China seems to be getting sick of Best Korea's shiat, so we may see an invasion soon.




Latest reports show China mobilizing more troops on North Korea's northern border and a live fire naval exercise in the yellow sea that appear to be in support of North Korea. It is pretty much a given that if action is taken against North Korea China would support North Korea if for no other reason than keeping them as a buffer between South Korea and their own border. I think it is safe to assume that China believes that any action in Korea would be limited to Korea and the area around it since the USA would not want to engage China directly. I am pretty sure that all this rhetoric from North Korea is mostly propaganda and posturing before talks begin. Once talks are underway they can make some small jester towards peace in exchange for aid then report to their people that the USA feared them and gave them this bounty out of fear which the great leader will now share with you the people.
 
2013-04-02 11:41:04 AM  

CeroX: Sure the US could get all pissy and start telling china to do it, but that would make us look bad by demanding china break a treaty with its neighbor just because we say so... never gonna happen, but if china could broker a deal, then they will listen...


China wants to keep their economy churning and that requires them to sell lots of cheap tiny shiat to us. We politely ask them to please handle their petulant child or we'll go back to having the wetbacks build our shiat like we did in the 80's.
 
2013-04-02 11:43:12 AM  

Profedius: Latest reports show China mobilizing more troops on North Korea's northern border and a live fire naval exercise in the yellow sea that appear to be in support of North Korea. It is pretty much a given that if action is taken against North Korea China would support North Korea if for no other reason than keeping them as a buffer between South Korea and their own border. I think it is safe to assume that China believes that any action in Korea would be limited to Korea and the area around it since the USA would not want to engage China directly. I am pretty sure that all this rhetoric from North Korea is mostly propaganda and posturing before talks begin. Once talks are underway they can make some small jester towards peace in exchange for aid then report to their people that the USA feared them and gave them this bounty out of fear which the great leader will now share with you the people.


This blustering by Kim is nothing more than him trying to show himself as hard and strong so as to avoid a military coup, and China is a little pissed off by it.
 
2013-04-02 11:48:46 AM  

Digipr0f69: It seems everyone on FARK is all about america puting the smack down on NK. It's not going to happen. Never will. No one in the region wants that. Not SK, not Japan, not China. If anyone does it will be China. Sorry USA, your not that important economically here.


Obviously.  Just remember all those NK threats against China, calling for settling of Chinese accounts, the videos depciting China in flames.
 
2013-04-02 11:53:54 AM  

Digipr0f69: BSABSVR: Sensual Tyrannosaurus: I don't know why everyone's so worried about China.

Because we have been conditioned to whimper in fear about everything foreign.

Absolutely FT. It seems everyone on FARK is all about america puting the smack down on NK. It's not going to happen. Never will. No one in the region wants that. Not SK, not Japan, not China. If anyone does it will be China. Sorry USA, your not that important economically here.


You obviously also can't read because at least half of the posters discussing this in the thread called or stated hope or liklihood of China doing it. Try again later.
 
2013-04-02 11:57:53 AM  

Vodka Zombie: Digipr0f69: Sorry USA, your not that important economically here.

B.. b...  but FREEDOM!

And Jesus!


I once talked to a Buddhist monk I met at a train station. I talked about Jesus being crucified for his beliefs. As I lit her cigarette she said "What? He didn't move on to the next town?"
 
2013-04-02 11:57:58 AM  

Le Bomb Suprize: Until John Bolton speaks on this issue there can be no well reasoned opinions.  And by that I mean whatever he says the opposite is likely to be true.


Ugh, worst guy in the world.
 
2013-04-02 12:03:47 PM  

awalkingecho: Digipr0f69: BSABSVR: Sensual Tyrannosaurus: I don't know why everyone's so worried about China.

Because we have been conditioned to whimper in fear about everything foreign.

Absolutely FT. It seems everyone on FARK is all about america puting the smack down on NK. It's not going to happen. Never will. No one in the region wants that. Not SK, not Japan, not China. If anyone does it will be China. Sorry USA, your not that important economically here.

You obviously also can't read because at least half of the posters discussing this in the thread called or stated hope or liklihood of China doing it. Try again later.


Really. Because I don't grok that from this thread.
 
2013-04-02 12:10:19 PM  
s23.postimg.org
 
2013-04-02 12:11:32 PM  

Vodka Zombie: Thunderpipes: Never understood this completely made up stupid. Hundreds of thousands of civilians killed, directly and openly funded terror, fired on coalition aircraft thousands of times, but all libs think is we went in and stole all the oil.

It must get lonely when you realize that everyone is ignoring you for being a troll, doesn't it?

I think you need an alt.


Not really, because the important people aren't.

/but I'm sure you think you're just the very most important person in your little echo chamber, aren't you, precious?
//it will be so funny when you find out putting reality on your ignore list doesn't actually make it disappear
///that's why it's called reality, you know
 
2013-04-02 12:16:02 PM  
Could spend most of the day wasting away in the N. Korea threads.  North Korea renamed "Not Quite Socialist or Communist Republic of LULZ COW".
 
