Danqazmlp

One more step to world domination.

You make it sound as if both Koreas are on equal terms. The south has almost half the standing army of the North, and with the Proximity of the South Korean capital to the North, once that has been taken, the rest of the country would go into disarray. That is why I used the little kid and an adult comparison, because South Korea realistically cannot defend itself at this current point in time.

You guys should all know by now how to act on these forums. Flames have been removed and any more will lead to actions being taken.

Blocking adverts, wether through stopping them appearing or hiding them is against the rules set out by Jagex, and therefore against our forums rules. Please read our forums rules and the Jagex rules before posting. http://forum.tip.it/topic/48092-tip-it-forum-rules/

Welcome back. It is good to have you back, but please use this sticky for introductions. http://forum.tip.it/topic/276124-introductions-farewells/

We can only hope some of these things leaked don't lead to increased tension in the Middle East. Many of the things said, such as Middle eastern countries asking for America to make a move against Iran could very realistically lead to increased hostilities. I agree with Nadril. There is no way governments would be 100% open. Things happen in secret for a reason. Not because they secretly want to take over the world, but because to do their job rights and keep countries safe, they need to do things which may endanger others if known to the public. Hell I'm usually one of the most idealistic people around here but even I know that these being leaked can only do more harm than good. I do ask, what good comes of it? Then I ask, what bad comes of it? The answers to the second question come much easier than those to the first.

I'm sure at one point, even referencing 4chan would get a post removed.

I agree. Look back to the last page of General discussion at threads from 05. They aren't any different room our threads. If anything, there are many more one line insignificant answers to threads and much less discussion back then.

It is for the greater good for America to get involved if the North declares war on the South. Americas huge economic and military power have become it's own burden. There is no point in such power if it isn't going to be used. It is almost selfish to have so much power yet be reluctant to use it when a country is in such dire need of aid. You can either choose to sacrifice a few to save many, or choose to be a bystander and do nothing. And yes, I would argue the same for Britain to get involved in the situation, but there seems to be very little chance of that happening on any sort of scale compared to what America could give. I'd also like to add that historians never even consider 'good' and 'bad', everything has to be compared to the difficulties and culture of the peoples of that time. Trust me, we are taught not to classify but to understand reasoning.

Hi Mr. Contradiction. So being American would make my argument null, but not being American would too? I don't care if you're American, I don't care if you're Korean, Hell I don't care if you're Romanian, Afghan, Australian, Thai, Japanese, French, German, Brazilian or Mexican. The information is out there for people to know, it doesn't matter where somebody is from. Looking objectively is something you seem to be failing miserably at doing. Just because you have seen anti government propaganda in your media (trust me, it is there all the time in new broadcasts, posters and magazines, and especially on the internet) Means that you have a much more jaded view than somebody like me who can look in from the outside. I cannot believe just how ignorant you are in this situation. PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD look up how North Korea treats its people. That makes no sense! How in the hell does that relate? North Korea is attacking the South, get that through your thick skull. American is not attacking anybody. Your arguments keep getting debunked but you keep saying that America is evil for wanting to get involved. Please, tell me why without resorting to 'Because they are evil' and without having to mention other parts of the world, because, as I have said god knows how many times now, AMERICA IS NOT INVADING ANYBODY. p.s Yes I'm actually starting to rage at how you do not seem to be in so brainwashed by your own countries media.

Sorry but from many of your posts, it seems you have little understanding outside of any anti war propaganda you have heard in the last few years and online. There is a difference between being a responsible country and the forcibly policing the world. Imagine you walk down the street and see somebody beating up a little kid. Do you carry on walking or do you step in and help? You step in and help, not because you are trying to get something out of, but because the kid cannot defend them self. The situation is the same with North Korea. They are attacking the South which has a small chance of withstanding the attack without help from outside. It would be irresponsible for America not to help. You need to stop thinking that everything has to be done for money or gains of one country. I would say it would be immoral for the rest of the world not to get involved. You are also contradicting yourself. You say each country should be able to do what it wants. But North Korea is invading another country. South Korea does not want to be rules by North Korea. They would lose all sovereignty. In a globalised world, no country can have total independent from others. The world strives on connections between all countries.