2013-04-02 12:21:07 PM  

jat26006: Joe Blowme: jat26006: meanmutton: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

What not having WMDs may look like: Warning: graphic, disturbing images of the civilian victims of Iraqi chemical weapons

how long are you going to drink that kook-aid?  I'm an Iraq war vet and even I think we had no business there

Opinions, this is how they work. But you dont speak for all of us

Welcome to fark?   Isn't the comments section opinions?  I must have had it allllll wrong all of these years. I do realize there are vets that cling to the idea that our invasion of Iraq was justified.  Some day you'll wake up.


Or maybe someday you will once you get over them being brown and not worthy of your efforts
 
2013-04-02 12:21:11 PM  
Keep in mind their stated goal is to attack our country with nuclear weapons.

I don't see how we can let this not go unanswered and mitigate a future attack.

It is only going to be much, much worse in the future dealing with more advances in their delivery systems to reach their stated goals.
 
2013-04-02 12:31:46 PM  

Joe Blowme: Vodka Zombie: Thunderpipes: Never understood this completely made up stupid. Hundreds of thousands of civilians killed, directly and openly funded terror, fired on coalition aircraft thousands of times, but all libs think is we went in and stole all the oil.

It must get lonely when you realize that everyone is ignoring you for being a troll, doesn't it?

I think you need an alt.

So which part of this is trolling? All i see is facts that are easily GIS for truth.


It's trolling because none of those were given at the time as reasons for going to war, so they must not have been a factor in the decision.   Here's the full text of why we went.  It was for our own security, not the Kurds, and not the rest of the Iraqi population.  The US has killed about 115,000 civilians in Iraq, making it difficult in any event for us to justify the excuse that Hussein was killing his own people.  The DOD says Iraq fired on coalition aircraft only 71 times or so before the war, not thousands of times.  I haven't read anyone saying that we intended to "steal" their oil, so that characterization is misleading and inflammatory.  But it was made quite obvious by Ari Fleischer and Paul Wolfowitz that the US fully intended to pay for reconstruction with Iraqi oil, making it a freebie for the US.

Additionally, if those factors (specifically terror funding, which they certainly took part in, though not with the commonly accused parties) were used as part of the rationale, why did (and do) the US consistently ignore other countries when they did (and do) precisely the same things?  The answer is that the US did not use those as rationale.
 
2013-04-02 12:34:14 PM  

MyKingdomForYourHorse: Profedius: Latest reports show China mobilizing more troops on North Korea's northern border and a live fire naval exercise in the yellow sea that appear to be in support of North Korea. It is pretty much a given that if action is taken against North Korea China would support North Korea if for no other reason than keeping them as a buffer between South Korea and their own border. I think it is safe to assume that China believes that any action in Korea would be limited to Korea and the area around it since the USA would not want to engage China directly. I am pretty sure that all this rhetoric from North Korea is mostly propaganda and posturing before talks begin. Once talks are underway they can make some small jester towards peace in exchange for aid then report to their people that the USA feared them and gave them this bounty out of fear which the great leader will now share with you the people.

This blustering by Kim is nothing more than him trying to show himself as hard and strong so as to avoid a military coup, and China is a little pissed off by it.




I agree, but China is not going invade despite how angry they are. With the situation as it is now China would have the blessing of the world (maybe not openly stated) if it wished to invade North Korea and yet China has instead chose to support North Korea even at the U.N. though that support is diminishing. North Korea would be a costly invasion and occupation since its people are extremely brainwashed and would likely resist on every level even after the military is defeated and the nations know this so they are reluctant to expend the resources on military action with little more than stability in the region the benefit.
 
2013-04-02 12:36:47 PM  

Clemkadidlefark: It's a clever plan. Provoke America into war, get a lot of destruction going on, quit. Congress then soaks US Taxpayers for a coupe trillion dollars to reconstruct what we paid to blow up.

Zippity-do-dah and new schools, new hospitals, new roads and highways, new airports, farm aid, civilian experts in every sector and if History is any guide ... men with great sacks of cash show up and buy your loyalty.

... Bob's your uncle.


Except the US has a second-term president of the MSM-favored ideology, so instead we'll be following the Serbia battle plan instead of the Iraq one.

/that's where we level the entire farking country, starting with the infrastructure needed for basic survival, until we get a surrender
//then we leave your neighbors to deal with the humanitarian problems, while our President collects another Nobel Peace Prize
///and the only complaint you'll hear from anyone to the left of Freeperville is maybe a Doonesbury comic reprising their sarcastic apology for disturbing the sleep of the night watchman at the Chinese embassy
 
2013-04-02 12:38:00 PM  

Profedius: I agree, but China is not going invade despite how angry they are. With the situation as it is now China would have the blessing of the world (maybe not openly stated) if it wished to invade North Korea and yet China has instead chose to support North Korea even at the U.N. though that support is diminishing. North Korea would be a costly invasion and occupation since its people are extremely brainwashed and would likely resist on every level even after the military is defeated and the nations know this so they are reluctant to expend the resources on military action with little more than stability in the region the benefit.


Well they wouldn't put boots on the ground. They would however allow the US and Japan to pound their military in the stone age (as if it isn't already). They'd then wait for the country to destabilize itself and then go in under a UN charter to keep peace. Award rebuilding contracts to SK and the US could start talks about eventual reunification.