But millions WILL die if the North invades the South as well. You don't seem to be getting that. Your knowledge of the situation and world politics seems to limited that you are blind to the real workings of countries and foreign policies. IF the North attacked the south, China would very likely not get involved. China has been getting more and more critical of North Korea recently and I would not expect them to help if they went on an attack. The Chinese know they would be stupid to defend the North, as a majority of the large world powers have also been very critical of the North Koreans. I would expect the reasoning for China not being as critical as the rest of the world is it's proximity. The Chinese may have a large military, but they would still suffer massive civilian casualties if the North Koreans decided to attack them as well. Angering the North Koreans is not something China want to do at the moment. For all we know, they may actually Help the South in the event of a war due to wanting stability in the Area and the possibility of being given part of the Korean Peninsula. Also, Alliances may have lead to many deaths in World war 1, but they also prevented many. Alliances stop aggressive countries from taking over the world one country at a time and spreading like a Cancer. If it wasn't for alliances, for all we know Europe would currently be under full German rule, and who knows where that rule may have spread after consolidating strength with the whole of Europe? I cannot stress this enough, Less lives will be lost with American involvement than if there was no involvement. Soldiers deaths are unfortunately inevitable, but that is known when they sign up. The government will try not to have to use an army, but they are there for one reason and one reason only, to fight. Deaths would be an unfortunate consequence of defending millions of innocent civilians from slaughter. You are probably right, China likes to flex its e-peen but doesnt like to actually do anything, I think they would be very reluctant to enter a direct conflict with the US. And this is where you are sadly mistaken, WWI started between a conflict with Austria-Hungary and a small worthless country called Bosnia (much like south Korea in this case), which through the alliance system drug the whole of Europe into war. Because Russia had an alliance with Bosnia, as Germany did with Austria-Hungary and Italy, and I think that France had a secret alliance with Russia and Britain was allied with France (part of the reason Russia agreed to this alliance was because the Japanese *heavily funded by the British* destroyed Russias navy a few years prior to this). Through this twisted web of alliances countries that had no part in the assasination of the Archduke of Hungary were lead to war. Again in this situation I wouldve rather seen Austria and Germany invade the country then have the whole of Europe at war with each other. Just like if China made a formal agreement to back N Korea at all costs (which they did in the Korean war) I would say I would rather see S korea fall then this happen. However if it could be said with certainty that China would not commit to a war against the US if we go to war against N korea I would support backing it, as there is a strategic advantage in doing so. And dont fool yourself into thinking our government is doing so for any reason other then strategic advantage because I would say when is the last time we sent military action to stabilize african governments? Somalia is not an example, we were on a humanitarian food giving mission, and they shot at us and we stopped feeding them. Far cry from a Vietnam or Iraq war. Please, don't try to school me on history. As I said, and as you seem to have consolidated, Alliances stopped the destruction of most of Europe by the growing German power. The war was not caused by the alliances and it is widely thought that even without the assassination, the war was inevitable due to the newly formed Germany wanting a much larger imperial base and a growing Nationalistic sentiment within the country. These are just a few of the reasons, the situation was so complex you cannot hope to blace blame on one thing, as is all of history. Stop trying to assume you know why your government does anything. You have no idea at all. Not one iota of an idea. You are not in the white house when decisions are made, you do not know the tough decisions those in power have to take. International law and knowing that troops would not help in African countries are the reasons your army is not there. Military action also does not help stabilize, it destabilises and is a last resort. Also factor in that the US probably cannot afford to spread it's troops even more thinly. You cannot say one generalised reason for the government taking action in one place and not another. It just makes you sound as if you know nothing and are just arguing for the sake of hating the government. Again, THE US IS NOT INVADING THE NORTH. The Us will only get involved if the North attacks the South. In this situation, it is doubtful the Chinese would get involved due to many reasons. A few are the economies ties to the US, the UN, Destabilising the region, possibility of revolt in the country. I have also lost respect for you over this statement: Humans are humans. A country which wants to be free is still a country which wants to be free no matter of the size and should be protected no matter what. Your blatant disrespect for people of other countries is disgusting. They have as much right to be protected by foreign countries as you do. EDIT: Yes, and you don't have a clue about the inner working of the American Government or of this situation, yet you feel the need to criticise them still with just a general idea and anti-war propaganda?