PRC doesn't want to lose that buffer between them and SK, but at the same time they want that sweet sweet money to keep flowing in the name of consumerism.
 
2013-04-02 12:39:21 PM  

meanmutton: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

What not having WMDs may look like: Warning: graphic, disturbing images of the civilian victims of Iraqi chemical weapons


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#200 9 _Declaration
 
2013-04-02 12:40:32 PM  

midigod: meanmutton: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

What not having WMDs may look like: Warning: graphic, disturbing images of the civilian victims of Iraqi chemical weapons

Stop being disingenuous.  Are there any pics of chemical attacks during the war?  After?  any items of interest found during the war?  No?  Then STFU.  EVERYONE KNOWS he had chemical weapons many years before the war.  That wasn't the issue.  The issue was whether he still had any, was buying or making new ones, or was planning to do so.  The answer is no to all of those, and it now looks like even the idiots in power knew that all along.


Maybe you need this link too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#200 9 _Declaration
 
2013-04-02 12:44:17 PM  
FTFA: ...B-2 stealth planes and F-22 stealth bombers...

FAIL
 
2013-04-02 12:47:40 PM  
s24.postimg.org
 
2013-04-02 12:48:04 PM  
i1054.photobucket.com
 
2013-04-02 12:49:11 PM  

MyKingdomForYourHorse: Profedius: I agree, but China is not going invade despite how angry they are. With the situation as it is now China would have the blessing of the world (maybe not openly stated) if it wished to invade North Korea and yet China has instead chose to support North Korea even at the U.N. though that support is diminishing. North Korea would be a costly invasion and occupation since its people are extremely brainwashed and would likely resist on every level even after the military is defeated and the nations know this so they are reluctant to expend the resources on military action with little more than stability in the region the benefit.

Well they wouldn't put boots on the ground. They would however allow the US and Japan to pound their military in the stone age (as if it isn't already). They'd then wait for the country to destabilize itself and then go in under a UN charter to keep peace. Award rebuilding contracts to SK and the US could start talks about eventual reunification.

PRC doesn't want to lose that buffer between them and SK, but at the same time they want that sweet sweet money to keep flowing in the name of consumerism.


I'm not sure the 'perceived threat' they currently pose in the region is enough to allow the JSDF to take up arms in outward conflict.
 
2013-04-02 12:50:55 PM  

UnspokenVoice: Maybe you need this link too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#200 9 _Declaration


Did you read this, from your own link?

"Later U.S.-led inspections agreed that Iraq had earlier abandoned its WMD programs, but asserted Iraq had an intention to pursue those programs if UN sanctions were ever lifted. Bush later said that the biggest regret of his presidency was "the intelligence failure" in Iraq, while the Senate Intelligence Committee found in 2008 that his administration "misrepresented the intelligence and the threat from Iraq". admitted that he lied about his allegations, "then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war"."
 
2013-04-02 12:51:39 PM  

awalkingecho: PanicMan: Listen, if you need food, just ask for food.  If you need technology, just ask for it.  We'll give it to you.  In our country we give our children iPads and mini electric cars.   These things are toys to us.   The only cost will be you gotta lighten up a bit, and open up more.  Tell us things.  Tell us what you need.

You want to stay a farm country?  Fine.  But use modern methods so you can actually feed your people.

What, GMOs and processed crap? They're better off starving.

You evidently have never been really hungry. At the point of starvation you would gladly eat the ass out of a moose if it filled your belly.
 
2013-04-02 12:52:33 PM  
Didn't get the entire quote for some reason.  Here's the missing part:  "A key CIA informant in Iraq   admitted that he lied about his allegations, "then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war"."
 
2013-04-02 12:52:42 PM  

midigod: Joe Blowme: Vodka Zombie: Thunderpipes: Never understood this completely made up stupid. Hundreds of thousands of civilians killed, directly and openly funded terror, fired on coalition aircraft thousands of times, but all libs think is we went in and stole all the oil.

It must get lonely when you realize that everyone is ignoring you for being a troll, doesn't it?

I think you need an alt.

So which part of this is trolling? All i see is facts that are easily GIS for truth.

It's trolling because none of those were given at the time as reasons for going to war, so they must not have been a factor in the decision.   Here's the full text of why we went.  It was for our own security, not the Kurds, and not the rest of the Iraqi population.  The US has killed about 115,000 civilians in Iraq, making it difficult in any event for us to justify the excuse that Hussein was killing his own people.  The DOD says Iraq fired on coalition aircraft only 71 times or so before the war, not thousands of times.  I haven't read anyone saying that we intended to "steal" their oil, so that characterization is misleading and inflammatory.  But it was made quite obvious by Ari Fleischer and Paul Wolfowitz that the US fully intended to pay for reconstruction with Iraqi oil, making it a freebie for the US.

Additionally, if those factors (specifically terror funding, which they certainly took part in, though not with the commonly accused parties) were used as part of the rationale, why did (and do) the US consistently ignore other countries when they did (and do) precisely the same things?  The answer is that the US did not use those as rationale.


No, this is why we went in and you ignoring it is very telling as is your civilian casualties total. As for war for oil, current Defense sec. said as much in 2007.  And every one of those 71 times they fired (no fly zones) put us in a defacto state of war with iraq that Clinton ignored as they violated the cease fire that was in place after GW1. Very telling how you pointed to a "speech" by Bush and not the text of he actuall resolution that spells out the reasoning for going in.
 
2013-04-02 01:04:20 PM  
s11.postimg.org
 
2013-04-02 01:13:53 PM  

HMS_Blinkin: I highly doubt we would nuke them.  If they managed to get a warhead to an American city (which is near impossible) I would say the chances of us retaliating with nuclear weapons of our own are barely above zero.  There's no point nuking a place that's that backward---some serious bombing of Pyongyang and conventional infantry/tanks cutting through the border would probably be enough to totally destabilize the regime.


If they did manage to vaporize an American city, it's hard to predict what would happen next. I would hope that the response would be conventional, but I also remember how badly the nation lost its collective head after 9/11. If we just lost an entire city to NK, it's certain that there would be more than a few hot heads in the country trying to push a nuclear response.

On the whole, I believe that cooler heads would prevail, but let's hope it never comes to that.
 
2013-04-02 01:18:23 PM  
What is the origin of the "Best Korea" name?  Based on context, I guess Team America, but I don't remember it well enough.  Know Your Meme does not have it.
 
2013-04-02 01:21:29 PM  
Perhaps if we got wind power setup there, they wouldn't feel the need to invest in nuclear?

/got nothin
 
2013-04-02 01:23:01 PM  

Netrngr: awalkingecho: PanicMan: Listen, if you need food, just ask for food.  If you need technology, just ask for it.  We'll give it to you.  In our country we give our children iPads and mini electric cars.   These things are toys to us.   The only cost will be you gotta lighten up a bit, and open up more.  Tell us things.  Tell us what you need.

You want to stay a farm country?  Fine.  But use modern methods so you can actually feed your people.

What, GMOs and processed crap? They're better off starving.
You evidently have never been really hungry. At the point of starvation you would gladly eat the ass out of a moose if it filled your belly.


Moose ass is a delicacy where I come from.
 
2013-04-02 01:28:26 PM  

HMS_Blinkin: If they managed to get a warhead to an American city (which is near impossible)


Heck that's easy.  Encase it in cocaine and ship that mutha into the port of Miami.
 
2013-04-02 01:33:41 PM  
The DERP is strong here.
 
2013-04-02 01:39:02 PM  
s16.postimg.org
 
2013-04-02 01:40:47 PM  

Thunderpipes: Netrngr: awalkingecho: PanicMan: Listen, if you need food, just ask for food.  If you need technology, just ask for it.  We'll give it to you.  In our country we give our children iPads and mini electric cars.   These things are toys to us.   The only cost will be you gotta lighten up a bit, and open up more.  Tell us things.  Tell us what you need.

You want to stay a farm country?  Fine.  But use modern methods so you can actually feed your people.

What, GMOs and processed crap? They're better off starving.
You evidently have never been really hungry. At the point of starvation you would gladly eat the ass out of a moose if it filled your belly.

Moose ass is a delicacy where I come from.


I can imagine you just lifting the tail and burring your face in there.
 
2013-04-02 01:44:56 PM  

MyKingdomForYourHorse:
PRC doesn't want to lose that buffer between them and SK, but at the same time they want that sweet sweet money to keep flowing in the name of consumerism.


People keep saying that, but honestly of what use is such a buffer? What the hell would be so bad about having Worst Korea for a neighbor? Run some railroad lines into Seoul and PRC suddenly has a trading partner instead of a backwards regime as a neighbor. And all without losing any of their influence in the area. All those U.S. troops will go home, a unified Korea will get massive international aid as they rebuild the shattered north, and all is well. Why exactly does PRC have any interest at all in propping up Best Korea at this point in time?
 
2013-04-02 01:46:03 PM  

Mugato: Tyrone Slothrop: Although I'm sure Cheney made out like a bandit from war profiteering.

You would have to be a total sociopath to start a war just to raise the stock in the company you were the CEO of.


Cheney, a sociopath?  Impossible!  It's not like he shot someone in the face and then had them publicly apologize on the air for it or anything.
 
2013-04-02 01:49:43 PM  

midigod: Didn't get the entire quote for some reason.  Here's the missing part:  "A key CIA informant in Iraq   admitted that he lied about his allegations, "then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war"."


No, actually you did get that whole quote, you just unintentionally included some extra nonsense about how it was also proven that Saddam fully intended to restart the WMD program.

/that's the hazard of training yourself not to see anything that contradicts your beliefs
//you might unintentionally copy and paste something that makes it look like you're spreading ungoodthink and thoughtcrime
 
2013-04-02 01:55:08 PM  

Joe Blowme: jat26006: Joe Blowme: jat26006: meanmutton: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.

What not having WMDs may look like: Warning: graphic, disturbing images of the civilian victims of Iraqi chemical weapons

how long are you going to drink that kook-aid?  I'm an Iraq war vet and even I think we had no business there

Opinions, this is how they work. But you dont speak for all of us

Welcome to fark?   Isn't the comments section opinions?  I must have had it allllll wrong all of these years. I do realize there are vets that cling to the idea that our invasion of Iraq was justified.  Some day you'll wake up.