Me? You have mod abilities too. :wink:

But millions WILL die if the North invades the South as well. You don't seem to be getting that. Your knowledge of the situation and world politics seems to limited that you are blind to the real workings of countries and foreign policies. IF the North attacked the south, China would very likely not get involved. China has been getting more and more critical of North Korea recently and I would not expect them to help if they went on an attack. The Chinese know they would be stupid to defend the North, as a majority of the large world powers have also been very critical of the North Koreans. I would expect the reasoning for China not being as critical as the rest of the world is it's proximity. The Chinese may have a large military, but they would still suffer massive civilian casualties if the North Koreans decided to attack them as well. Angering the North Koreans is not something China want to do at the moment. For all we know, they may actually Help the South in the event of a war due to wanting stability in the Area and the possibility of being given part of the Korean Peninsula. Also, Alliances may have lead to many deaths in World war 1, but they also prevented many. Alliances stop aggressive countries from taking over the world one country at a time and spreading like a Cancer. If it wasn't for alliances, for all we know Europe would currently be under full German rule, and who knows where that rule may have spread after consolidating strength with the whole of Europe? I cannot stress this enough, Less lives will be lost with American involvement than if there was no involvement. Soldiers deaths are unfortunately inevitable, but that is known when they sign up. The government will try not to have to use an army, but they are there for one reason and one reason only, to fight. Deaths would be an unfortunate consequence of defending millions of innocent civilians from slaughter.

Would I be able to do a second list?

Nobody wants to overthrow N Korea. However, even if people wanted to they could not. I ask you to read this small article: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/05/28/welcome-to-north-korea-you-will-love-it-115875-21394846/ . The people of North Korea have been brainwashed so badly that they have no idea of freedom. Again, this is why I refer to the term Animals. They have almost no idea of self worth and free thinking. In its current situation, it is impossible for them to overthrow their leaders. That is the whole point of a dictatorship, abusing power enough to stop any form of rebellion from within from forming. All this for the unlucky people who have been born there. America couldn't 'Explain' democracy if if they wanted, the N Korean leadership has the media locked town tightly. I personally do think it is up to the rest of the world to take notice of North Korea and do something major about it. Trade sanctions are not working at a fast enough rate and may not even work at all. This only gives N Korea more time to prepare hostilities against the South. HOWEVER America is not there to invade the North. It is there to defend the south. The south cannot defend itself against such a large army. It isn't a matter of not being able to defend itself due to being lazy after having American Allies. It is due to the country not having the capacity for a larger army. The North has that capacity because almost all of the countries resources can be put into the army. The South however trades with foreign countries which means it cannot pour all of its resources directly into the army. The proximity of Seoul to the North Korean border means any swift attack would lead to an incredible amount of casualties. The city has over 10 million civilians living and working there. How many do you think the North will try to save? How many do you think will agree to live under the North's rule? How many do you think will be slaughtered due to resisting? That is if the city still stands, being so close, the North could easily bombard it with artillery from their own side. There is no easy way for the situation to play out, but Americas involvement is definitely a good thing.

I agree with faux, you are the polar opposite of somebody calling all middle Eastern people terrorists. A book titled 'Ugly American' is not going to give a very subjective view at all, and is basically good for nothing but firewood. What you fail to mention is that a majority of these deaths are not American caused, but Iraqi caused. They are the bombs and other explosive devices used on civilians BY civilians. You also fail to mention how many morw would have died under Saddam, and hopefully, how few will continue to die how it is. Your argument is too one sided to stand any ground. However, it is also something not for this thread, as Iraq did not invade another country leading to Saddam's fall, which makes the situation in Korea much different. People in Korea are starving to death and are brainwashed. The country NEEDS change.

Lets see, I personally dont give a crap about how someones government treats them therefor I shouldnt have to die because America is on a crusade against them. But every time we wage a war against "a totlitarian government which treats its citizens like animals" things end up worse the second we leave. Tell me this, if something happens in America and we adopt a totalitarian government and you made it out and are sitting in some safe country, do you think that country should have the burden of breaking the American government because you think its bad? Of course not, they would most likely say leave America alone and guess what by that policy a war is avoided and many lives are saved, not to mention billions of dollars in tax payers money. And yes it is fair, South Korea wouldve built up its military had we not made a forever promise to stay there. And Saddam hardly killed anyone, he was targeting a minority but the death toll was in the hundreds? maybe 1-2 thousand. Maybe 10 years later it mightve been 15k? But does it justify Americas involvement which estimates the low estimate of civilian deaths to be 100k but some leaks have suggested up to 300k. Plus thousands of dead Americans who couldnt have given a rats ass about Sudam. But thats beside the point as we originally went to Iraq because of his "weapons of mass destruction" which never were found. You wanna champion the cause go to those countries and rally the people, dont waste American lives and tax payers dollars on it though. I now see you as nothing but a selfish kid. Sorry but I have to sue those words as nothing else describes it. You Should care about how people are treated, they have done nothing wrong apart from being born in that country. If you had been born there, would you not want help in case another country decided to attack you? America is not on a 'crusade', it had a treaty with S Korea making them allies if the North attacked. America won't be pushing for the war, on the contrary, the government tries its best to calm the North down every time it flairs up. For the record, I'm not American, I don't live in America and I am usually not a fan of American, but this is not about the country, it is about fighting for freedom. If America somehow managed to be taken over by some form of dictator and threatened nearby countries, yes I would want other countries to help fight for it's freedom. I see no reason why not to help. I have to say, you seem to have no grasp on what a dictatorship does to a country. They aren't peaceful people who just rule differently. They murder their own people, starve them to death, kill anybody who does not want to be ruled with an iron fist. It is as I say, living like animals. That is worth fighting for to stop and I would gladly join the armed forces to do. North Korea isn't just a country merrily going along it business and now being antagonised by the US. North Korea is threatening to murder millions in the South. Without Intervention, many more would die than without intervention. I also ask where you and Fakeit got their figures from. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Saddam_Hussein's_Iraq Wikipedia may not be the best source, but I can confidently say Saddam killed many more people than America have.