Or maybe someday you will once you get over them being brown and not worthy of your efforts


Attacking a strawman?  You realize we went in to Iraq under the understanding that we WERE going to find some WMDs, right?  Hell If I were a male of fighting age I would have been fighting invaders too.  Pull G.W. Bush's scrotum off your eyes.
 
2013-04-02 01:55:10 PM  

Preston Preston: Mugato: Tyrone Slothrop: Although I'm sure Cheney made out like a bandit from war profiteering.

You would have to be a total sociopath to start a war just to raise the stock in the company you were the CEO of.

Cheney, a sociopath?  Impossible!  It's not like he shot someone in the face and then had them publicly apologize on the air for it or anything.


t0.gstatic.com
 
2013-04-02 01:58:03 PM  

dai the flu: Serious question: what does North Korea have to benefit by goading South Korea/USA into making the first strike?


They may be playing it as their chance to repeat the 1950s, and draw China in militarily as an ally.

Thing is, the US and China have far better relations now than they did in 1950, and everyone knows the US isn't about to fire the first shot on purpose.
 
2013-04-02 02:00:02 PM  

MyKingdomForYourHorse: This blustering by Kim is nothing more than him trying to show himself as hard and strong so as to avoid a military coup, and China is a little pissed off by it.


I have a different theory.  Un is just some kid that happens to be related to someone famous.  The regime, generals, etc. scooped him up as a figurehead to maintain the status quo.  The coup happened decades ago.

I'll bet he doesn't get to make any actual decisions at all.

I mean, hell, the kid went to school in Switzerland.  And spent his time playing video games, watching basketball, and flunking out.
 
2013-04-02 02:00:24 PM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.



I'm sick of this crap about Iraq and oil. We import how much from Iraq? Maybe 2 percent of our total consumption?
 
2013-04-02 02:05:32 PM  
Methinks North Korea is overconfident because they got a shipment of Atari 2600's last week.
 
2013-04-02 02:06:15 PM  

Tatterdemalian: No, actually you did get that whole quote, you just unintentionally included some extra nonsense about how it was also proven that Saddam fully intended to restart the WMD program.


You are absolutely incorrect.  I'll make this part bigger for you:    if UN sanctions were ever lifted.
 
2013-04-02 02:06:18 PM  

Some 'Splainin' To Do: HMS_Blinkin: I highly doubt we would nuke them.  If they managed to get a warhead to an American city (which is near impossible) I would say the chances of us retaliating with nuclear weapons of our own are barely above zero.  There's no point nuking a place that's that backward---some serious bombing of Pyongyang and conventional infantry/tanks cutting through the border would probably be enough to totally destabilize the regime.

If they did manage to vaporize an American city, it's hard to predict what would happen next. I would hope that the response would be conventional, but I also remember how badly the nation lost its collective head after 9/11. If we just lost an entire city to NK, it's certain that there would be more than a few hot heads in the country trying to push a nuclear response.

On the whole, I believe that cooler heads would prevail, but let's hope it never comes to that.


The nuclear deterrent ceases to be a deterrent the moment anyone believes we will not pull the trigger.    It doesn't really matter what cooler heads want.  If we are subjected to a horrific attack worthy of a nuclear response, then we MUST respond with nukes.

But lets say we don't respond... Suddenly there is no such thing as the American Nuclear Umbrella, and every country that has relied upon that umbrella will now seriously be looking at going nuclear themselves.  A lot of people forget that this American Nuclear umbrella is as much about self defense as it is about stopping a lot of countrys from feeling like they need to keep a stockpile of nuclear tipped ICBM's themselves...
 
2013-04-02 02:12:11 PM  

Joe Blowme: No, this is why we went in and you ignoring it is very telling as is your civilian casualties total. As for war for oil, current Defense sec. said as much in 2007.  And every one of those 71 times they fired (no fly zones) put us in a defacto state of war with iraq that Clinton ignored as they violated the cease fire that was in place after GW1. Very telling how you pointed to a "speech" by Bush and not the text of he actuall resolution that spells out the reasoning for going in.


I'll concede that it's very interesting that the reasons he gave to the public, and the reasons he gave Congress were quite different.  I wonder why that would be.

Not sure why my civilian casualties total is "very telling" in your mind.  I "told" it to you because it laid bare your contention that we were doing it for the Iraqi people.

Violating the no-fly zone did NOT put the US in a state of war, de facto or not.  It put Iraq into a violation of the UN sanction, which the US was not free to interpret how they pleased.  The US had to go in front of the UN and convince them of the need for an attack in order for the UN to approve.  That approval was predicated upon the US "knowing" where WMDs were located.  They lied.  Face it.
 
2013-04-02 02:14:43 PM  

NeuralSpike: colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade. Best Korea. Yes WMDs or at least boasting such and threatening out loud to use them, but no oil. Stern letter.


I'm sick of this crap about Iraq and oil. We import how much from Iraq? Maybe 2 percent of our total consumption?


It has nothing to do with amount of supply of oil or bringing more in to the US. It's about making private oil companies money. (what? did people think the government was going to supply the "oil" - what are we socialist now?). Nope It has to everything to do with oil being a world wide fungible commodity that trades at the same price everywhere regardless of where it's pulled out of the ground.
Stir up conflict in a region that produces oil. Scare speculators and OPEC that there could be a disruption in supply. That causes OPEC to raise prices and speculators to buy more, driving up demand which drives up the price. BUT It still costs the same to pull it out of the ground in Texas, only now the oil companies are able to sell it at a higher price... and TADA - record profits for (who was in the oil business and has friends in the oil business... humm I wonder?) on the backs of our dead solders.
 
2013-04-02 02:15:08 PM  

nekom: MyKingdomForYourHorse:
PRC doesn't want to lose that buffer between them and SK, but at the same time they want that sweet sweet money to keep flowing in the name of consumerism.

People keep saying that, but honestly of what use is such a buffer? What the hell would be so bad about having Worst Korea for a neighbor? Run some railroad lines into Seoul and PRC suddenly has a trading partner instead of a backwards regime as a neighbor. And all without losing any of their influence in the area. All those U.S. troops will go home, a unified Korea will get massive international aid as they rebuild the shattered north, and all is well. Why exactly does PRC have any interest at all in propping up Best Korea at this point in time?


So they can buy minerals and labor gangs dirt cheap.

VICE did a documentary on NK labor camps in Russia, I betcha it's the same for China as well.

How do you think Daddy Kim became the biggest customer of Hennessy Cognac?

I have a bit of a crackpot theory. Maybe Little Kim DOESN'T want to rule. Sure he's a God-Emperor, but of a failing shiat-hole stuck in the 50s.

Maybe this saber-rattling is his way of trying to get world powers to "buy him out" of NK leadership. Get someone to invade, step down willingly, and go back to Switzerland with Daddy's bank accounts and Starcraft 2.
 
2013-04-02 02:34:07 PM  

midigod: Tatterdemalian: No, actually you did get that whole quote, you just unintentionally included some extra nonsense about how it was also proven that Saddam fully intended to restart the WMD program.

You are absolutely incorrect.  I'll make this part bigger for you:    if UN sanctions were ever lifted.


Now see, there you go freaking out again. In order to properly doublethink, you have to see that Saddam was going to restart his WMD program when sanctions were lifted, but declare that he was not going to restart his WMD program under any circumstances, especially not when the horrible sanctions that were starving innocent Iraqi babies to death were lifted.

/keep up with the narrative, citizen, or it will be off to MinLuv for you
 
2013-04-02 02:35:47 PM  

Vodka Zombie: Random Anonymous Blackmail: It would be awesome if China finally got sick of their shiat and invaded Best Korea to save us the trouble.

That would freak half the planet right the fark out, though.  Seriously.  If China invaded ANYONE, we'd be running around in a panic.


Yea, but it would make a great backdrop for Command & Conquer Generals 2
 
2013-04-02 02:41:08 PM  

Tatterdemalian: Now see, there you go freaking out again. In order to properly doublethink, you have to see that Saddam was going to restart his WMD program when sanctions were lifted, but declare that he was not going to restart his WMD program under any circumstances, especially not when the horrible sanctions that were starving innocent Iraqi babies to death were lifted.


Ah, I get it.  I've heard this one before.  When the US agrees with the UN, then the UN can be used as a moral shield, but if the US doesn't agree with the UN, then they must take matters into their own hands because the UN doesn't know what they're talking about.

Glad we got that sorted.
 
2013-04-02 02:43:07 PM  

shortymac: I have a bit of a crackpot theory. Maybe Little Kim DOESN'T want to rule. Sure he's a God-Emperor, but of a failing shiat-hole stuck in the 50s.

Maybe this saber-rattling is his way of trying to get world powers to "buy him out" of NK leadership. Get someone to invade, step down willingly, and go back to Switzerland with Daddy's bank accounts and Starcraft 2.


My own crackpot theory: Kim Jong-Un grew up in a propaganda bubble and actually believes it all - that the US is the cause of all their problems, that they could defeat the US easily in battle, etc. Nobody's setting him straight because correcting dictators is hard.
 
2013-04-02 02:44:32 PM  

NateGrey: October 2008

North Korea has now achieved one of its most-prized objectives: removal from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism. In exchange, the U.S. has received "promises" on verification that are vague and amount to an agreement to negotiate the critical points later. In the Bush administration's waning days, this is what passes for diplomatic "success." Link

Thanks Bush!


4/10
 
2013-04-02 02:48:44 PM  

nekom: Why exactly does PRC have any interest at all in propping up Best Korea at this point in time?


Bargaining chip

"Hey we'll smack this fool down again if you give us favorable rights in this treaty"

Preston Preston: I mean, hell, the kid went to school in Switzerland. And spent his time playing video games, watching basketball, and flunking out.


Ahh, so its his way of trying to get out of being a figure head. Interesting theory, I could buy that as well
 
2013-04-02 02:54:12 PM  

TeddyRooseveltsMustache: Methinks North Korea is overconfident because they got a shipment of Atari 2600's last week.


That's what happens when you get the lowest score on Missile Command.
resources1.news.com.au

cdn.bleacherreport.net
/see, they can't stop our missiles!
 