The North Korean population do not live. They are basically animals to a dictatorship. If they managed to take over S Korea, they would force the same thing on them, and those that opposed would probably be killed. We are talking genocide due to S Koreans now knowing what it means to be free. South Koreans are humans who want to live a free life. That is worth protecting and worth sending troops to help fight for. I can't grasp how going to war with a totalitarian government which treats its citizens like animals is a pointless war. Hell, Americas civil war was based on the same general idea that we as humans should have the right to live for ourselves and not be oppressed. It is a sacrifice well worth making. South Korea would almost certainly lose a war with the North without outside aid. It does have a strong military, but it only has roughly half the standing army the North does. I ask you, is it fair to let millions of innocent civilians die when there is a chance of preventing it? As for Iraq, it is impossible to guess how many more people would have died under Saddam if he had stayed in power, but I would assume it would be many more than have done since he was killed. The reason for going in may have been jaded, but the end result cannot be denied.

http://forum.tip.it/topic/279378-post-all-rs-screenshots-videos-and-sounds-here/ The title of that says it all really, there is no need for a whole thread for those two pictures.

Yeah Hl1 has an activation code but it isn't like modern DRM, it can be used multiple times. I would say it is worth $10, it is a great game you need to play at least once. Ouchy, tried the Thief games? They would work on an old machine like that.

Kim spawnlings = Kimlings? :P But yeah, I've heard that as well. Apparently the older Kim's health isn't great....and promoting someone to general is pretty big in NK since head of state is also head of the army if I recall correctly? Correct. And Kim Jong Il is believed to have cancer, heart problems, and failing kidneys, among other things. I guess he's pretty Il. [/hide] lol'd :lol: Anyways, I don't know if South Korea is actually in alliance with any of the big boys. BUT, if they do ever start a war, it'd be best to leave the two Koreas to duke it out alone, without the aid of foreign countries. I mean, they were one country before, and if the States didn't go half way across the world, they probably still be today. Why did the States get to station their troops south of 38 after 1945? Why do they have to put their nose in everything? Same to the Soviets. Just leave them alone for chrissakes. We went over there because North Korea probably would have defeated South Korea, spreading communism through the entire country, strengthening their resolve, which would have only gotten stronger with time. The same reason we went into Iraq, to take down Suddam before he got too powerful (no, there were no weapons of mass destruction, but we did rid the world of him, which is a good thing). And to be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if that's where I'll be deployed to (korea) within the next couple years. and communism spreads. Big deal. Its like saying we were justified for fighting in Vietnam to stop communism, lol no. America needs to stay on its own continent and we will have a lot less trouble. Also please dont try and justify the war in Iraq, it an easy way to ruin your creditability. And you just ruined yours by thinking your opinion is the right and only opinion. But that really is something for another thread. Americas involvement would only be a good thing as far as I can see. S Korea doesn't have the military size to withstand a sudden attack from the North, especially if they managed to capture Seoul. Americas involvement is probably what is currently stopping the North from invading and has stopped them from invading previously. America is as much of a deterrent as it is a fighting force for the South. The thing with North Korea is that it is so different from a majority of our cultures that it is near impossible to predict.

My current strategy is to shout "Punch! Kick! Attack! Smite! Heal! Pray! Bless! Go!" every turn until I run out of power. I can get 5 out of that and usually at least one is him praying which lets me do more. Edit: I even managed to give Godzilllla a run for his money last time we fought and he had to resort to spamming punish on me.

Do you not send him to the arena?