2013-04-02 03:05:58 PM  

Netrngr: NateGrey: October 2008

North Korea has now achieved one of its most-prized objectives: removal from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism. In exchange, the U.S. has received "promises" on verification that are vague and amount to an agreement to negotiate the critical points later. In the Bush administration's waning days, this is what passes for diplomatic "success." Link

Thanks Bush!

4/10


Only 4? Come on I got you to read and response. I bet you dont even know who wrote that.
 
2013-04-02 03:36:36 PM  

trickymoo: Dick Gozinya: Iraq didnt have an ally like China watching their back.

That said, China seems to be getting sick of Best Korea's shiat, so we may see an invasion soon.

Is China gonna have to choke a biatch?

Seriously, but doesn't China have treaties to protect NK? I saw that yesterday China was reportedly amassing their forces on the NK border, figured it was their version of 'strategery'.

So, China is obligated to protect NK in the event they are attacked -OR- they launch an attack to punch wee baby farkface out in one?


China's military is just a tiny tad better than NK. Their tanks are 1950's Soviet tanks and their only carrier is a Russian one that is rusted out. While they are a bigger nation, when it comes to actual blows NK can punch China as hard a China can punch them. Somehow I don't think China wants that.

That's not even taking into account all the other negatives like refugees, economic issues, local protests and imbalance of power that comes from a war between NK and China.
 
2013-04-02 03:44:36 PM  

Gaseous Anomaly: shortymac: I have a bit of a crackpot theory. Maybe Little Kim DOESN'T want to rule. Sure he's a God-Emperor, but of a failing shiat-hole stuck in the 50s.

Maybe this saber-rattling is his way of trying to get world powers to "buy him out" of NK leadership. Get someone to invade, step down willingly, and go back to Switzerland with Daddy's bank accounts and Starcraft 2.

My own crackpot theory: Kim Jong-Un grew up in a propaganda bubble and actually believes it all - that the US is the cause of all their problems, that they could defeat the US easily in battle, etc. Nobody's setting him straight because correcting dictators is hard.


I think your crackpot theory is correct for his Dad, but little Kim was raised at a boarding school in Switzerland and has seen the luxuries that most people in the west have: TV, internet, video games, lots of food, etc.

NK can barely keep the electricity on and I doubt even "The People's Palace" has an internet connection worth a damn. The only thing stopping him is money, he has a LOT of it right now considering the whole country basically works for him. If there are Swiss Bank Accounts full of NK money he could dissolve the state and possibly take control of them and live off the interest forever.
 
2013-04-02 04:06:44 PM  

shortymac: Gaseous Anomaly: shortymac: I have a bit of a crackpot theory. Maybe Little Kim DOESN'T want to rule. Sure he's a God-Emperor, but of a failing shiat-hole stuck in the 50s.

Maybe this saber-rattling is his way of trying to get world powers to "buy him out" of NK leadership. Get someone to invade, step down willingly, and go back to Switzerland with Daddy's bank accounts and Starcraft 2.

My own crackpot theory: Kim Jong-Un grew up in a propaganda bubble and actually believes it all - that the US is the cause of all their problems, that they could defeat the US easily in battle, etc. Nobody's setting him straight because correcting dictators is hard.

I think your crackpot theory is correct for his Dad, but little Kim was raised at a boarding school in Switzerland and has seen the luxuries that most people in the west have: TV, internet, video games, lots of food, etc.

NK can barely keep the electricity on and I doubt even "The People's Palace" has an internet connection worth a damn. The only thing stopping him is money, he has a LOT of it right now considering the whole country basically works for him. If there are Swiss Bank Accounts full of NK money he could dissolve the state and possibly take control of them and live off the interest forever.


I recall reading that the average speed of their internet is faster than most in the west because it is only one small 1028 IP network in a localized area on one trunk through to China. I'm not sure how accurate that is and I read it while I was drunk.
 
2013-04-02 04:09:05 PM  

colinspooky: Iraq. No WMDs but has oil. Invade.


Nonsense. Iraq not only had WMDs, but used them. Iraq was required by the terms of the 1991 cease-fire  and UN Resolution 687 to fully disclose its WMD programs and allow unfettered access to UN inspectors. Iraq agreed, then actually did neither.

Iraq formally declared it had no biological weapons program. UN Inspectors found biological weapons and a production facility. Iraq formally declared it had no clandestine nuclear program. UN inspectors found clandestine nuclear weapons components and documents proving a program. Iraq formally declared it had no chemical weapons program. UN inspectors found evidence they did, and were surprised how advanced it was. On and on and on like this. For years.

Despite Iraq's deliberate falsifications, obfuscations and refusal to cooperate (including arresting and firing warning shots at inspectors), over much of the next decade UN inspectors somehow managed to continue to discover evidence of banned weapons and undisclosed WMD programs until 1997 when Saddam decided to declare vast tracts of Iraq off-limits to UN inspectors. He finally expelled UNSCOM in 1998, unilaterally terminating inspections.

Saddam didn't kick the inspectors out because they  weren't finding WMDs and prohibited programs. He kicked them out because they  were.

UNSCOM produced a report stating that Iraq had not fully disarmed with respect to banned weapons. UNSCOM chief Scott Ritter concluded Iraq was merely disassembling banned weapons and programs then concealing the components in various places (including the "off limits" sites) to elude discovery, allowing for the possibility the banned weapons and programs could be quickly reconstituted later.

From December 1998 and for the next  four years there were no inspections, leaving Saddam to his own devices. Saddam had relentlessly violated the terms of the cease-fire by violating no-fly zones, shooting at peacekeepers, kicking out weapons inspectors, &c. Like a the thug that he was he essentially said, "Know what you pussies going to do about it? Nothing, because you're all a bunch of biatches." Unfortunately, an incompetent Bush Administration took perfectly rational justification for putting Saddam out with the trash and made an absolutely incoherent shambles of it.

UNSCOM's successor org UNMOVIC became the UN's Iraq-inspection body. Under threat, Saddam let them back in and in the three months they worked in-country, they also discovered banned chemical and ranged weapons. UNMOVIC's chief Hans Blix would conclude that besides those, UNSCOM must've got everything.

This is historical fact and the opinion of the UN and its UNSCOM and IAEA inspectors. Read them yourself.  http://www.un.org/Depts/unscom/Chronology/chronologyframe.htm http: //www.iaea.org/OurWork/SV/Invo/chronology.html

The Federation of American Scientists takes pretty much the same perspective.   http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/deception.htm

After Saddam was deposed, The Iraq Survey Group (UNMOVIC's successor) also found evidence of undeclared and continuing development of WMD and other banned weapons programs. They also found evidence of banned weapons deliberately concealed from previous inspectors. They did not find  stockpiles of WMDs, which is why people think they found  nothing. Here's David Kay discussing what they found.  https://www.cia.gov/news-information/speeches-testimony/2003/david_ka y _10022003.html

The ISG's  Duelfer Report concluded that by 2003, Saddam had virtually broken the will of the international community to maintain sanctions against his regime, and Saddam had concrete plans to reconstitute his WMD programs after sanctions were lifted.  https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd_2004/C o mp_Report_Key_Findings.pdf

Ultimately, the Bush Administration's bad judgment doesn't justify misrepresenting reality of Iraq's WMD programs so you can white-knight that turd, Saddam.

The Iraq War, like every war, was and is a farked up thing. But Blix was clearly determined to give Saddam a pass, meaning the sanctions would have been lifted by the end of 2003 and Saddam would, by now, have WMDs and no compunction about using them. He never did. And if Saddam was back to gassing people today, no doubt most of the people like you currently insisting "There were no WMDs!" would be the same ones insisting somebody should have taken that motherfarker out a decade ago.
 
2013-04-02 04:26:17 PM  

PsyLord: Actually, that's an interesting question.  How would the world react if China invaded Best Korea?


Collective sigh of relief.
 
2013-04-02 05:39:11 PM  
farm4.static.flickr.com
 
2013-04-02 07:24:45 PM  

BSABSVR: Sensual Tyrannosaurus: I don't know why everyone's so worried about China.

Because we have been conditioned to whimper in fear about everything foreign.


For that matter this whole deal with North Korea is overblown. This isn't the first time they've pulled this shiat and it won't be the last. Nothing will happen.
 
2013-04-02 08:40:53 PM  
that means no bbq's with nuclear weapons?

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2013-04-02 11:00:17 PM  

Dick Gozinya: Iraq didnt have an ally like China watching their back.

That said, China seems to be getting sick of Best Korea's shiat, so we may see an invasion soon.


You don't know what you are talking about.
 
2013-04-02 11:10:34 PM  

CeroX: PerilousApricot: Because right now, they have NK separating 10billion US/SK troops from their border. If NK fell and we took over, we'd be way too close for their comfort

If i were China, i would use the treaty as a bargaining chip:

"We will break our treaty with the NK and not come to their defense should you go to war on these conditions:

1. When the conflict is over, the US pulls back to SK, and allow the rebuild/annexing of NK to be handled by China
1a. leaving negotiating room to include: A joint taskforce between China and SK with US/UN oversight to rebuild/reintegrate NK

2. China is awarded all mineral and developmental rights to the former NK
2a. leaving negotiating room to split with SK for 50/50

Unless these conditions are met, we feel we are obligated to continue to honor the treaty with NK"

US then only has to worry about the actual combat, leaving any post-iraq financial syndrome to China/SK which would probably give the pentagon a huge viagra fueled boner...


There's a lotta ifs, moving pieces and (importantly) trust in that plan. I don't see how it could work IRL
 
2013-04-03 04:05:00 AM  

midigod: UnspokenVoice: Maybe you need this link too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#200 9 _Declaration

Did you read this, from your own link?

"Later U.S.-led inspections agreed that Iraq had earlier abandoned its WMD programs, but asserted Iraq had an intention to pursue those programs if UN sanctions were ever lifted. Bush later said that the biggest regret of his presidency was "the intelligence failure" in Iraq, while the Senate Intelligence Committee found in 2008 that his administration "misrepresented the intelligence and the threat from Iraq". admitted that he lied about his allegations, "then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war"."


Did you miss the statement that claimed they didn't have any which is patently false? Following the conversation is not just for adults - it is for all those who want to chime in. The two can't both possibly be true now can they?
 
Displayed 251 of 251 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report